Slashdot Mirror


DSPAM v3.2 Released

Nuclear Elephant writes "After four months of development DSPAM v3.2 has been released, bringing many new enhancements and filtering technologies. These include distributed computing support, implementation of Bill Yerazunis' Sparse Binary Polynomial Hashing algorithm (from CRM114), and v1.2 of Bayesian Noise Reduction. Other enhancements include SQLite support and many significant performance enhancements for PostgreSQL. DSPAM's official release is next week, but you can download the preview release now. Users of the project have also contributed towards creating a new logo for this release."

5 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. DSpam with qmail / vpopmail by hayds · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I am using D-Spam on a qmail/vpopmail server and I find that its great in terms of accuracy. Most of my users have never had a false positive and many havent seen a spam after a couple of weeks of training.

    The problem that I have with DSpam is the integration side. Im not sure how it goes with other mail systems but integrating it with vpopmail was a major pain. It seems easy, you just put the command in the dotfiles, but in practice getting it to work was quite a trial. Even now it doesnt integrate properly with the web administration, etc despite some scripting and minor code changes.

    Because of this Ive been thinking of switching to Spam Assassin simply because of its integration with qmail-scanner. Has anyone else had similar problems or been in a similar situation and found a good solution?

  2. Re:second post? by hayds · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I would have thought that running 2 bayesian filters would cause more trouble than good. The first filter would be ok as it would be trained like usual.

    The second filter would probably have problems because it would only see a small subset of all your mail as the first filter would have removed most of the spam. The second filter's sample would therefore be skewed and it would have far less data to accurately classify spam.

    Just my thoughts on the subject anyway...

  3. Re:second post? by kalman5 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What I dislike is the centralized Antispam. What is spam for me could not be for you. I was using the antispam filter on thunderbird but at least in previous was not good then I switched to use K9 ( http://keir.net/k9.html ). Is there nothing around for Linux like K9 ? K.

  4. did they fix the problems? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    a few months ago those features were available, too. while dspam is great at filtering mail, I faced two crucial problems, which forced me back to spamassassin. I haven't heard that they fixed any of those:
    - the database did grow huge. when my single user server with 128 mb had to use a 512 mb spam token database, performance was terrible. even with the tools included I could not do anything to fix the issue.
    - dspam knows only yes or now, there is no usable value that gives you some grey information. as a result, I had to check all those spam postings for false positives. Spamassassin on the other hand has that spam result 0 .. 10, so I can check 0..4 where 0 is ok (few false negatives) and 1..4 spam (few false positives), and I can directly delete thousands of mails in 5..10 without looking at them.

    i wont go back to dspam unless someone can offer speciic help for those issues. I believe everyone will face them sooner or later.

  5. Re:Does DSPAM inform the sender? by hayds · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No. Since spammers mostly use fake addresses, it's pretty pointless trying to send mail back to them. All that would achieve would be that you would receive all the bounces back and you'd get double the junk mail.