|
A. While both share the common goal of eradicating spam, the two solutions bear very different philosophies. Cocktail Approach vs. Centralized Adaptive Learning SpamAssassin is designed with the arsenal (a.k.a cocktail or toolbox) philosophy and aggregates the results from a myriad of different spam detection tests with the hope that at least some of the components should detect an inbound spam. These different tests range from heuristic "rules" which identify specific characteristics in spam to blacklists, and finally to limited Bayesian learning. DSPAM's philosophy is based on the belief that machine-learning (basic artificial intelligence) can, in and of itself, solve the spam problem without the need for human-maintained rules, inaccurate blacklists, or any hodge-podge of solutions for that matter. DSPAM's one central spam detection function incorporates advanced, concept-based statistical analysis. This has resulted in levels of accuracy up to ten times that of a human, with ...
|
How is DSPAM different from SpamAssassin?
Related Questions
- A. First, very cool on the huge userbase thing. Be sure to shoot me an email and let me know about it. Large ...
- A. In real-world scenarios, false positives have ranged anywhere from 0% (none) to 0.10% depending on both ...
- If you check mail from multiple computers/devices, there are two ways to manage your spam. The quarantine is ...
- A. DSPAM can integrate with any MTA (Mail Transfer Agent) capable of calling dspam either as a local delivery ...
- A. DSPAM doesn't have a whitelist manager, rather whitelisting is an automatic function of DSPAM's Bayesian ...