[clug] anti-spam: anyone using tarpitting successfully?

[Daniel]

was: Re: [clug] Spambayes 
On Wed, 2003-05-21 at 10:02, Nemo -earth native- wrote:
.... snip ...
> Personally, I'd be interested to see a comparison of the relative
> effectiveness of bogofilter, spambayes, spamassassin, etc... for
> example, train each system on the same block of spam and ham, and then
> test each on a new block of email known to contain both ham and spam... 
>....snip ...
> .../Nemo

Hello All,
all the conversation about spam got me thinking about tarpitting in the
context of some of the other alternatives {combine the best
detection/analysis with something to 'slow them down'}

Teergrubing (German tarpitting)
http://www.iks-jena.de/mitarb/lutz/usenet/antispam.html

qmail patches
http://www.iidea.pl/~paweln/proj/qmail-patches/

http://www.martiansoftware.com/tarproxy/doc/plugin-api.html

*amavisd-new, which integrates SpamAssassin (with the Bayesian filter)
as well as virus scanning, as a Postfix content-filter in a large system
http://www.bluestream.org/Networking/LinuxSpam.htm

The tarpitting theory is very interesting, but I was concerned about the
practice making not just the spammers machine ineffective, but your own
as well (?).  However if the cost to your own mail machine is not too
great - why not put a spanner in the spammers works?

Cheers,
Daniel.