Re: [exim] DynaStop - It works for me.

--On 9 November 2006 17:09:41 +0000 Chris Lightfoot <chris@???>
wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 04:39:21PM +0000, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>> Well, I think that there are spam filters that are more reliable than
>> humans at detecting spam. That is; the spam filters get fewer false
>> positives.
>
> That's obviously not possible.

Yes, it is possible. You get some email that you want, it's buried in a
pile of spam. You delete the pile, and accidentally delete the message that
you wanted.

OK, for a single message in an empty mailbox, you probably won't get a
false positive. However, phishing relies on humans getting false negatives.

Humans *are* fallible. The challenge isn't to achieve 0 false positives,
it's to achieve fewer than the human. For a person who gets little spam,
that's hard. If you get hundreds per day like I do, it's actually pretty
easy.

--
Ian Eiloart
IT Services, University of Sussex