Here are the filters for Mailwasher
w5hq.com/MailWasher/MailWasherFilters.txt
Unwanted Penis Web Ads Prompt Calif. Spam Rage
November 21, 2003
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Call it spam rage: A Silicon Valley computer programmer has been arrested for threatening to torture and kill employees of the company he blames for bombarding his computer with Web ads promising to enlarge his penis.
In one of the first prosecutions of its kind in the state that made “road rage” famous, Charles Booher, 44, was arrested on Thursday and released on $75,000 bond for making repeated threats to staff of a Canadian company between May and July. Booher threatened to send a “package full of Anthrax spores” to the company, to “disable” an employee with a bullet and torture him with a power drill and ice pick; and to hunt down and castrate the employees unless they removed him from their e-mail list, prosecutors said. He used return e-mail addresses including Satan@hell.org.
. . . The object of the Californian’s anger was Douglas Mackay, president of DM Contact Management, which works for Albion Medical, a firm advertising the “Only Reliable, Medically Approved Penis Enhancement.” . . .He said his firm does not send spam but blamed a rival firm which he said routes much of their unsolicited bulk e-mail through Russia and eastern Europe. Mackay said such firms gave a bad name to the penis enhancement business.
Too much! He surely must have been speaking tongue in cheek, but something tells me he isn’t. What a twat! 
if your using hotmail check the options in your account settings… and you can turn on the ms spam block… it works pretty well i find… I get maybe 2 spams a day, I can deal with that… and lately they are all about getting out of debt… on another note… googles tool bar is great for getting rid of pop ups… lemme get the link to this spam filter for outlook my friend swears by… sorry doesnt work with OE
The battle appears to be lost:
United States set to Legalize Spamming on 1 January 2004
[quote=“wolf_reinhold”]The battle appears to be lost:
United States set to Legalize Spamming on 1 January 2004
Maybe not. The article says spam will have to originate from the spammers’ own, identifiable ISPs, and they’ll have to adhere to the opt-out clause, as well. That alone will cut spam by a huge amount – of the spam I get, virtually all of it comes from stolen open proxies.
It may help a bit, but the fact that big spammers like Ralsky and many marketing groups are happier about this than the anti-spam groups should tell you something. The US Legislature has been promising anti-spam legislation for years. It never happens, because the marketing groups always manage to get it killed. The reason why all of a sudden there’s a US ‘anti-spam’ law passed now? Because California passed a strict opt-in only law with stiff $1000 per incident penalties that would go into effect January 1, 2004. This federal law would supersede this law, and that is mainly what the marketers want. It will change the ground rules, and may perhaps make it easier to block spam that no longer uses illegal means of distribution, but it still makes a lot of spam completely legal. And it remains to be seen whether the opt-out provisions actually work or not. Spammers even now operate a kind of opt-out shell game where when you opt-out from one spammer, he sells your address to 10 others who start spamming you. While the new law makes this practice illegal, it is tough to prove that such practices take place.
Australia on the other hand is implementing new legislation that actually has teeth: noie.gov.au/projects/confide … g/Spam.htm
If the US passed something like the California law or the Australia law, then they’d be making real progress.
What will soon become the new US federal spam law (CAN-SPAM) is a terrible law because it legitimizes spam and will actually lead to an increase in junk e-mails.
The biggest problem with it is that it is an opt-out law, meaning every spammer may send you unlimited unsolicited commercial e-mails (UCE) until you respond to the particular sender and tell them to stop. The EU and Australia, on the other hand, have adopted opt-in approaches, meaning that it is illegal to send any UCE to anyone unless you have their prior consent (or in the EU unless the sender received the recipient’s address through ongoing or prior business relations, but even then the sender must give each recipient the ability to opt out of receiving more UCE). The EU approach is vastly superior to the US’s CAN-SPAM Act.
CAN-SPAM focuses on the content of UCE, prohibiting false headers and subject lines and the like. But most problems caused by spam result not from its content but its volume. That’s what causes anoyance, loss of productivity, strain on servers, consumption of bandwidth, purchasess of equipment, hiring of personnel, etc. So volume is what the law should focus on. But CAN-SPAM focuses on content instead.
Most experts say that those who send fraudulent spam will ignore any laws so the best means of combatting them are technical . . . and educating users not to respond to spam. But CAN-SPAM legitimizes spam. Whereas it may have been uncertain before whether some UCE was legal or not, this Act lays out the rules: so long as one doesn’t use false header info or subject line one can spam away. So “legitimate marketers” and other “legitimate businesses” will dramatically increase their output within the guidelines.
There are other major problems with CAN-SPAM too, including that it supersedes many stronger state laws (as pointed out by another poster) and it may not be enforced by recipients of spam (only by ISPs and various government agencies). Most state laws, on the other hand, permit enforcement by recipients.
While the EU approach (contained in an EU Directive and being implemented by the Member States) is better it also has a major flaw. It requires opt-in concerning spam sent to individuals. But they stupidly made spam sent to businesses an exception. So in Europe one may send unlimited UCE to businesses. Member States may enact tougher laws than the Directive but most aren’t doing so. The UK didn’t – their regulations also permit sending of UCE to businesses.
Australia’s law is not a good law either. While it is similar to the EU model it contains even more exceptions, permitting spam sent from government, religious, charitable, educational and many other types of groups. And there are a number of other serious flaws with it.
Some people brag about the national do-not-spam registry in CAN-SPAM, but the law doesn’t actually require such a registry. It only directs the FTC to look into that, and the FTC chairman and many others have already said that they are highly doubtful such a registry would work.
EVery jurisdiction, whether it is a state in the US or a country, likes to brag about how they’re getting so tough on spam, but the fact is no country in the world has a really tough spam law. And the US is really blowing it now with CAN-SPAM. As the world’s number 1 source of spam, the US has an obligation to do better, but the Direct Marketing Association is a powerful lobby and Congress is so stupid that they will adopt this lame law with a tough name in order to impress their constituents. But down the road they will need to wake up and pass an opt-in law.
Well, the US went and passed a lousy opt-out spam law, legalizing the sending of spam. The Taipei Times reported today that Taiwan has done the same thing. The TT is wrong, the article is poorly written and the title is completely misleading.
Contrary to what the TT has reported, Taiwan has NOT passed a spam law. The MOJ is talking about submitting a bill to the LY, where it will languish before being amended or rejected. Bills are not promptly approved after being submitted as suggested by the TT. Here’s the lousy article about the lousy proposed law (note the final word from Cheng Ding-Nan, below, speaking in favor of spam):
Internet spammers, junk mailers to face stiff new fines
By Jimmy Chuang
STAFF REPORTER
Thursday, Dec 18, 2003,Page 2
Minister of Justice Chen Ding-nan (
I recently swtiched email accounts from yahoo to hotmail, and my SPAM dropped by 90%. Does hotmail have better safeguards than yahoo? Whatever, I love it. Only get 3-4 SPAM a day now, compared to 150 with yahoo.
Taipei Times had another article today:
“Government urged to act against e-mail spammers”
taipeitimes.com/News/biz/arc … 4146/print
There’s been some goot news from the US recently. One of the top-10 spammers ‘Gavin Stubberfield’ was arrested and faces up to 5 years per count for forgery in Virginia, and another top-10 spammer Scott Richter is being sued for fraud by New York’s Attorney General.
And another today:
“Group urges authorities to get tough on spam”
taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/ … 4514/print
It’s very similiar to Friday’s article, so the ‘yesterday’ probably refers to Thursday.
And the China Post weighs in with some mixed messages:
“Internet services call for anti-spam regulations”
FURRY NAKED BARNYARD FRIENDS!!!
Now why can’t HiNet do that?[/quote]
Hinet doesn’t even know how to set their DNS properly - what makes you think they know how to filter email?
try it: hinet.net
To stop spam:
have at least 2 accounts - one for ALL website signups, for giving out on any non-vital forms, etc…
- U just need to pop in to grab a password for the new web memberships - other than that don’t even bother reading - have all mail moved to trash automagically and just delete before it fills your quota.
The second email account is only for people you trust not to spam you or give you virii - family, friends, etc… If your friends/family are complete muppets then don’t give them your email address
- better to have no mail than spam in my opinion.
You probably should also have a third account to receive mail from Taiwanese (mostly forwarded jokes that go cc and get u into spam lists with lightning quick speed) better yet don’t even give a Taiwanese your email address.
and last but not least
DON"T USE OUTLOOK UNLESS YOU LOVE SPAM AND VIRII!
What’s a virius? 
Is it a very violent voracious virus?
Kenneth
Random Acts of Spamness
Jan. 13, 2004
“Daphnia blue-crested fish cattle, darkorange fountain moss, beaverwood educating, eyeblinking advancing, dulltuned amazons…”
This is not a failed attempt at free-form prose. It’s a snippet of a spam message intended to promote a sexual stimulant, a deliberate crack at sneaking past and spoiling some of the most popular antispam filters. Antispam experts agreed that this isn’t a brand-new technique, but said the addition of potentially filter-foiling gibberish is rapidly becoming a common component of spam. “I’d say at least half of the spam that I bother to look at now contains a paragraph or two of random blather. Until recently we’d see it in only one or two spams a week at the most,” said Anthony Baxter, one of the developers of SpamBayes, a free, open-source Bayesian antispam filter. . .
wired.com/news/infostructure … 86,00.html
Spammers turn to classic prose
Poetry is probably not top of the list of things you expect to see in the spam and junk mail messages landing in your inbox everyday. But lots of people are starting to find literary value hidden among the porn, penis patches, generic Viagra deals and mortgage offers.
Some have composed poems using the subject lines of the spam they receive; others are creating verse using the strings of strange words that are often found inside spam messages. A lucky few have even found excerpts of novels buried in spam. Blogger and journalist Clive Thompson found an excerpt from Chapter 20 of The Master Key by Wizard of Oz author L Frank Baum in a message that had as its subject line “the big unit” (no prizes for guessing what the rest of it was hawking). . .
Perhaps this will be one of the redeeming virtues of spam, that buried in the filth and lucre are some gems of ingenuity and creativity. But don’t count on it.
stargeek.com/item/33798.html
Since late december i’ve had a radical decrease in the amount of mail hitting my spambox. anyone notice this?
My big dick, debt consolidation and porno spam has all but stopped, but now I’m being bombarded with online xanax prescriptions for some reason.