Use an appliance to reduce spam's impact on Exchange servers

Experts disagree about just how much spam is out there, but one thing they do agree on is that the majority of e-mail is spam. Current estimates indicate that anywhere from 60% to 95% of inbound e-mail is spam. In my own Exchange organization, over 90% of the mail that my Exchange server receives is spam. That means that only one out of every 10 messages is legitimate.

Spam places a tremendous burden on Exchange servers just because of its sheer volume. There are some basic steps that you can take to reduce the strain that spam puts on your servers. For example, a lot of companies disable non-delivery reports. That way, servers don't respond every time someone attempts to send a spam to a mailbox that doesn't exist. Disabling mail relay is also essential in combating spam. But these techniques alone don't really get to the root of the problem.

Once your Exchange servers receive spam, the message must be scrutinized by your servers' antivirus and antispam software prior to ultimately being either deleted or delivered to users' inboxes. Even if you have incredibly good antispam software that filters out all spam, the simple act of filtering places a huge performance hit on your servers.

So how do you get around the performance impact caused by processing spam? It's simple -- don't allow your servers to process spam. If your Exchange servers are overburdened, why not offload as many tasks as possible? You can't free up your servers from having to run your Windows operating system or Exchange application, and it isn't safe to not run antivirus softw

To continue reading for free, register below or login

Requires Membership to View

To gain access to this and all member only content, please provide the following information (all fields required):

First Name:
Last Name:
Country: Select... Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, Democratic Republic of Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote D'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia, The Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard and McDonald Islands Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, North Korea, South Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Man, Isle of Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestine Panama Panama Canal Zone Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu U.S. Minor Outlying Islands Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Vatican City Venezuela Vietnam Virgin Islands Wallis and Futuna Islands Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe
Email Address:

I would like to receive a FREE subscription to Information Security magazine online.
YesNo

Do you manage, evaluate, recommend, implement, support or purchase security products, software or services?
YesNo

Please estimate the yearly security budget for your entire organization including all security products and services.
Please select... Over $10 Million $5 Million-$10 Million $1 Million-$4.9 Million $500,000-$999,999 $100,000-$499,999 $50,000-$99,999 $25,000-$49,999 $10,000-$24,999 Less than $10,000 None

What is your role in purchasing IT related products and services? (Check all that apply)
Technical decision maker
Financial decision maker
Recommend/Specify
Evaluate products
Implement Products/Services
Determine Needs
Create Security Strategy
None

By joining SearchSecurity.com you agree to receive email updates from the TechTarget network of sites, including updates on new content, magazine or event notifications, new site launches and market research surveys. Please verify all information and selections above. You may unsubscribe at any time from one or more of the services you have selected by editing your profile or unsubscribing via email.

TechTarget cares about your privacy. Read our Privacy Policy

One way of doing this is to invest in an antispam appliance that sits between your Internet connection and your Exchange organization. When messages are sent to your domain, they will pass through the antispam appliance, where they will be filtered prior to being delivered to the Exchange servers.

How much of a difference will this make in Exchange server's performance? A lot of it depends on the volume of spam that your organization receives and how effective your antispam appliance is at catching spam. For the sake of argument though, let's say that 80% of the mail sent to your domain is spam and that you bought a cheap antispam appliance that only manages to catch about half of it. Even with such a mediocre appliance, you have still lightened the volume of mail that your Exchange server has to deal with by 40%! Furthermore, you have also relieved Exchange of the task of having to filter spam itself, so the performance gain will actually be much greater than it would be if you were only reducing the volume of mail.

About the author
Brien M. Posey, MCSE, is a Microsoft Most Valuable Professional for his work with Windows 2000 Server and IIS. Brien has served as CIO for a nationwide chain of hospitals and was once in charge of IT security for Fort Knox. As a freelance technical writer he has written for Microsoft, TechTarget, CNET, ZDNet, MSD2D, Relevant Technologies and other technology companies. You can visit Brien's personal Web site at brienposey.com.

This tip originally appeared on our sister site, SearchExchange.com.