Windows 7 - Cloudmark

Asked By Jeff T on 15-Mar-12 02:12 PM
I am gonna do a little good advertising. I am impressed with the way cloudmark
pro handles spam. So far it has detected all spam and sent it to quarantine.
Very few false positives. It does a good job.

Is it okay to have positive comments  in this newsgroup?


Jack Toff replied to Jeff T on 15-Mar-12 05:16 PM
You are a newsgroup spammer.
Jeff T replied to Jack Toff on 15-Mar-12 05:37 PM
I just want to give a little positive feedback. I thought that is what these
groups were all about - learning!
David H. Lipman replied to Jeff T on 15-Mar-12 05:54 PM
From: "Jeff T" <jthoele@nospam.invalid>


If someone asked about it, yes.  That's ok.

No one did, and as an unsolicited post that is a type of spam.  In fact many
spam posts masquerade as someone who purports to have just found a product
and says its good and suggests it.

If this was a spam or email related news group, then your post would have
some legitimacy as being on Topic.  As a WinXP news group, no.

See - you learned something.

--
Dave
Multi-AV Scanning Tool - http://multi-av.thespykiller.co.uk
http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp
Jeff T replied to David H. Lipman on 15-Mar-12 06:04 PM
Yes, I learned something. Never again. Thanks Dave.
Jeff
Mayayana replied to Jeff T on 15-Mar-12 08:15 PM
| Yes, I learned something. Never again. Thanks Dave.

It'd be less annoying if you had explained what you were
actually talking about. Why is anyone supposed to know
what Cloudmark Pro is? I visited their website and I still have
only a vague idea. it is full of trendy marketing slang like:

and security solutions"

That sounds to me like a tool for ISPs, not a tool for
installing on XP. (Since their menus are dysfunctional I
could not actually find a link for "Pro". But do not most ISPs
these days handle spam well? I have ISP email and a website
that uses the open source SpamAssassin for my domain
email. I do not get notable spam from either, and neither costs
anything.)
VanguardLH replied to Jeff T on 15-Mar-12 07:21 PM
You will not like my comments because they are negative.

Cloudmark is a community voting scheme.  Users vote by submitting
examples once they receive the spam.  Notice I say that they RECEIVE the
spam to then report it (to vote it as spam).  That means you have boobs
voting on e-mails that do not qualify as spam but merely as unwanted
e-mails.  It also means those who poll their e-mails regularly and at
short intervals WILL see the spam because there has not been enough
voting on that message yet.

If you are the first few hundred or couple thousand to receive the spam,
it will not be in their database.  The first victims still see the spam.
The first victims report the spam to save the hash code for it in the
server database.  Then later potential victims get the advantage of
using that voting to not see that same spam (except those users still do
see the spam when checking the spam folder for false positives).  I
rarely got new spam that had sufficient voting so that it marked as spam
for me.  Instead I'd see the new spam (not yet flagged as such), vote on
it, and someone else did not have to see the spam.  I got to work for
free to help someone else not see the spam and Cloudmark got the credit.

You need to connect to their database to check the hash code for a
reported spam to compare against the hash for your new e-mails.  That
means problems with offline spam checking.  You have to do the spam
check right after your e-mail session with the server but BEFORE you
disconnect from the Internet.

filtering to generate no false positives (good e-mails flagged as spam)
and few negatives (spam that did not get flagged as spam).  Otherwise,
there is no point in using such a system.  Why?  Because you still have
to go monitor the spam folder looking for false positives.  Having to
review the spam that you receive negates the purpose of filtering it
out.  If you are reviewing the spam, you are seeing the spam, so you
wasted time to segregate it.  Maybe you do not care about losing a few
good e-mails that were wrongly flagged as spam.  That is not a tolerable
business model.

By the way, Cloudmark started as SpamNet.  That started out as free for
personal use.  What they did was use volunteers to test their setup,
load test it, and build their database to flesh out their entire system.
Then when it was deemed ready for commercial use, they yanked it away
from their volunteers.  It was no longer free.  They did not offer a
discount to their volunteers that had helped them test and modify their
system.  They just ripped it away and told current users how much it
would cost if they wanted to continue using it.  Since it already had
the deficiencies noted above, I was not going to waste my time with it.

Note the topic of this newsgroup.  It discusses Windows XP, not spam
itself or spam-related programs.  For anti-spam discussions, go post in
those newsgroups, like alt.spam.  "Advertising", as you stated, is
spamming, especially since your post is off-topic to this newsgroup.
Jeff T replied to VanguardLH on 15-Mar-12 07:42 PM
Sorry, again.
Jeff T replied to VanguardLH on 15-Mar-12 09:15 PM
The reason I thought that maybe this pertained to WindowsXP is because I have
got Cloudmark (which works good for me) working with Outlook Express on a
Windows XP machine.
I did not really understand what it meant to be a "newsgroup spammer". So I
did learn something!!!
Paul in Houston TX replied to Jeff T on 16-Mar-12 12:21 AM
Thats ok.  I got chewed out here once for typing "test"
in the header.
J. P. Gilliver (John) replied to Jeff T on 16-Mar-12 04:19 AM
In message <jju478$5ma$1@dont-email.me>, Jeff T <jthoele@nospam.invalid>
writes:
[]
Don't worry - I think some of the reactions have been harsher than they
might be, as it _seems_ your post was genuine: and yes, positive comment
is accepted, just uncommon! But as someone else explained, a lot of
newsgroup spam _is_ of the "I just found x and it is great" type, which
is why many are wary.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

prolong!" - Monty Python
J. P. Gilliver (John) replied to Mayayana on 16-Mar-12 04:22 AM
In message <jjtt07$t8s$1@dont-email.me>, Mayayana
[]
[]
I have no idea whether they _are_ stopping a lot of spam reaching me,
but my incoming ISP is certainly letting a lot through at the moment -
starting around the turn of the year, I'd say. My outgoing ISP traps the
vast majority of what my incoming ISP does not trap (no, I do not send
spam, but I do forward what I get to assorted spambins [yes I am aware
that the usefulness of doing this is debated], and most of it gets
bounced - as spam - on the way out).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

prolong!" - Monty Python
Bob F replied to Paul in Houston TX on 16-Mar-12 08:31 PM
That will not happen on alt.test.

Plus, it will test your reply address.