Outlook's filter was designed to meet the needs of the greatest number of
users and requiring no effort.

Every Office product is extensible. This aspect of this product, regardless
of Microsoft's assertions that SPAM is a huge problem (which it is), is not
very extensible at all, and as shipped, does a lousy job. As for the
"greatest number of users and requiring no effort" argument, that's just
marketing talk. It either does a good job or it doesn't. It doesn't.

Thanks for the link, but as I said, I plan to develop my own solution at
some point. I have some ideas which I want to try out, when I have the time.
I'm sure someone else will benefit from it, though.

Thanks gain,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
Professional Chicken Salad Alchemist

I recycle.
I send everything back to the planet it came from.

"Diane Poremsky [MVP]" wrote in message
...
Outlook's filter was designed to meet the needs of the greatest number of
users and requiring no effort. if it doesn't meet your needs spambayes is
quite good and free.

http://www.slipstick.com/rules/junkmail.htm#tools

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours
Coauthor, OneNote 2003 for Windows (Visual QuickStart Guide)
Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/
Outlook 2007: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2007/

Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/
Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com
Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter:



"Kevin Spencer" wrote in message
...
Thanks Diane,

I don't have a SPAM filter, and don't plan to get one any time soon,
unless it's free. I do plan to write one, though eventually. It just
surprises me that the SPAM filtering in one of Microsoft's "flagship"
applications is so ... cheesy. I am a big fan of Microsoft, and an MVP.
But I wouldn't be doing the company any favors if I was to ignore this
sort of thing. I know they read these newsgroups, so my hope is that I'll
spark a little motivation!

In the meantime, I will use the negative logic Rule for keeping these
irritating blank emails out. Thanks for your help.

--

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
Professional Chicken Salad Alchemist

I recycle.
I send everything back to the planet it came from.

"Diane Poremsky [MVP]" wrote in message
...
Blocked senders is one of the most useless ways to manage spam - they
only work if it's an address that sends often (like a newsletter you
can't get unsubscribed from). Use a rule to delete blank messages if the
spam filter is not catching them or get a better spam filter.

http://www.outlook-tips.net/archives/2004/20041018.htm

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours
Coauthor, OneNote 2003 for Windows (Visual QuickStart Guide)
Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/
Outlook 2007: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2007/

Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/
Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com
Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter:



"Kevin Spencer" wrote in message
...
I am using Outlook 2003, and recently installed the update that contains
the latest Junk email filters. It certainly improved the Junk email
collection. I combine the use of this with adding SPAM email addresses
and domains to my Blocked Senders list whenever they arrive. However, an
obvious SPAM regularly makes it through, and I'm wondering why Microsoft
seems to have overlooked this for so long.

The obvious SPAM is an email message with *all* of the following blank:
From, To, CC, BCC, Subject, and Body. There is header data, though.
Here is an example of the headers from one of these (recipient and
innocent server names obfuscated):

Return-Path:
Received: from centrmimpi02.***.net ([##.##.###.###])
by centrmmtai02.***.net
(InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP
id
20060618121714.ZWXD10025.centrmmtai02.***.net@cen trmimpi02.***.net
for ; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:17:14 -0400
Received: from mail.******.com ([##.###.##.#])
by centrmimpi02.***.net with IMP
id n0CG1U00x06acko0000000
for ; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 08:12:18 -0400
Received: from SMTP32-FWD by takempis.com
(SMTP32) id A000008AC; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 07:12:35 -0500
Received: from esper.com [86.198.69.128] by mail.*****.com
(SMTPD32-7.07) id A3321A8200CA; Sun, 18 Jun 2006 07:12:34 -0500
Message-Id:
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 07:12:37 -0500

I would suggest that such obvious SPAM be filtered!

I was also unable to create my own Rule for deleting such emails, as
the Rules that use those fields do not allow for blanks.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
Professional Chicken Salad Alchemist

I recycle.
I send everything back to the planet it came from.