By this time, you all must be already aware of new anti-spam features provided in Exchange Server 2003 SP2.
Alexander Nikolayev discusses all the anti-spam features of Exchange server 2003 SP2 i...
Updated Jul 01, 2019
Version 2.0
Blog Post
2 MIN READ
Exchange Server 2003 Service Pack 2 (SP2) anti-spam features - order of execution
When we first added the IMF, we set it to "No Action" because we wanted to just watch the performance monitor counters to see how it was doing. Once we did that, though, we got absolutely killed with spam. When we then enabled the IMF blocking, the spam dropped down to a more reasonable level. That led us to believe that the IMF was somehow interfering Brightmail because there was a drastic increase of missed spam with IMF (no action) + Brightmail that we had with Brightmail alone.
Is there any case where the IMF will effectively bypass a third party spam filter?
Since we've had the IMF and Brightmail enabled, many of our users swear that they're getting more spam than they did before when it was just Brightmail. It would be nice to be able to reassure them that both filters work nicely with each other, but so far I haven't been able to get a definitive answer on that.
Is there any case where the IMF will effectively bypass a third party spam filter?
Since we've had the IMF and Brightmail enabled, many of our users swear that they're getting more spam than they did before when it was just Brightmail. It would be nice to be able to reassure them that both filters work nicely with each other, but so far I haven't been able to get a definitive answer on that.