Outlook 2007 junk mail filters sufficient at stopping spam??

[Spin]

Gurus,

My company has a Spam Firewall. However, some spam does get through,
particularly to HR mailboxes with easy to guess names such as
res...@company.com and h...@company.com. hat should my approach be to
filtering out spam sent to these mailboxes? Should I focus more in stopping
it at the Spam Firewall or more at teaching the user how to use the built-in
Outlook 2007 junk mail filters?

--
Spin

[Diane Poremsky [MVP]]

if you can block it at the server level, do so.

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/
Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com

Outlook Tips by email:
dailytips-sub...@lists.outlooktips.net

EMO - a weekly newsletter about Outlook and Exchange:
EMO-NEWSLETTER-S...@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM

You can access this newsgroup by visiting
http://www.microsoft.com/office/community/en-us/default.mspx or point your
newsreader to msnews.microsoft.com.

"Spin" <Sp...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:6o4bfeF...@mid.individual.net...

[Spin]

"Diane Poremsky [MVP]" <outlo...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:%23WROVNh...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> if you can block it at the server level, do so.

Is that because the server is basically better equipped to handle this task
(more CPU, RAM power, etc...) or is it b/c it's generally not advisable to
leave it up to the user to do this task - or both?

[Brian Tillman [MVP - Outlook]]

"Spin" <Sp...@invalid.com> wrote in message

news:6o58osF...@mid.individual.net...

> Is that because the server is basically better equipped to handle this
> task (more CPU, RAM power, etc...) or is it b/c it's generally not
> advisable to leave it up to the user to do this task - or both?

I agree with Diane and I'd say the reason is because it's more efficient
(you handle it all in one place rather than at each Outlook instance) and
Outlook's Junk E-mail filter is not user-configurable. All you can do is
block specific senders, domains, TLDs, or message encodings. Anything else
requires rules and that's a nearly hopeless endeavor, since spammers change
their tactics so frequently. If the server-based spam filter is bayesian
and can be trained, you're better off.
--
Brian Tillman [MVP-Outlook]

[Diane Poremsky [MVP]]

the user is certainly up to the the task, but they are paid to work, not
deal with spam. :) If you can block it at the several level, all employees
benefit and can be more productive - 1 admin working on a filter at the
server might need 10 min to have a positive affect the productivity of 200.

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/
Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com

Outlook Tips by email:
dailytips-sub...@lists.outlooktips.net

EMO - a weekly newsletter about Outlook and Exchange:
EMO-NEWSLETTER-S...@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM

You can access this newsgroup by visiting
http://www.microsoft.com/office/community/en-us/default.mspx or point your
newsreader to msnews.microsoft.com.

"Spin" <Sp...@invalid.com> wrote in message

news:6o58osF...@mid.individual.net...

[david]

You can now get very good dynamic (community update) spam
filters for Outlook, so you could also consider doing that for
single users.

As in, very good. My mother is getting better spam filtering
than I have at work. Actually, excellent, regardless of the
comparison.

At work the main spam firewall leaks, as yours does. Outlook
stops almost nothing, and what it does block (quick check....)
is a message from my wife and automated messages from my
suppliers.

Theoretically, Outlook 2007 has 'improved' mail filters, but it
doesn't matter how good, if they aren't updated. Last automatic
updates I see are November 12, then October 16.. And before
that it was May.

For comparison, standard Exchange UCE filter is updated every
second week, Enterprise Edition or Forefront Security updated
every day.

(david).

"Spin" <Sp...@invalid.com> wrote in message

news:6o4bfeF...@mid.individual.net...