SPAMFIGHTER - WHAT DO YOU THINK? Solved

Question

Hello everyone!

I just received a letter praising the virtues of the "spamfighter" program for Outlook and Outlook Express.
What should we think about it?
Is this program really as effective as the site claims? https://www.spamfighter.com/SPAMfighter/Lang_FR/Product_Info.asp

If it is effective, doesn't Spamfighter duplicate the function of the BitDefender firewall that I use (or another firewall)?

Thanks for your insights.
Didier

Configuration: Windows XP Firefox 2.0.0.1

thesaint · Accepted Answer

Attention !!
Spamfighter is an anti-spam tool with a very special business approach: once installed on your computer, it sends emails to people in your address book without your knowledge.

These commercial emails are also written in such a way that the recipients think you are recommending the product to them!

In short, here’s an anti-spam software that uses spam to promote itself!
Detestable! More than ever, long live open source!
Uninstall immediately!

boulepate62 · Answer

Hi

no worries, you can still give it a try, it doesn't cost anything.
There's no risk with your Bitdefender firewall since it's anti-spam and won't cause any problems ;-)

--
it's by forging that one becomes blacksmith!
** personal site to forge, in my profile **

vince · Answer

Hi   I installed Spamfighter. It works great so far, no issues!!!

marie · Answer

I uninstalled Spamfighter because I'm not a pro; they contacted me again and I didn't respond. When I deleted their messages, I ended up with two Outlook icons; my first version was empty, and I naturally accepted the second one where I found my contacts. The next day, I was faced with a huge spam from Spamfighter that prevents me from seeing my messages and a message telling me that my subscription has expired. I can't do anything because I uninstalled Spamfighter, or I have to pay €25, even though I just tested their program for three weeks before uninstalling it. I never had spam before; I installed Spamfighter on the advice of a contact.

Bertrand SERGENT · Answer

Hello,  yes, but: are there other free software that can handle SPAMS... I receive 40 to 50 a day and I would like to know a better way  Bertrand.

thesaint · Answer

For my part, I think I’ve found a solution: drop Outlook and use the amazing Thunderbird, which offers only advantages:

- free (open source)
- add-ons (like Firefox)
- multi-account (check all your inboxes with one click)
- very effective integrated anti-spam!

Trying it is adopting it!

ob mvp · Answer

Under personal Outlook, I've been using SpamBayes for a few years and it's just bliss; however, it only works with Outlook, not Outlook Express.

genesis · Answer

Little detail:
Spambayes is undoubtedly the best solution currently for someone not using Thunderbird and its integrated filter.
Spambayes works perfectly with any email client, Outlook AND Outlook Express.
The only difference with Outlook Express is that it doesn't install as a "plugin" but as a POP3 or IMAP proxy.

carnops · Answer

There is indeed a free solution, extremely effective, but that requires a bit of configuration to be at its best.
It is the SpamAssassin mail proxy.
This software is under the GNU GPL free license, so no Spywares, no Spambots, no penalties in case of uninstallation...

Otherwise, there is also SpamPal, which is free but less refined in terms of detection.
It relies on external databases such as SORBS, DNSBL,...
It is possible to add your own filters very easily.

SpamAssassin:
- requires good configuration
- requires a minimum of technical knowledge
+ very fine and precise in filtering
+ free and open-source
+ available for multiple platforms

SpamPal:
- False positives at the beginning due to the use of external databases.
- also requires a bit of knowledge for configuration
- available only in Windows version.
+ free and open-source
+ allows for quick sorting
+ possibility to refine the settings quite simply

It's up to you to choose!

PATOU · Answer

There is POPTRAY .... excellent, I've been using it for years without any issues: free and in French...

Cdp06 · Answer

Hello,

I have been using SpamFighter for a year. I find it very effective. The advertisement that follows each of my emails is due to the fact that I use the free version. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Every offered product contains something, and I think it's not unreasonable to support someone who helps us effectively, especially since the only email SpamFighter sends to my contact list is the notification that each of my contacts is on my whitelist.

This has not had any consequences on my contacts, and without comparing with other anti-spam software, SpamFighter is sufficiently effective, considering what I used to receive before. The follow-ups from SpamFighter are not aggressive. They seek a paid subscription after the trial period, but do not force it at all. A new registration number is provided to continue benefiting from the free anti-spam protection (like Avast Antivirus, I believe), which is limited in services compared to the paid version, more suitable for professionals.

Another advantage of SpamFighter is that new spam reported by recipients and confirmed by others allows SpamFighter to block them based on reports from multiple internet users. We can check the list of spam received in Outlook, and possibly whitelist some that might interest us.

Otherwise, there is a provider like laposte.net that has a free anti-spam service, but we have to check their site for the list of spam before it gets deleted by the service provider, which is not the case for those who use Outlook to import emails.

If you encounter issues in case of discontinuation with a service provider, it is likely due to a poorly configured uninstallation. To resolve this, you need to go through your control panel and open your program to add or remove programs.

Best regards,

xav1944 · Answer

I have been using Spamihilator for over a year with OE and IE6; it removes 99% of spam and has a learning feature for what is not filtered. Easy addition of spam words. Installs as a POP proxy.

cerbane · Answer

Hello, nobody talks about Vade Retro... why?? It's super simple and free; okay, it's not 100% effective but it sorts more than 90-95% of spam into a junk folder... and it works with OE... C

Libou · Answer

I had a somewhat similar experience to Marie's. Disastrous! In trying to disable this so-called antispam that was flooding my screen with payment requests, all my emails disappeared into a black hole. Impossible to reach anyone in this sea of anonymity. Spamfighter epitomizes the dark side of the internet. People without scruples hunting for easy targets.

Cdp06 · Answer

I have Orange as my internet service provider, which also has an anti-spam feature, so I receive very little spam, as I have a new PC on which I haven’t reinstalled SpamFighter. I therefore have some spam that isn’t recognized as well by other anti-spam solutions because my wife, who has SpamFighter, doesn’t have any spam at all.

I confirm that SpamFighter is a very good product. It's like everything, you have to learn how to use it. The one-month free trial implies a choice towards the free family edition after requesting a registration number. The more efficient choice of the professional edition is paid. It includes efficient options that are not needed for us individuals, whose results are enough to encourage professionals to choose their anti-spam and anti-virus products.

Upon installation, you are asked to add our address book to the whitelist, and that we are protected by SpamFighter's anti-spam, it’s take it or leave it. You are informed of this during installation. It's the same for those who want to be listed for their sites or blogs, to include the directory providers who promote them on a page of their sites and blogs. You can do it at the bottom of the page to avoid damaging your image, and it's a way to be seen across a large number of directories for visits. It's a choice.

After three weeks with SpamFighter, you are notified of the deadline and a choice to be made. You are therefore invited to register for the family or professional edition. If this does not suit you, you can then go to your operating system's control panel and uninstall SpamFighter. It’s the least you can do, out of politeness, to respond to someone who writes to you, especially when you have received and used their services. Otherwise, you uninstall the anti-spam like any software that doesn’t suit you.

The free choice involves adding a signature at the bottom of your emails, and it also shows the number of spam removed, which decreases significantly when your service provider blocks them beforehand. This is what happens with Incredimail, for instance. For the rest, you block them gradually with the actions your email software can take.

Now, I’m happy to know that there are other free anti-spam solutions for those who need them. Not only do you have to first find them, but there are also options for all tastes.

Happy end-of-year celebrations, and all my best wishes for the coming year, if I don’t have to come back to enlighten you.

Cdp06

Cdp06 · Answer

If memory serves, you just need to select the addresses for ads and others that you wish to receive, and choose the "Whitelist" option, so for you, SpamFighter will let those emails through. Since Orange offers free anti-spam, I haven't reinstalled SpamFighter on my new PC, but the filter isn't sharp enough, and I still have some spam getting through. I classify them as junk in Outlook. SpamFighter is on other PCs that I own, but I'm not the one using it. Best regards,  Cdp06

Crazyb · Answer

Thank you for this ultra-fast and effective response. I have included these emails and domains in the famous whitelist. Thanks again and Happy New Year 2008 Bernard.G

Sacles · Answer

Hello,

Recommended antispams: Spamihilator or SpamPal. Both are free and come with no traps of any kind.

Most antispams work, among other things, based on a Bayesian filter (statistical filter) that requires training. This is the main reason for false positives (which will never completely disappear).

The best thing, of course, is to avoid receiving spams, which are not a fatality but often result from imprudence in sharing addresses. A zombie PC from a correspondent can also be responsible. Hence the advice: never share your primary address but always use an alias.

-----------

Some still use Incredimail. It is THE email software you should not use. Here’s what they accept in order to use this software:

Excerpt from Incredimail's terms and conditions:

"Users, including without limitation users from the European Union, fully understand and clearly consent to the collection and processing of their personally identifiable information..."
Source and continuation (enlightening): http://assiste.com.free.fr/p/logitheque/incredimail.html

I am not the only one to find these critters that jump and pollute messages composed with Incredimail inappropriate.

Cheers and best wishes to all.
--

My favorite extensions for FireFox: AdBlock Plus-NoScript-CookieSafe-CustomizeGoogle-RefControl

zouriteman · Answer

I use EUDORA 7, and I cannot have an opinion on SpamFighter, as it only works with OUTLOOK (Express) I used to use the adjustable Junk filtering in EUDORA, which works mainly by searching for words in addresses, titles, my messages; but it requires a constant effort to add to the unwanted list. I then used SPAMPAL, which is generally effective with its Black Lists, White Lists, with a personal and also automatic update of its database. However, it increasingly lets spam through, as the "spammers" are perfecting and modifying their techniques, particularly: a) they spoof sender addresses, pretending to be anyone, including now one of your friends or contacts (it only takes once to hack a friend's address book to bombard you with spam) b) they have started to write in FRENCH (not very well yet), but that makes English word filters obsolete c) they pepper their messages with spelling variations and invisible characters: it's useless to filter on "VIAGRA" because that's what you see, not what is written in bytes. d) now (about 30% of messages I've read on a site) their messages are no longer written in text, but are made of images that change slightly every time, which renders traditional filtering techniques ineffective  My son, who has a domain xxxxx.com and accounts on GMAIL, opened an account for me on GMAIL, in the form of jean@xxxx.com, to which I forward ("redirection") all my other email accounts (like toto@free.fr, toto@laposte.net, toto@tele2.fr, etc ...); I now only read (via POP3 or WebMail) that account on GMAIL, which does automatic filtering.  The result is EXTRAORDINARY (for a free thing): all my spams (at least 99%) have disappeared; Google must have invented a very effective technology, and probably has a very up-to-date database of spammers.  My conclusion: use GMAIL!

comptaciel · Answer

Hello,  I used it for a few days and then uninstalled it. Before I had 20/30 spams a day, and the day after the installation, I was up to 80/100. I concluded that the software was generating spam to justify its usefulness. Unfortunately, I still have them on the address I had to change, where I just throw everything in the trash, unfortunately, even the good messages. I haven't found any other solutions using free software.

Cdp06 · Answer

Hello Bernard, and Happy New Year 2008. Likewise, thanks to Sacles for your information. Best wishes to Zouriteman. All your information is good. Very often, software doesn't always work the way we want it to, as it needs to be adapted to our messaging system. The more we seek perfection, the more we hinder ourselves. Having too many email addresses, aliases, etc., changes nothing; it's our correspondents who suffer as much as we do.

Generally speaking, especially in a business context, it’s better to keep things simple and traditional. I'm not in favor of monopoly. Competition is interesting, but simplicity is still the best approach. In any case, if we must be deceived, it’s because we are deceiving ourselves. So let’s respect choices, and avoid multiplying software.

Everything that is free is generally paired with something that must bring in revenue, so let's be cautious and think about what we are going to do. Additionally, it seems important to regularly clean your PC, even going so far as to format the hard drive and reinstall everything, of course, after backing up our documents, not forgetting the personal folders that are saved within programs like some photo recording, scanning, messaging programs, etc.

I'm not a computer whiz, but by sharing tips, I manage to get by.

Wishing everyone a Happy New Year.

Cdp06

Comdex · Answer

Cdp06: Please spare us this pedantic and condescending tone.
Your interventions verge on misinformation.
Contrary to what you say in almost every one of your posts, free options still exist, and without any strings attached.
This is the very foundation of the internet and the distribution of open-source software.
Of course, one must remain vigilant and not confuse a "trial" or "evaluation" version of commercial software with "freeware" (which may contain spyware or ads) or excellent open-source software like Firefox, Thunderbird, or Open Office.
If you limit yourself to using only Open Source software (see the excellent Framasoft website), you won't risk any of the issues mentioned regarding the use of aggressive software like SpamFighter, which is, let us remind you - TO BE AVOIDED -.
For those who, I don't know for what reason, remain loyal to the Outlook email client, I recommend the very effective and Open Source Spambayes.

Wishing all of you a happy and prosperous new year!

zouriteman · Answer

without being insulting, I didn't quite get the response from Cdp06, and like Comdex, I think his company has a lot of money to spend solely on commercial software.

However, finding a good or excellent FREE software is a treacherous journey, as there are unfortunately many true/false free ones (like the famous passport of mister Pasqua):
on the main download sites (logitheque, zdnet, download, tucows, etc...) softwares that are presented as FREE turn out to be:
* either "Free to Try": HA! HA! thanks, I didn't pay attention to the detail, we can try it for free! But not for long
* or "Trial", after which you have to figure out what will happen (often it's undocumented): either it completely stops after X days (often 30), or it's limited (it only does part of the job), or it constantly throws message windows at you.
* or more insidiously, as you said for SpamFighter, it really pretends to be free and to work well, but secretly either it collects private information about you, or it starts pestering you to upgrade to the paid version.

* finally, free ones, like the paid ones, claim to do wonderful things, be the most beautiful, ... and you often have to try several before finding the best, or the LEAST WORST!

Among the 7 mentioned in this forum (SpamAssassin, SpamPal, SpamBayes, PopTray, SpamHilator, Vade Retro, SpamFighter), I tried several a long time ago (2006), and I only kept SPAMPAL, which is really FREE (none of the mentioned issues), which is enriched with optional "plugins" created by kind talented people.
But I admit that the effectiveness of GOOGLE MAIL, which I've been using for 2 weeks, amazes me as it filters spam so well.
Of course, I know that Google takes advantage of this to sneakily grab some information about my habits to bombard me with targeted ads, but like 95% of internet users, I use Google's search engine throughout the day, which means GOOGLE knows me better than my mother or the R.G. or the C.I.A.!
Finally, for Cdp06, using GoogleMail does not require you to share multiple addresses. Your main address, known by all your contacts, can very well remain JEAN.TOTO@NEUF.FR, while the other TOTO25@GMAIL.COM remains secret, the system consists of having Google forward all messages received on the first one to the second (with spam elimination in the process), then reading them via the second, and only writing or replying using the first. Happy New Year!!!

Sacles · Answer

Good evening,  Spamihilator is indeed free and works very well (with the option to add additional filters).  It can be configured in French.  As I mentioned before, any good email provider also allows you to define aliases for the main address that should not be shared with anyone (only share the aliases). This way, there's no need to check emails in multiple accounts; one is enough.  With a little caution (especially by using aliases), it's possible to never receive spam.  Cheers. --  My favorite extensions for FireFox: AdBlock Plus-NoScript-CookieSafe-CustomizeGoogle-RefControl

jungo2a · Answer

Hi,  I'm trying to download Spamfighter and it gets stuck at a certain point... (module registration).  I've tried several sites and nothing... I disabled my firewall... nothing  I don't know what to do... Basically, is there another antispam that would work with Outlook Express?  Thank you for your help... :-)

Comdex · Answer

jungo2a: I feel like you haven't read the previous posts...
SPAMFIGHTER should be AVOIDED!
If you can't install it, don't insist and you'll be better off!
However, if you're looking for anti-spam for Outlook, you can use Spambayes which is Open Source.
You can find it here:
https://www.zdnet.fr/telecharger/logiciel/spambayes-39177160s.htm
or here:
http://spambayes.sourceforge.net/

See you and have a great year everyone!!!

zouf40 · Answer

I feel like we're in the middle of a madness! I've been using Spamfighter since... since... it must have existed! Never, well never, have my correspondents received any advertising messages from me recommending to buy this or that product. And this is very easy to verify because most of my correspondents are from the same area and I regularly send them jokes and other funny stories that I receive from other correspondents. Among them, there is my wife who has her PC... in the next room! The only thing mentioned is that I use a free version of Spamfighter. Then, once or twice a year, and I don't know why, Spamfighter uninstalls itself. I no longer have the mention 'I use the free version'. I know that I need to re-download this program. And I have never received any blocking messages from my PC. I use Outlook Express and I have Windows XP Home as the OS. As for spam, I receive very little on my "official" email which is only known to my friends. I have 2 or 3 junk emails that do not get stored on my PC. I open them on the ISP's site and it doesn't matter if there are any spam or something else. It stays on their server.

zouf40 · Answer

I feel like we are in a full-blown delusion! I have been using Spamfighter since... since... it must have existed! Never, ever, have my correspondents received spam messages from me recommending them to buy this or that product. And this is very easy to verify because most of my correspondents are in the same area and I regularly send them jokes and other funny stories that I receive from other correspondents. Among them is my wife who has her PC... in the next room! The only thing mentioned is that I use a free version of Spamfighter. Then, once or twice a year, and I don't know why, Spamfighter uninstalls itself. I no longer have the mention 'I use the free version'. I know I need to reinstall this program. And I have never received any messages blocking my PC. I use Outlook Express and I have XP Home as my OS. As for spam, I receive very little on my "official" email which is only known to my friends. I have 2 or 3 junk emails that do not get saved on my PC. I open them on my ISP's site and it doesn't matter if there are spams or anything else. It stays on their server.

waja · Answer

Hello, Gmail with its integrated spam filter, Thunderbird with its spam filter that "learns" from our contacts and our spam and uses SpamAssassin, and imports the address book... but Gmail already does almost all the work.

Sacles · Answer

Hello,   Obviously, the best is not to receive spam.   With a few precautions, it's possible.   Gmail is Google, and when it comes to privacy, it's certainly not the best.  Extracts from Gmail's terms "...your messages, contact lists and other data related to your account are collected, processed, and stored by Google." "We prohibit selling, renting or sharing personal information of our users with third parties, except as provided in Google's Privacy Policy..."   However, this Privacy Policy states that Google can share whenever and wherever it wants for whatever reason with convoluted phrases that open every door for it, such as: "If access, use, protection, or disclosure of such information is reasonably necessary, to the extent permitted or required by law: (a) to comply with a legal, regulatory, judicial obligation or any other request from a government authority, (b) to enforce the current Terms of Use of any relevant service, including to identify any violations thereof, (c) to detect, prevent or address fraudulent activities, security breaches or any technical issues, or (d) to protect against any imminent harm to the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public."   And then, as if that weren't enough, there’s the content license (§11 of Google Terms of Service) that applies to ALL Google services and states things like: "By submitting, displaying or publishing Content, you agree to grant Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, represent, display and distribute any Content you submit, display or publish on the Services, or through the Services." And they add: "You agree that this license includes the right for Google to make such Content available to companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of shared services"! Source: http://assiste.com.free.fr/p/abc/a/google_et_vie_privee.html   Bye. --  My favorite extensions for Firefox: AdBlock Plus-NoScript-CS Lite-CustomizeGoogle-RefControl

zouriteman · Answer

pour ZOUL34, how to retrieve your messages via GMAIL when you are in your GMAIL account, through the Webmail ( https://accounts.google.com/ServiceLogin?service=mail&passive=true&rm=false&continue=https://mail.google.com/mail/&ss=1&scc=1&ltmpl=default&ltmplcache=2&emr=1&osid=1 ), you go to the "SETTINGS" page; there you have several tabs (GENERAL, ACCOUNTS, LABELS, FILTERS, .... WEB EXCERPTS) you click on the ACCOUNTS tab, and there in the central part "RETRIEVE MESSAGES FROM OTHER ACCOUNTS", you click on "ADD ANOTHER MAIL ACCOUNT", and a window opens with a button "NEXT" where you will mention the address to retrieve (toto.durand@free.fr for example), then the account name, the password, the POP3 server, the port (110), and 4 options (which you generally won’t check unless absolutely necessary). Then you click on "ADD", and immediately GMAIL tests the access to your other account, and if there is an error (for example, a Password error), it will block and signal it. If all is good, it will start, approximately every hour, to retrieve your messages and filter them through its ANTI-SPAM filter.  For SACLES: Yes, you are right in theory, but in practice, your fears are completely unfounded; GOOGLE is no more of a scoundrel than the other internet service providers, whether it's your ISP (if you have a FREEBOX, are you sure that FREE doesn't collect data on you, and won't spy a little on your email accounts opened with them... Would you bet your life that they never have done this, never will do it, and won’t start tomorrow)... If you answer YES, it's because you are only super critical against Google and totally naive and indulgent towards others! Have you ever checked the hundreds of COOKIES that all the sites you visit load onto your device?? And when you delete them, or worse, when you block them, then many sites no longer function correctly. So, cool, I believe that if you want to keep things secret, the most effective solution is to agree with your correspondents on encrypting the messages; otherwise, millions of messages transit every day, both on Gmail and Free, and we are not in the Stasi era in East Germany where there was one spy for every 5 inhabitants! Here, practice sending fake news every day to your friends, like "I got a super tip from a guy at EADS, you need to buy immediately 100,000 EADS shares at 40 euros, they will be worth double in a month"; you'll see if there's a spy on your line!

Sacles · Answer

Hello,  The terms of service of my ISP, which is also my email provider, are significantly better than those of Gmail.  For cookies, it's enough to manage them with Firefox + CookiesSafe Lite, so there are absolutely no problems on that side since for a given site, you can refuse cookies, accept them, accept them temporarily, or for the session (no scan will ever find a single unwanted cookie).  Hi. -- My favorite extensions for FireFox: AdBlock Plus-NoScript-CS Lite-CustomizeGoogle-RefControl

Waja · Answer

Hello  I'm curious, but who is this interesting ISP Saclès? It's true that I chose Gmail with spam as my top priority criterion.

Sacles · Answer

Hello,  A Belgian ISP.  In my opinion, most ISPs (Internet Service Providers, but which also provide me with addresses) have privacy policies similar to mine.  Hi. -- My favorite extensions for FireFox: AdBlock Plus-NoScript-CS Lite-CustomizeGoogle-RefControl

jbtours · Answer

Could the use of Spamfighter be linked to an issue with the automatic opening of Outlook or Outlook Express by the HP Scanvision utility? While everything was working normally, recently, when I click on the shortcut to send a scanned file via the HP utility to an email, after a good 10 seconds of Windows freezing, I receive a window saying "Outlook Express could not be opened because another session is already using this program..." everything freezes and uninstalling Spamfighter doesn't help, as if not everything was removed during the uninstallation... Thank you

nounuoursou77 · Answer

I cannot blame Spamfighter for being the source of the spam I receive, but I must note that my ratio has changed from 1 to 5 since installing this software. The practice of using your own address list for advertising is really shameless. So if you install this software, be careful not to let your contacts' list be spread.

patrickB · Answer

Hello everyone,  Instead of using Spamfighter (I confirm its spamminess) in the list of paid antispam solutions, I recommend the excellent Spambully ( https://spambully.com/ ) which I have been using for over a year and the only one (I had tested about twenty) that managed to eliminate the image + auto-modified text spam, which is a hassle to detect. And following that, I bought it. Since it was removed not for its price (very reasonable) or its qualities (still very appreciated and widely used in the US), but simply because I no longer use Outlook. I switched to The Bat ( https://www.ritlabs.com/en/products/thebat/ ) and after testing various antispam solutions, I have now switched to AntispamSniper ( http://www.brothersoft.com/antispamsniper-for-the-bat-64121.html ) which exists in free and paid versions, for which I am currently considering purchasing (approx. €15 and lifetime updates). Moreover, it's available in French!  It seems very appreciated by users of The Bat (and Outlook) in the US, with a good success rate after a certain adaptation period (for the paid version).  I'll tell you more in a while. My initial tests seem promising.  Otherwise, for free and configurations: Messpams ( https://www.messpams.net/ ) left me with an excellent impression (if only the configuration wasn't so heavy). For the others, Spampal could not detect the image + text messages. Vade Retro is one of the most effective, but the price is outrageous. But I won't revisit what I've already mentioned here: https://www.clubic.com/forum/t/tests-de-divers-antispam-et-notificateur/376322  Oh yes, another important thing to mention just like Spamfighter, beware of DYNAXA antispam which integrates a (hidden) file named tmasvr.exe that generates a file (I have a pretty good idea of which file!) from the company: Target Marketing Agency.  To know: since software is in perpetual evolution, just like spam techniques, the good software of today may not necessarily be the best tomorrow, so watch out for prejudice; As for the two poorly performing products mentioned above, they have not changed their techniques in a year. Despicable! Patrick

jc.carrier · Answer

Hello everyone,  After testing several anti-spam solutions, I largely agree with what is said in most of the comments. However, I feel that the best ones are not highlighted enough.  I should clarify that in my criteria, the percentage of spam detected automatically comes in second place. The first is the false positive rate (good messages classified as spam) because if there are any, one has to regularly check the spam folder to retrieve them, and the usefulness of the anti-spam diminishes greatly. In short, I prefer no false positives and 80% spam detection to 1% false positives and 99.9% spam detection. That being said, I don’t consider Newsletters as false positives. Losing a Newsletter is not a big deal.  I started with my own filtering rules for at least two years, obviously for free. It worked well with over 90% spam detected and very few false positives. But the solution was cumbersome because it required constant improvement of the filter with new words, without risking filtering out good messages, and the spammer's creativity in terms of spelling knows no bounds. This solution was abandoned due to the increase in spam volume and the time it took to manage.  After selecting based on reviews found online at different times, I tested and used for an extended period with Outlook 2000, successively:  - MesSpams (French). Used for a few months. Bayesian filter like SpamBayes below. Never worked properly, even after learning. Lots of false positives and false negatives. Free but not recommended.  - Spamfighter, the subject of this thread, used in the free version for a few months. I agree with what is said about it, but without falling into excessive disparagement. Of those mentioned, the only problem it poses in the free version is the message added to sent emails. So, even if I think cdp06 works for SpamFighter, he is not entirely wrong in what he says. The results are satisfactory, but not perfect as there are sometimes false positives (my nightmare), confirmed by the tests I've read where the cause is explained (here, in English: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2319568,00.asp). I don't remember the detection rate, but it was very good. Abandoned due to the occasional false positives and the message added to my emails (image issue and the paid version is too pricey).  - Vade Retro. Used for over a year. Excellent. No false positives and very good spam detection rate, over 95%. Disadvantages: expensive and cumbersome in dealing with false negatives (decision to block the address or the entire domain to be made each time).  - The anti-spam integrated into Wanadoo. Free and works very well without ever having false positives (does not provide statistics, but I estimate the detection rate at 90-95%). The issue is that it only works with Wanadoo email accounts, and I abandoned it after a few months due to the increasing volume of spam in my other inboxes.  - SpamBayes (currently being tested for a few weeks, but has already processed several hundred messages). I am still reserving my judgment. I haven't had any false positives yet and the spam detection rate is very good: around 93%. Free.  - iHateSpam (or Cloudmark which uses the same system and database, but is significantly more expensive). In testing for over a month alongside SpamBayes and on the same messages (one on the desktop, the other on the laptop). Excellent results, confirmed by the same source of tests (https://www.pcmag.com/archive/ihatespam-50-225975 : more than 96% detection rate and no false positives. Cloudmark and iHateSpam are regularly the best choice in recent serious tests and they can only improve as the number of users increases.  In conclusion, the two currently being tested are certainly the best, as confirmed by several test sources:  - SpamBayes, free but with a risk of false positives.  - iHateSpam, better but paid (not too expensive and with discounts for quantity and duration of subscription).  It’s certainly iHateSpam that I will adopt for its almost impossibility, given the method used, of producing false positives, even if some improvements would be necessary:  + Add the possibility of a sound alert upon arrival of a good email.  + Fix an issue when waking the computer from hibernation: it seems that iHateSpam sometimes reconnects to the internet too slowly (at least slower than Outlook), which produces an error message from it, but mainly causes that the first batch of messages received by Outlook is not checked and thus remains in the inbox. This requires manually acknowledging the message and requesting a check of the inbox, but since one can only check all messages and not just the unread ones, it’s a bit tedious and skews the statistics (quite minimal) since good messages are re-counted in the total number of messages checked each new scan.  I hope this lengthy message will be helpful to those looking for a good anti-spam solution.

jc.carrier · Answer

It's true that for those who only receive messages in French, filtering by language can eliminate a large part of spam, and a few words in a simple filter integrated into the messaging service can be sufficient.  But I often receive messages in other languages, most often in English, and there is also a lot of spam in French. Furthermore, many spam emails in French come from senders with Anglo-Saxon names. They have switched to foreign languages!

patato_57 · Answer

I completely agree with zouriterman, great comparison, well-documented and argued. Thanks also for introducing me to these two software (IhateSpam and Cloudmark) which are indeed highly rated in the US (I've read some comments about them).  Before continuing, I want to clarify that the previous message from patrickB is from me! ;-) I forgot that I registered under the nickname patato_57.... let's continue!  However, based on what I’ve read, it’s limited to Thunderbird and Outlook email clients (just like spamBully) and therefore not compatible with products like Pocomail, The Bat, Si.mail, dreammail which are increasingly used.  Regarding false positives, I completely agree with carrier on the importance of these in choosing anti-spam software. Where I slightly disagree is concerning the mespam software which left me with a good memory and was tested for several weeks before I chose spambully (excellent anti-spam for those who receive and want to sort their emails). Contrary to what you noted, I had few false positives, but I admit that after a certain period of adaptation and a selection (rather deselection) of the various integrated filters (there are quite a few in the base, but too many selected by default… hence the false positives), that’s also why I previously mentioned: “if the configuration wasn’t so heavy,” it’s to be reserved for an informed audience.  For Vade retro, during my tests, it had quite a few false positives during the first week of testing, but it was easier to configure (if I remember correctly), its price and its paid updates quickly made me abandon the software. Moreover, the update of the DNSBL list at Vaderetro is paid (a shame, as the database is free). As a rule, I avoid this type of product that abuses! As you said, it’s an excellent anti-spam, but it’s not worth the price asked with an abusive update fee.  To be objective, it must be acknowledged that very often, the most complete products give false positives during their first use, given the very complete bases they possess and that are mostly activated at installation.  For those interested in spambully, a simple tip before testing: put in a directory (outlook) all the spam collected over a certain period, install SB then start the learning process by indicating (it will ask you during installation) the path to this directory. The result is very conclusive without having to reconfigure the filtering.  Otherwise, I am currently still testing the anti-spamsniper software (I just purchased it, 16€ lifetime updates), a small product but finely tuned configuration, the latest version released a few days ago (V3 for now in English), integrates network filtering (snipersync that allows using the whitelist of email addresses and a common database in a network), XML file import, new URIBL filtering (spam + phishing), etc. The novelty compared to what I knew from other products is the possibility of filtering by script which allows very targeted filtering based on the messages we receive.... For now, this last one suits me perfectly as it’s user-friendly for my wife, thanks to the buttons integrated in The Bat (send to whitelist/blacklist), but also allows precise adjustment (for the initiated) simple, extensive, and effective (plugin, script, pre-installed script, filters….). A+ Patrick

cdp06 · Answer

Hello,  Thanks to jc.carrier for his studies and reports. It’s good to avoid thinking about who I work for because I work for myself, as a freelancer. I say things as I think them, and above all, I don’t stress over technical questions when I’m satisfied with what I’m using. If SpamBayes had been offered to me before Spamfighter, I would have spoken with the same praise. Perfection does not exist in this world. What takes my time is going to the Orange portal to look at the hundreds of spam, while a few still get through that Spamfighter blocks, and I see those gradually before I delete them.  So, anti-spam or not, you still have to check them. So, where's the problem? True false or false true, you have to control it afterwards. The advantage is checking when you feel like it, right?  Hi everyone.

Blisco · Answer

I tested the program for free for a month. The good thing is that there is a filter by language, which means that since 90% of spam is in English, it goes straight to the trash. This also works for other languages. At the end of the trial month, it was impossible to open Outlook without first receiving a notice from Spamfighter to buy the program. Despite that, I decided to buy it even though I saw that spammers who previously used English, and then German, were now starting to send the same crap in French. When I arrived on the Spamfighter site, everything was as usual. The price of the program was listed at €25, but once I filled out the form, a 25% tax was automatically added at the time of credit card payment. I repeated the process thinking I made a mistake, but it was the same thing. I therefore declined. In the USA, some companies say it’s for VAT and that it can be deducted, but that’s false: no European tax administration accepts that you deduct a tax paid in the USA. Word from my accountant. I uninstalled Spamfighter with difficulty, but I managed. As soon as I did, I opened Outlook to check and immediately received a notice from my antivirus telling me there was an infected message. If that’s a coincidence, it’s a strange coincidence.

patato_57 · Answer

But confirm everything that has been said so far. For your information, SpamBully has never caused me any problems after uninstallation. A good antispam! Here's a little trick to get an interesting price, for those who would be interested, of course... Download SpamBully from the original site, install it on your PC, then after testing and if interested in purchasing, uninstall it, a message box will appear where you will note that the price is too high. You will receive a message (I’m not sure if immediate or by email) that will offer it to you at a nice discount! Hoping it's still valid... at worst, you won't buy it! Patrick

jc.carrier · Answer

Hello everyone,  As promised, here are the updates on my comparison between SpamBayes and iHateSpam.  IHATESPAM:  1029 messages processed, including 951 actual spams. 944 spams detected, which is 99.26%. NO FALSE POSITIVES as I expected. So, 7 spams processed manually, which is 0.68% of the total. I find these results remarkable and even exceeding my expectations. However, the reconnection issue is not resolved. The developer has informed me of a new version coming soon, but without specifying a date, which probably explains the lack of maintenance for the current version. Stay tuned.  SPAMBAYES:  First, I would like to specify the settings used: negatives up to 45%, doubtful between 45% and 60%, and spams above 60%. Under these conditions:  716 messages processed (I started after iHateSpam) including 668 actual spams. They were classified as follows:  53 good messages, of which 9 were spams 658 spams, of which 2 were not spams 5 doubtful messages, of which 2 were good and 3 were spams  This results in an excellent spam elimination rate of 98.20%, but iHateSpam lets through between 2 and 3 times fewer (0.74% compared to 1.80%). But also 4.17% of good messages processed as spams, noting that the 2 messages in question were both Newsletters and in English. In total, 2.23% of messages need to be processed manually compared to 0.68% for iHateSpam.  These results are before optimization of the settings.  On this subject, I would first like to say that the classification into 3 categories, good, doubtful, and spam, is only useful during the initial adjustment phase. After that, it seems preferable to set both limits to the same value (the highest) in order to keep the doubtful with the good: it’s quicker to check only the inbox and remove only the spams than to additionally go into the doubtful folder and manually classify the spams and the good ones (less reclassifying to do and only one folder to read).  My optimization method during the testing period is therefore as follows: - Keep the scores (in %) of all doubtful and false positives and, for the good ones, whether or not they are Newsletters. - Derive the maximum score attained by the good messages with and without the Newsletters. - From that, determine the level at which to set the bar.  In my case, it’s impossible to eliminate false positives of the Newsletter type because one had a score of 100% (the other 80%). Outside of Newsletters, the highest score for a good message was 50%. With a safety margin, I would therefore set the bar at 55 or 60%, knowing that between 55 and 60%, it’s just one or 2 more undetected spams (one is exactly at 55%) out of more than 650. So, 60% seems safer to me (less risk of false positives) with few additional messages to process manually. At 60%, the manual processing rate drops from 2.23% to 1.96%, and at 55%, it would go down to 1.68% with more risk of false positives. Always compared to the 0.68% of iHateSpam.  Finally, it should also be noted that the comparison may not be very fair to SpamBayes as its results can only improve over time: as soon as an error is reported, it takes it into account, and the same message has much less chance of causing an error next time. After 2 or 3 receptions of the same type of message, it would certainly be well classified. But the risk of false positives will always exist.  I said "maybe" because this remark still needs to be tempered by the fact that before starting, I "trained" SpamBayes on several thousand spams and several hundred good messages that I had retained, but I would still be interested in the documented opinion of someone who has been using it for a long time (at least a year), as for other anti-spams as well, notably Spam Bully and SpamIhilator.  Conversely, given the method employed, iHateSpam offers little room for improvement over time, but is it necessary considering the results achieved immediately?  I therefore believe that both of these anti-spams are very valid, with the cost of iHateSpam (€15 to €20 per year for a single workstation, much less for multiple workstations, and even less if you subscribe for 2 or 3 years) justifying the elimination of the risk of false positives compared to the free SpamBayes. And here, unlike Vade Retro, the price is justified by a true service: management of a spam database with real-time access for users for each message received. The paid updates of Vade Retro only cover the provision of a public and free database!  Good luck to everyone in the fight against spam.

jaio · Answer

I removed Spamfighter because after the one-month trial period, in order to access Outlook, I first had to eliminate the Spamfighter window that appeared before and prevented me from accessing Outlook. In principle, if I am satisfied with a program, I buy it, but this aggressiveness bothered me, especially since the advertisements everywhere encourage you to download Spamfighter because it's free, and you only learn afterwards that it's free for only one month. I downloaded it because for always, 90% of spam is written in English and there is a possibility to set a filter for that language, and it worked quite well, except that from the moment I uninstalled it, I started receiving spam disguised as French. How did the spammers know that I had a filter before and that now I don't have it anymore? I let you guess. Furthermore, the first two weeks after the uninstallation I received viruses every day, and now I only receive them, if I can say, once a week! Fortunately, I have antivirus! I read above someone praising it and saying that it was normal to do a service to this company if it helped you. I could say that other competitors who are truly free don't ask you for anything, and the minimum that Spamfighter should do is to be less aggressive and more friendly because, admit it, if a guy shoves you in the street and asks you for 1 euro not to shove you anymore, you should expect the worst!

jaio · Answer

I also read that good antispam tools still end up letting through up to 3% of spam. In this case, if you normally receive 97% spam, you should do the following: Go to the Outlook menu. Click Tools > Rules > Mail, and in the window that appears, set up a new rule for incoming messages as follows: New > Then select: For all messages, and below, select the small box: Delete them. Result: All incoming messages are thrown in the trash, and all you have left to do is check the trash every day and retrieve the 2 messages that interest you, which, over time, is equivalent, if not less, to what you would lose with an antispam to see if it hasn't eliminated a real message! If you have configured Outlook to empty the trash when you close the program, it will take care of the rest. Good luck!

Blisco · Answer

It seems that the inventor of Spamfighter sold his program to a large American company, and it was from that moment that Spamfighter became aggressive and dishonest. I say dishonest because a U.S. firm that adds VAT when you're paying by credit card is very dishonest. In itself, it makes sense. A software developer often does it for pleasure or out of personal need or motivation. Some developers want to recoup their investments, others do not. Hence the distinction between paid and free programs. However, commercial companies that have none of the scruples and motivations of developers want a program to make money. They may be firms specializing in spam and think that selling an anti-spam product would build trust and start bombarding the net with free offers like Spamfighter that... you see for yourselves.  In short:  1- The program is initially offered for free, then you find out that it is only for a month.  2- After a month, you realize that despite that it works quite well and you want to buy it, and you notice that the price is €25 to €29 per YEAR whereas there are anti-spam programs for €15 for a lifetime and very effective free ones. However, when you want to buy it, you don’t know all this and still want to proceed with the purchase. That’s where the issue arises: At the last moment, a tax is added that is not based on anything since each European country has a different VAT rate and VAT is not deducted between countries but only in the country where it is added to the invoice. In this regard, Skype, which bills you from Luxembourg, also does this abusively.  3- The first two points can be immediately verified by anyone of you who wants to try Spamfighter. Just go online and proceed to the payment process then stop when you see the tax added to the amount to be paid. If despite this you still want to try the program, there will certainly be some honest filtering work, but if suddenly, because you don’t buy the program, you start having to remove a spam window from Spamfighter itself every time you open Outlook, you’ll have to wonder how an anti-spam program starts spamming you on your own computer, not to mention that other users above claim that Spamfighter takes advantage of this to send its ads, thus its spams, through your mail to all your correspondents! It’s absurd for an anti-spam to spam!  4- If then, after uninstallation, the English spams which were previously eliminated by the language filter of Spamfighter, now come to you in French (even if the French used is full of translation errors), you should ask yourself who has commissioned the spammers or who these spammers are because it is too obvious. If Spamfighter cheated you twice as in points 1 and 2 above and hassled you three times as in points 1, 2, and 3,  for sure it won't let you go. A word to the wise is enough!

Blisco · Answer

It has been a month since I set up a mailbox with Gmail as suggested here on these pages to avoid spam, and it's working really, really well. I arranged to redirect all the mail that was coming to my other mailboxes, which I used to open with Outlook while receiving loads of spam. Now, as if by magic, all the spam, absolutely all of it, is automatically set aside without any misinterpretation. What's more, for websites whose newsletters I no longer want to receive, I ask Gmail to consider it as spam, and it's automatically eliminated, whereas with Outlook I had already filtered it 5 times and it kept showing up. Advice: Don't load any anti-spam software, even free ones. Gmail is enough to get rid of it. It's logical; Google knows everything about everyone on the web, so spammers are spotted without error.

danl · Answer

Oh beware, spam fighter is installing and blocking the basics, then if you try to uninstall - BEWARE, I was trapped.

ludico · Answer

For now, I have nothing to say about Spamfighter. I'm satisfied with it. What is the best? I would be happy to know. Thank you.

B. D. S. · Answer

This advertising approach, written in such a way that the recipient thinks it was done at our
initiative, is indefensible and resembles "identity theft."
Furthermore, to allow oneself to use the first name of the recipient, which in many cases was not provided by us, is outrageous!
This leads to the opposite result intended by SPAM FIGHTER as I had to send a correction to each person, along with my apologies for this unwelcome familiarity, firmly advising against this company.
Uninstall without delay. April 2, 2009

ange · Answer

Honestly, I have the free version and I'm still just as overwhelmed.

smed_79 · Answer

Hello :)  Attention !! Don't be naive!  Spamfighter is an anti-spam with a very questionable business approach: once installed on your computer, it sends emails to people in your address book without your knowledge. These commercial emails are also written in such a way that the recipients think you recommend the product! Furthermore, at the end of the one-month period, the "free" version takes over and all your emails end with a signature:  I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. So far, SPAMfighter has blocked xxx spam emails. Optimize your slow PC  it promotes adware software https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publiciel  It's abusive that there is no uninstallation option offered at the end of the one-month period :-/  In short, Spamfighter is an anti-spam software that uses spam to promote itself! Detestable! More than ever, long live open source :)! Urgently to be uninstalled!  Solution: Why not try Thunderbird. It is free without ads and has a very good anti-spam filter.  installable version: https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/  or the portable version: https://portableapps.com/apps/internet/thunderbird_portable/localization#3  @++  -- I am here to learn more than to solve a problem!

SPAMFIGHTER - WHAT DO YOU THINK?

53 réponses

How to get the character µ on the android keyboard.

Texture issues in enshrouded

Access issue to my "contact me" profile

Windows spotlight is not working.

Black screen digital camera

Connecting rj45 cable with fiber

Sony bravia tv red led blinks 4 times

Free: associating with the freebox server in progress

Inuyasha in french

Ccleaner starts at boot.