Better?
Is the latest anti-spam meant to be any better? Still find myself having to mark as many emails as "spammers" and "spam" as I did in the previous version. What's meant to have changed?
Comments
-
It is fully cloud technology based. Before it wasn't.
The aim is to increase accurate detection rates eventually with extra available info on what is spam/not spam as compare to traditional databases stored on your PC alone. It will of course get more accurate once even more data is available in the cloud. As with all new data sources it takes time to bed in and grow.
When you identify a message as spam and agree to it being sent for analysis, the info should become available via this method for other users much sooner. The more people do this, the better it will become. Similarly anything identified as spam/not spam by other users should be filtered on your PC more accurately.0 -
It is fully cloud technology based. Before it wasn't.
The aim is to increase accurate detection rates eventually with extra available info on what is spam/not spam as compare to traditional databases stored on your PC alone. It will of course get more accurate once even more data is available in the cloud. As with all new data sources it takes time to bed in and grow.
When you identify a message as spam and agree to it being sent for analysis, the info should become available via this method for other users much sooner. The more people do this, the better it will become. Similarly anything identified as spam/not spam by other users should be filtered on your PC more accurately.
Well, happy to give it time as I can appreciate the thinking behind the Cloud system. I'm certainly feeding the Cloud with a regular daily diet of examples of spam that slip through. The rest of BIS seems pretty good so it's a pity the spam area appears a weak point.0 -
@ Lancelot21
Hello,
Please post back your ticket ID so I can do a follow-up on the history of your case.
Thank you.0 -
@ Lancelot21
Hello,
Please post back your ticket ID so I can do a follow-up on the history of your case.
Thank you.
201307191015379
New BIS is no better at identifying Spam. It picks some up yet lets other really obvious stuff through, including repeat phishing attempts (e.g. fake messages from "Google admin".) My understanding is that as the new BIS "learns" from all the spam other users submit to the Cloud it will get better.0 -
Hello,
Thank you for these details.
As far as I can see, before recommending the upgrade to the new Bitdefender, my colleagues repeatedly asked for samples of the spam emails that were undetected by your product, as well as to tell us if the Antispam test was passed. Without this information, we are unable to help you.
Instructions on how to perform the Antispam test are available here:
http://forum.bitdefender.com/index.php?sho...st&p=195022
It's mandatory to save the spam emails as .eml or .msg, or the labs won't be able to analyze them. You can upload the samples to any file hosting website and then reply with the download links.
Thank you for your cooperation, looking forward to hearing from you.0 -
After using Norton for a few years, I must admit that Bitdefender's antispam is pretty much useless.
0
