SpamAssassin vs. MEFilter?

Discussion, support and announcements for third party applications that work with MailEnable.
Post Reply

Which Spam filter do you use with MailEnable?

SpamAssassin
2
22%
MEFilter
6
67%
SNIMTA
1
11%
 
Total votes: 9

ChrisHenry
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 6:33 pm

SpamAssassin vs. MEFilter?

Post by ChrisHenry » Fri Feb 20, 2004 4:36 am

So, I've got a relatively low end machine that I'm setting up as a mail server. I'm using MailEnable and I'd like to use spam filtering.

I've got SpamAssassin installed and running, but since it has to run single-threaded, I can only process one message about every 10 seconds. :(

Is MEFilter faster?
How does the filtering compare between the two?

Thanks,
Chris

Brett Rowbotham
Posts: 542
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2003 7:48 am
Location: Cape Town

Spam filter

Post by Brett Rowbotham » Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:42 am

I currently use MEFilter which is doing a great job. I tried SpamAssassin which promised to teach itself about spam but, as you mention, running in a single thread is painful. Didn't try SNIMTA as I could not see any option to hold mail for eyeball checks.

Eric Conley

Post by Eric Conley » Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:58 am

Chris

Remember that MEFilter and Spam Assassin are doing totally different jobs.

I have two clients with ME Pro and a small number of users (~10 and ~45) but accessing 4-5 domains each.

I am successfully using MEFilter to cut the obvious crap out at server level without going for 99% spam removal.

inside that gateway the clients are MS Outlook and the four heaviest targeted for spam are using Junk-Out at client level. with "hand tuned" black and white listing the MEFilter does a good amnd reliable "pre-filter" and takes out over 90%. Junk-out gets the rest for the hard hit clients. The rest don't get enough spam to worry about.

Spam Assassin, either "raw" or as the engine to a proxy tries to get the lot. In my case the complexity of (windows) server installation or the need for a more expensive proxy shell ain't worth it.

If your need is similar to mine this approach could be ok.

If you have hundreds of clients AND need 99.9% spam capture then a more complex solution may suit you.

I have not tried SA on a Linux mailserver or on a Linux proxy/gateway ahed of the windows machine so I cannot comment on that option.

Eric C

guest

Post by guest » Fri Feb 20, 2004 3:15 pm

but it's right the mefilter has a problem with the attachments.
it scrambles up the attatchments like word, excel........

guest

Post by guest » Fri Feb 20, 2004 3:18 pm

sorry that was mespam and not mefilter.

Post Reply