Pesquisar no apoio

Evite burlas no apoio. Nunca iremos solicitar que telefone ou envie uma mensagem de texto para um número de telefone ou que partilhe informações pessoais. Por favor, reporte atividades suspeitas utilizando a opção "Reportar abuso".

Saber mais

Spam Filter Suggestion

  • 1 resposta
  • 6 têm este problema
  • 9 visualizações
  • Última resposta por Matt

more options

I have been using filters for some time now to dump spam into a junk mail folder. This has worked better than Thunderbird "learning" to identify spam. Unfortunately, spammers have begun changing their addresses daily using long addresses of gibberish. More and more are slipping through my filters now. It would be nice if Thunderbird gave me some more options like: - filtering based on domain names with a number of characters exceeding a limit I set - filtering based on other parts of the email address like the portion in all caps "GET YOUR NEW SUV <buyacarnow@spammer.com>"

Any other suggestions would be highly appreciated.

I have been using filters for some time now to dump spam into a junk mail folder. This has worked better than Thunderbird "learning" to identify spam. Unfortunately, spammers have begun changing their addresses daily using long addresses of gibberish. More and more are slipping through my filters now. It would be nice if Thunderbird gave me some more options like: - filtering based on domain names with a number of characters exceeding a limit I set - filtering based on other parts of the email address like the portion in all caps "GET YOUR NEW SUV <buyacarnow@spammer.com>" Any other suggestions would be highly appreciated.

Todas as respostas (1)

more options

One of the reasons that we have a learning spam filter is just as you say you spend your whole time chasing how the spammers have changed their mail today, or this week.

My "learned" spam filter wards out about all my spam. It has had years of practice, but tell me. Do you mark your spam as spam in the filters or just do some arbitrary action with it so the filter gets no opportunity to learn?

My observation is folk who waste time on manual spam filtering mostly do not mark the messages as spam. Nor do they execute the filter after junk classification. They then say the filter does not learn and their system works better. Without ever having really used the junk filter or it's Bayesian logic.