Spam Filters and Dopey IT guys!!

[Stuart]

Hey, no probs, just a small dummy spit on my part (I need that icon!)

I ***** about our central IT support as much as any (probably louder)

[q9]

Funnily enough, the best place I ever worked for was a uni also. We provided same day service for nearly everything, and 99% of jobs had a 24 hour turnaround.

In the business world, which I expected to be roughly the same, it was much, much worse. IT departments seem to exist as a seperate service provider, rather than an intergral part of the business. A lot of the IT guys I have worked with seemed to have no concept of the idea that one person not being able to log on WAS a big deal. No thought of productivity of the BUSINESS, only what is convenient for them to deal with. They like to impose bizare 'security' policies that make no sense, or are completely inappropriate, and in every single case where that has been done, all it has done is increase the workload of the IT helpdesk, and impede on the legitimate work of the end users.

Anyhow, SPAM is a worldwide problem, outside the control of the end user, and even the IT dept. So how does blaming the end user help? I would suggest that if you are losing a large portion of legitimate email to your spam filter, then it is inappropriately configured.

I am afraid I don't have much time for support people blaming the end user for their woes. I agree that some people are their own worst enemy, but it is up to the support professional to ensure that they are appropriately managed. This often does not occur, and generally it is because it is difficult, time consuming and (wrongly) thought to be a waste of resources.

Anyhow with luck, I will be back at uni studying something a little more challenging and worthwhile next year

[Stuart]

Anyhow, SPAM is a worldwide problem, outside the control of the end user, and even the IT dept. So how does blaming the end user help? I would suggest that if you are losing a large portion of legitimate email to your spam filter, then it is inappropriately configured.

I am afraid I don't have much time for support people blaming the end user for their woes. I agree that some people are their own worst enemy, but it is up to the support professional to ensure that they are appropriately managed. This often does not occur, and generally it is because it is difficult, time consuming and (wrongly) thought to be a waste of resources.

Re; Spam, I'll pay all that. We have a good spam package, that gives control to the end user to manage it as they want. The package (spam assassin) rates each email as to it's likelyhood of being spam. It is up to the end user to decide what to do with it. We had a major spam even about a month ago (as did the rest of the world - care-of the Germans) and some users had 100s of emails because they hadn't paid any attention to the numerous notifications given as to how to set up spam filtering. They kept blaming the IT dept, when we are not in a position to enforce what they decide to do. I also offered training courses, which a massive 2 people out of the 1000 or so in my faculty chose to attend (the courses are free, so no excuse there).

Being a Uni, we have a different approach to the corporate world. Freedom of activity is given, as it is an academic environment, and therefore we do not want to be a compromising factor for academic research. It does mean however, that the end-user must take more responsibility for the tools they use, and the computer is just another tool. If they choose not to make use of the helpdesk support and training support offered before they have a problem, then demand assistance when something goes wrong (such as loosing all their data because they have not given any consideration to backup), then yes, the most common issue the helpdesk has to deal with is PEBKAC (problem exists between keyboard and chair). We proactively deal with any other problems.

[pau1]

Being a Uni, we have a different approach to the corporate world. Freedom of activity is given, as it is an academic environment.

I'd have to disagree with you there stuart. I work as a systems administrator at a uni. Among other things I also run our mail server and associated spam scanning. If anything our current policies are tighter and more secure than the "corporate" environment. The only people with administrative access to desktop boxes are the systems administrators. We don't have virus problems, we don't have malware and illegal programs installed, we don't have to re-install boxes at the drop of a hat. All that and staff still get all their work done and still have the "freedom" to do so. We have run like this for the last 6 years and staff appreciate the value of stable and always usable desktop machines. btw I work for an IT faculty.

We also use spamassassin and only tag the mail as spam/non-spam. No mail is lost and it is up to the mail client to decide what to do with it. The active non-delivery of mail by filters on the server is a bad policy and only leads to disatisfied end users. You can stop 100 spam and the end users won't care, but stop one legitimate email and you will hear about it.

[DavidG]

Surely the way to stop spam is to remove the concept of free e-mail.

If the user paid a small charge for every e-mail sent, over a free limit per account and a small joining fee to create an account, then spam would cost the spammer more than it was worth but legit users would hardly be effected.

At the moment you can create as many free accoounts as you like and mail what you like from each. Too easy.

Sender pays.

[Cliff Rogers]

...If the user paid a small charge for every e-mail sent... Sender pays.

Too simplistic, most spammers are not using their own account to send the spam anyway.

It also won't stop them... do you think the junk mail stuffed in your snail mail letter box gets there for free?

Anyway, as I have said before in the topic about telemarketers, you'll live a lot longer if you don't let it bother you.

[pau1]

Surely the way to stop spam is to remove the concept of free e-mail.

If the user paid a small charge for every e-mail sent, over a free limit per account and a small joining fee to create an account, then spam would cost the spammer more than it was worth but legit users would hardly be effected.

At the moment you can create as many free accoounts as you like and mail what you like from each. Too easy.

Sender pays.

That was the solution proposed by Bill "The Internet? We are not interested in it" Gates

Anyway half the spam sent out is from compromised virus infected machines that set up their own smtp servers and spam the world. Either that or they are comming from some dodgy country that doesn't quite subscribe to the same "laws" as the rest of the planet and they just do whatever they want. Large quantities of Spam aren't being sent by people who go and set up "free" webmail accounts, the origins are often much more sophisticated.

[q9]

Emailing is very simple to do through code. It only takes a few lines and you have created a basic email servlet type of thing.

A lot of spam would be reduced if antivirus and firewall software had to be shipped with new computers. In fact, I wrote something like that to the Dept of Information and the Arts once upon a time. You'll notice that their "anti-spam" legislation has done exactly what I predicted it would do at the time - nothing. I suggested that it would be better to legislate that all new computers have AV and firewall software installed.

Of course, people will cry that they are paying for something they don't want. But your ISP is charging per MB - as it costs them per MB - there would have to be a saving in there somewhere, even if only 10% fewer computers were being compromised.

[DavidG]

But.... If you had to pay then you would be much more careful with your system.
You would use a firewall as it could save you money. You would take every precaution. You would scream at the pollies to get a solution....

Because there is no immediately visible cost, resources are not allocated to prevent misuse. What does it matter to you if your system does send a few hundred thousand emails. A little extra traffic hidden in the rest.

You would react pretty quick if you had to pay for a few hundred thousand emails. Very quick.....

[Gingermick]

My solution requires some police and legislative work. What we need to do once we catch one spammer is to punish them severely. This would involve the forcible placement of anti-virus and anti-spam compact discs (and maybe ADSL modems) into the personal orifice from whence brown stuff emanates. Then the use of chastity belts to keep the discs there.

[Cliff Rogers]

But.... If you had to pay then you would be much more careful with your system.....
....You would react pretty quick if you had to pay ....

Yes, & this is from somebody who puts a picture in their signiture?

What about the poor buga's that have to pay by the Mb for the download???
They are paying to read this thread.... you won't stop people just by making them pay.

[DavidG]

Cliff
It is actually a link to ubeaut. It should be in your cache after the first time.

I would like to get it reduced in size so have to ask neil.

This was in response to issue that people using this board did not know about the ubeaut products so I thought we could advertise them.

[Cliff Rogers]

Still, you get the point, it's advertising that you have to pay for yourself.... making e-mail 'user pays' won't stop SPAM. That pic in your signiture is still 3Kb, it adds up.

It doesn't stop the junk mailers that have to pay for all the trees they cut down to print the sheyet that they stuff through my mailbox every single day of the week so it won't stop junk e-mail either.

[DavidG]

Cliff
Yeh. and your avatar is 7k.

Nothing will stop them but it might slow them down.
The stuff in the snail letter box is targeted and they hope to make a profit.
Spam is blindly sent by the million.

Price them out and fine them out. Then fit a desk top pc up their rear end, plugged in of course.

[Cliff Rogers]

Cliff
Yeh. and your avatar is 7k.
.

& your point is?

My point is that you won't stop them by trying to make them pay, you won't stop them, they will do it anyway.

....The stuff in the snail letter box is targeted ......

Rubbish.... who said I wanted a Manicure, perfume, Barby dolls & stainless steel saucepans & what idoit thinks that they can sell me a crap computer when I work in a computer business? Targeted my ass, it's the same thing as SPAM & they pay for it to be delivered.

If you want trageted, that's what Spyware is all about & who likes that? :mad:

Ignore it & chuck it in the bin, you'll live longer.