AT&T WorldNet
and
Brightmail
fight spam for me

(count)
visits since November 29, 2003

My tally of spam elimination for me by ATT WorldNet

This web page is http://obri.net/att/brightmail.html

copyright 2003-2004 by Jay O'Brien

jayobrien@att.net

updated September 27, 2004

Is this web page of use to you?

Please let me know, as I am considering stopping the collection of this data.

Thank you!

Jay O'Brien   6/14/04

jump to other ATT WorldNet related issues


This web page is a summary of my observations of the efficacy of the spam filter (Brightmail) made available to me as an AT&T Worldnet customer.

These observations are on mail sent to my email address that was established seven years ago.  I have made no effort to obfuscate this address. It is present in many usenet newsgroups and on many web pages, thus it is "ripe" for spammers to "harvest" as a valid address.

I turned on the Brightmail spam filter on September 28, 2002. I opted to have the filter put messages identified as spam into a "screened mail" folder rather than delete the messages outright. I review the screened messages each day. On the rare occasion that a message is wrongly identified as spam (a "false positive") I move it into my inbox and then download it into my mail client (Netscape 7.1).  After reviewing the screened mail folder each day, I empty the folder.


When I get a spam message into my mail client that was missed by Brightmail, I forward it, complete with all headers, to missed-spam@att.net. The exception is those messages containing a virus; I don't send them to missed-spam.

 I didn't keep track of the number of messages caught by brightmail in 2002. However, I forwarded 916 messages to missed-spam in 2002.  (In 2004 I opted to stop sending messages to missed-spam - see correspondence below.)

Starting in 2003, I recorded each day's total of spam messages caught by Brightmail and placed into my screened mail folder. I recorded spam missed by Brightmail; these are the messages I forwarded to missed-spam. I have also recorded false positives, and, recently, the number of the "swen" virus messages that were placed into my screened mail folder by Brightmail.  I count as "swen" those messages that are 143K in size in the screened mail folder; this conclusion is based on my experience with this virus and may not be entirely accurate.

I do not use the Brightmail virus filter; I suspect that the results would be somewhat different if I was using both the spam filter and the virus filter. At this time I prefer to handle virus messages with my mail client and McAfee VirusScan.

The number of spam messages has increased from 43 per day in January 2003 to 186 per day during the last full week of November 2003. Even though Brightmail has improved from catching 77% in January to 82% at the end of November, the sheer number of spam messages gives a false appearance that Brightmail isn't working as well as it did earlier in the year.

I feel Brightmail is doing a superb job; it isn't perfect, but the number of false positives are nearly zero.

I hope this information is useful to others.

This web page is copyrighted.  Link to this page if you like, but if you wish to publish or use this information in any other way, please contact me for permission to do so.

Jay O'Brien
Rio Linda, CA
November 29, 2003

(See later information and correspondence below the tables)



TABLE 1: Monthly summary starting January 1, 2003

Month
Brightmail
Screened
Mail
% spam
caught by
Brightmail
Brightmail
missed
spam

Total
spam
spam
per
day
false
positives

screened
swen
virus
1/03
1028
76.8%
311
1339
43
0

2/03
1017
69.4%
449
1466
52
0

3/03
1616
77.1%
481
2097
68
1

4/03
2022
78.1%
568
2590
86
0

5/03
2783
82.0%
610
3393
110
0

6/03
2997
85.2%
519
3516
117
7

7/03
3282
85.3%
565
3847
124
0

8/03
2890
86.7%
443
3333
108
1

9/03
3414
90.1%
376
3790
126
2
33
10/03
3748
88.6%
482
4230
137
3
350
11/03
4161
83.2%
840
5001
167
0
129
12/03
3706
78.3%
1028
4734
153
0
36
 Total 2003
32664
83.0%
6672
39336
108
14
548
1/04
3366
82.4%
718
4084
132
1
74
2/04 3831
92.1%
328
4159
143
1
124
3/04
3795
90.7%
387
4182
135
0
28
4/04
4136
88.4%
542
4678
156
2
15
5/04
3818
89.2%
464
4282
138
0
1
6/04
3676
89/.9%
411
4087
136
0

7/04
3397
87.8%
474
3871
125
0

8/04
3575
83.7%
697
4272
138
0



TABLE 2: Weekly summary starting June 1, 2003

Week
starting

Brightmail
Screened
Mail
% spam
caught by
Brightmail
Brightmail
missed
spam
Total
spam
spam
per
day
false
positives
total
email
received
6/1/03
656
86.9%
99
755
108


6/8/03
706
88.4%
93
799
114


6/15/03
695
82.1%
152
847
121
7

6/22/03
744
83.5%
147
891
127


6/29/03
631
85.2%
110
741
106


7/6/03
559
82.0%
123
682
97


7/13/03
816
84.6%
149
965
138


7/20/03
837
86.4%
132
969
138


7/27/03
846
86.2%
135
981
140


8/3/03
763
85.1%
134
897
128


8/10/03
510
82.5%
108
618
88
1

8/17/03
601
89.0%
74
675
96


8/24/03
707
91.2%
68
775
111


8/31/03
636
91.0%
63
699
100


9/7/03
806
89.4%
96
902
129


9/14/03
671
91.2%
65
736
105
1

9/21/03
975
90.3%
105
1080
154


9/28/03
969
90.8%
98
1067
152
1

10/5/03
950
91.4%
89
1039
148
2

10/12/03
713
89.7%
82
795
114


10/19/03
872
88.9%
109
981
140
1

10/26/03
823
83.7%
160
983
140


11/2/03
888
85.0%
157
1045
149


11/9/03
969
83.2%
195
1164
166


11/16/03
963
82.9%
199
1162
166


11/23/03
1061
81.3%
244
1305
186


11/30/03
898
78.2%
250
1148
164


12/7/03
817
75.4%
266
1083
155


12/14/03
833
78.5%
228
1061
152


12/21/03
770
78.6%
210
980
140

2121
12/28/03
785
79.0%
209
994
142

2606
1/4/04
655
77.1%
194
849
121

2451
1/11/04
744
75.7%
239
983
140
1
2452
1/18/04
846
88.7%
108
954
136

2494
1/25/04
849
91.3%
81
930
133

2590
2/1/04
938
87.3%
137
1075
154

2458
2/8/04
927
92.2%
78
1005
144

2270
2/15/04
937
94.4%
55
992
142
1
2304
2/22/04
917
94.5%
53
970
139

2411
2/29/04
994
94.7%
56
1050
150

2583
3/7/04
646
91.5%
60
706
101

2032
3/14/04
884
88.8%
111
995
142

2320
3/21/04
853
89.9%
96
949
136

2052
3/28/04
929
86.7%
143
1072
153

2655
4/4/04
979
86.8%
149
1128
161

2459
4/11/04
949
88.8%
120
1069
153

2301
4/18/04
1037
89.3%
124
1161
166

2659
4/25/04
869
91.1%
85
954
136
2
2296
5/2/04
818
87.8%
114
932
133

2214
5/9/04
842
88.7%
107
949
136

2479
5/16/04
862
90.0%
96
958
137

2463
5/23/04
973
90.1%
107
1080
154

2566
5/30/04
937
87.9%
129
1066
152

2373
6/6/04
888
90.9%
89
977
140

2518
6/13/04
840
89.8%
95
935
134

2408
6/20/04
808
91.5%
75
883
126

2409
6/27/04
785
91.4%
74
859
123

2592
7/4/04
710
86.3%
113
823
118

2455
7/11/04
732
88.5%
95
827
118

2730
7/18/04
846
89.5%
99
945
135

3262
7/25/04
753
84.7%
136
889
127

3560
8/1/04
823
86.1%
133
956
137

3274
8/8/04
837
82.5%
177
1014
145

3102
8/15/04
782
86.1%
126
908
130

3043
8/22/04
808
80.9%
191
999
143

3402
8/29/04
759
81.5%
172
931
133

2722
9/5/04
714
78.7%
193
907
130

1938
9/12/04
750
82.1%
164
914
131

1983
9/19/04
794
89.4%
94
888
127

2178
69 weeks
56484
86.5% 8817
65301
135
17
note 1
   note 1: Totals collected starting 12/21/03 are spam plus valid email.

Follow-up information and correspondence:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Brightmail spam filter summary
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:18:16 GMT
From: Jay O'Brien <jayobrien@att.net>
Newsgroups: worldnet.users.spam-killer

It's time for the other side of the story. I'm quick to criticize when ATT screws up, so I really should say so when ATT is being vilified without cause. Here goes...

Many posts complain about the Brightmail spam filter. I've found it to be very effective, and other than the fact that ATT won't share any details with or provide feedback to its customers, I'm quite pleased with the filter. The recent increase in spam has created a false impression that Brightmail isn't doing its' job. That is just not true.

My spam this year has gone from 43 per day in January to 186 per day last week. Brightmail caught 76.8% of the spam in January; last week it caught 81.3% of the spam. Brightmail is doing a slightly better job, even though the count of spam messages missed by Brightmail went from 10 per day in January to 35 per day last week.

I've posted my results at http://obri.net/att/brightmail.html that back up these numbers.

Jay O'Brien

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Brightmail spam filter summary
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 13:02:25 GMT
From: Sjur
Newsgroups: worldnet.users.spam-killer

Hi Jay,
Thanks for the link and post.  I've been keeping similar logs since September for two addresses, one with and one without Brightmail, and percentages agree ca. 1%.

I spent yesterday browsing the brightmail site and, for those with an interest beyond grousing, several white papers may be of interest:

http://www.brightmail.com/enterprise-as-features.html
http://www.brightmail.com/pdfs/Brightmail_Anti-Spam_5.1_datasheet.pdf
http://www.brightmail.com/pdfs/Brightmail_Server_5.1.pdf

(Brightmail offers an Enterprise version for the 'little' guys and a Service Provider version for the likes of Worldnet.  Pages for the former are a lot more informative.)

Brightmail's claim of a 99.9999% accuracy rate with respect to false positives seems at variance with your statistics.  I'd guess this is due to the 'Custom Rules Editor' that lets an ISP modify BM's default filtering - black lists, etc. <g>

I've always considered BM as only the first level for filtering, to be supplemented by POP3 server-side filters and client-side filters for messages actually downloaded (<1%).  What struck me as particularly interesting were several options available to the ISP, e.g.
Modify Header or Subject Line
Add a configurable X-header ... For example, X-spam or X-newsletter.
Enable end-user to create simple client-side filters to handle messages Brightmail has processed.

An X-header with a BM score would be a winner in my book, but how to convince the ITs it's their idea?

Sjur
--
Note: All replies are subject to server-side deletion unless in plain text with a single recipient.

-------- Original Message --------

Subject: Re: Brightmail spam filter summary
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 23:18:25 GMT
From: Jay O'Brien <jayobrien@att.net>
Newsgroups: worldnet.users.spam-killer

Sjur,
Actually, my results make Brightmail look worse than it "really" is. The 7 false positives on June 21 were all in a 23 minute period when there was a trouble condition where most mail processed by ATT was identified as spam. And, 4 individual false positives were all from a "questionable" mailing list to which I was subscribed that probably was reported by others as being spam. That leaves only two "real" false positives this year, and one of those was from ebay. If you only count the two "real" false positives out of 34602 spams so far this year, that calculates to a 99.9942% accuracy rate, not at all out of line with what is claimed by Brightmail.

Thanks for weighing in on this issue.

Jay


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Brightmail spam filter summary for 2003
Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 23:00:15 GMT
From: Jay O'Brien <jayobrien@att.net>
Newsgroups: worldnet.suggestions

Many posts complain about the Brightmail spam filter. I've found it to be very effective, and other than the fact that ATT won't share any details with or provide feedback to its customers, I'm quite pleased with the filter. The increase in spam has created a false impression that Brightmail isn't doing its' job. That is just not true.

My spam this year has gone from 43 per day in January to 186 per day one week in November, and now it is running 140 per day. Brightmail caught 76.8% of the spam in January; it was over 90% effective in September and in December it caught 78.3% of the spam.

In 2003, 39336 spam messages were sent to this address. Of those, Brightmail placed 32664 of them, or 83%, in the screened mail folder. In 2003 I had to deal with the 6672 spam messages Brightmail missed, and I sent them, one at a time, to the missed-spam address at att.

It takes me 8 seconds per message to send spam properly to missed-spam. That means that I spent 14.8 hours working for Brightmail last year. Now that ATT has made it easy for those customers who use webmail to report the missed spams, I have decided that I'm not going to devote a couple days of my time to this effort in 2004; I'll leave the missed-spam reporting to others. However, I will continue to report missed-spams from another worldnet address that I access exclusively via webmail. I will also continue tallying my experience with Brightmail.

I've posted my results at http://obri.net/att/brightmail.html that back up these numbers. Please see if these numbers track with your experience.

Jay O'Brien

  /end/

click here to jump to the top of this web page