Poll: What are you using for Spam?

[Krishopper]

I have found that Zimbra's install of SpamAssassin hasn't been doing as good of a job as it used to. I have some custom rules set up, but I don't want to customize it too much because it becomes a pain to continuously update it on every upgrade.

I also had medicore results with MailScanner. Wasn't much better than Zimbra's built in.

What's everyone else using? How do you like it?

This is simply a poll, with any comments you have about past/current solutions you're using. I'd like to hear!

Thanks

[bdial]

sophos puremessage

[dipeshmehta]

I have been using Zimbra's built-in spam control with customization for spamassassin rules. I checked and reviewed incoming spam mails for more than one month with help of all users in my organization, and customized spamassassin rules based on those. Now incoming spam ratio has been decreased satisfactorily. Still need to learn more about customization to get the rid of spams.

Dipesh

[ewilen]

For me the most important part of using SA is to supplement with scoring for additional blacklists. I also put a few very conservative (low FP) blacklists in the MTA blacklist section.

Today I just enabled DSPAM: Using DSPAM for Spam Filtering - Zimbra :: Wiki

I'm starting with a factor of 0.1 while DSPAM trains up (see wiki for how to do this).

If I need to do more, I may try Razor/Pyzor/DCC as described in Improving Anti-spam system - Zimbra :: Wiki. A while back I played around with ASSP, which I thought worked pretty well, but given the mail system in use at the time, I'm not sure my users could have been trained to submit false positives/negatives to it properly. With Zimbra, I think it would be easier, but I haven't been strongly motivated to try to make it work.

[lytledd]

What's everyone else using? How do you like it?

We've been using ASSP for a number of years. When we moved to Zimbra, we disabled SA. I like it alot, very configurable and has responsive developers.

Doug

[MartBrooks]

We use ourselves - http://antibodyMX.net/

We also filter for a handful of other companies with Zimbra installs. I can't say if they don't want the load on their server or if they think we do a better job.

[Krishopper]

Doug -

Did you have to do much tweaking to minimize false negatives and false positives, or was yours set up straight out of the box?

[lytledd]

Originally Posted by Krishopper

Doug -

Did you have to do much tweaking to minimize false negatives and false positives, or was yours set up straight out of the box?

When we started using it, we had an announced 3 month training period, where the software was put into training mode (It would tag and log, but still let spam though).

The end users were given instructions on what email addresses to use to correct the incorrect tagging. After this training period, we took it out of training mode.

it's not 100%, but it does a very good job.

Doug

[Klug]

We're using MailCleaner OSE - MailCleaner OpenSource Edition Forum • Index page
Setup with TrustedSources, SpamClam, PreRBL, URIBL and Spamc.
Greylisting helps (obviously) but is a pain (one DB per host, even in cluster mode).
Can also be trained (through IMAP) to learn, for bayesian filtering.

Works nicely enough for me for the price (free beside the servers/bandwidth): never more than 3 spam per day in my Inbox.
And is full of reports (domain admins love reports) 8))

Can be setup per domain for quarantaine or drop or delivery.
In delivery mode, works very nicely with a single rule in ZCS' SpamAssassin (all other rules removed) in order to deliver the tagged messages in "Spam" folder.


We also had excellent results with IronPort (well, some of our rich customers, not us 8)).