SpamNet is an add-on to Microsoft Outlook that adds a toolbar with "Block" and "Unblock" buttons to the user's Outlook interface. When a spam message comes into the Inbox, the user can mark it for blocking.

On the surface, this functionality is not unlike already-existing spam-filtering tools. However, a SpamNet user is tied in with a network of other users who are also blocking spam emails at the same time. Spam messages that have been flagged enough times by other users get automatically moved to all users' Spam folders. According to a press release from Cloudmark, users' "Unblock" actions also get communicated to the network. A "Truth Evaluation System" is incorporated into the network to prevent legitimate email from getting blocked.

SpamNet is available for free download at http://www.cloudmark.com.

Views: Many "false positives" raise questions about this tool

I've been testing SpamNet for the past week. The application is easy to use, and I've noticed that it does filter quite a bit of spam in advance. As a real solution to the problem of spam, I've never cared much for client-based filtering. Once spam reaches the user's computer, much of the damage has already been done, in terms of consumption of computing and network resources.

However, SpamNet does add value by its ease of use and by virtue of the community approach to spam elimination. If this application really catches on, it could make a significant difference in keeping unwanted email out of users' faces.

My biggest concern is the large number of "false positives" flagged by SpamNet. In one period of four days, the application sent 21 non-spam emails to my Spam folder. These were from trusted publishers who had my permission to send me email. Examples: The Daily Quote from Lycos, CyberAtlas from Internet.com, my Daily Dilbert cartoon, and a fax sent to me via JFax, my online fax service.

(Note: I wrote that last paragraph last night. Today, SpamNet rejected 14 non-spams.)

If this pattern holds up, SpamNet could contribute to the increasing problems that marketers and publishers have been experiencing getting email communications through to the people who have requested them.

However, I raised my concern about false positives in an email to Cloudmark and received this reply from CEO Karl Jacob:

"This is not because others are flagging the messages mistakenly or maliciously. Currently the Truth Evaluation System doesn't trust any of the new reporters which have come into the system. A few bugs did cause some issues but those have been resolved. As the system begins to trust people you will see the effectiveness improve with no increase in "'false positives.'"

Al Bredenberg
Publisher, EmailResults.com
Online resource for permission email marketing
http://www.emailresults.com