LGC said:
Outlook should bounce back spam from spammers who are added into the
Junk
Senders list by the user. Outlook should also be programmed with an
option to
identify spammers who use the 'automated mass-mailing' method of
sending spam
and, block such e-mails from even being downloaded.
Should Outlook be able to go a step further and include a feature to
report
spam to effective authorities, everyone would be buying and using
Outlook,
keeping the Microsoft family together, instead of having to buy
anti-spam
software that is not always produced by Microsoft, hence creating
competition
between Microsoft anti-spam software and Non-Microsoft anti-spam
software.
Wow, that must be some great drug you are on.
Bouncing is something a newbie thinks is cool because they haven't
bothered to think it through. Read
http://snipurl.com/cuez.
Just because YOU added some sender to your Junk Sender list doesn't mean
that what they sent was actually spam. Most users think any unwanted
e-mail they get is spam. You could be adding a sender to your Junk
Sender list that has nothing to do regarding spam.
There are some bulk mailers that will actually use the Bulk header. You
think spammers are moral? That they really are going to identify their
spam as bulk mail? You can already define a rule, if you want, to look
for the Bulk header and trigger on it. That will NOT stop the spam.
That will only block the newsletters to which you subscribed. Adding
the Bulk header doesn't necessarily mean it is spam but more likely
something you have subscribed to or opted into. It's amazing how
newbies think spammers obey the rules. Yeah, sure, spammer are going to
use their real e-mail addresses, and they are going to identify their
bulk spewage with an identifiable header, and they'll put "**SPAM**"
right in the Subject header for you, uh huh.
So what is stopping you from getting an account (free) at Spamcop and
reporting it yourself? Laziness, that's what. You want mommie to solve
your problem rather than participate in a joint effort by the worldwide
user community to identify the spam (but it sounds like you need to
review the definitions of what is spam, starting reading articles at
many anti-spam sites, and then get into reporting it). If sending a
report to SpamCop is too complicated for you, you could use SpamNet and
just add your vote on what you *think* is spam. Then if enough other
recipients vote the same way then the signature for that spam gets added
to their database so other recipients that use SpamNet won't see it (and
you won't see it if they other users noticed it first and they voted on
it). However, if you vote on e-mails that are not spam then your vote
will be degraded (i.e., if you vote on non-spam e-mails and do it
habitually then your vote's impact will be reduced because you have
statistically proven to be a poor judge of spam).
And then there are plenty of very effective anti-spam products available
but you choose not to avail yourself of them. SpamPal is free and so
are all its plug-ins. It will use the public DNSBLs (DNS blacklists),
like SpamCop and SpamHaus. Mailwasher also uses the DNSBLs (but doesn't
fork over any of its revenue for its commercial product that usurps
these public and free services). SpamBayes runs as a plug-in to Outlook
(but you can run it as a proxy) but all it does is Bayesian filtering
(which is all Outlook 2003 added). Have you yet checked if the spam
filter is enabled on your mailbox by checking your options using your
e-mail provider's webmail interface?
Have you read the proposed schemes to identify the sender of an e-mail,
like Yahoo DomainKeys and SPF (Sender Policy Framework)? SPF isn't
geared to identify spam but a spammer want to hide. SPF has its
failings of which some have been overcome. Yes, the big guys are trying
to come up with ways to stop the spam or, at least, make it tough for
them to hide. Bouncing is nothing any of them consider as a reasonable
proposal. It only exacerbates the problem. Personally I would love if
my e-mail provider would subscribe to a list of anonymous remailers and
offer me the option to block all e-mail originating from them. Then if
they offered MX blocking (to detect e-mail sent directly to my mail
server by some home computer with a dynamically assigned IP address)
then I could enable it at the mail server instead of having to use a
plug-in to SpamPal to filter it locally.
