Why the pressure to have SpamAssassin turned on?

[AndyCivil]

I'm curious to know why there is pressure to cajole users into accepting SpamAssassin. Why is there even an option "Global Forced ON"? What benefit is there to preventing users from turning it off if they don't want it?

I understand that in the case of security updates and virus protection, there's a 'herd immunity' thing where people need to be protected, otherwise they'll spread the harm to others; but in the case of spam (assuming there's no virus attached) the only harm is to the user, so why can't the user choose?

My hosting company is trying to be helpful, and has allowed me the option to turn it off, but SOMETHING is turning it back on again without my permission. Why is it so hard? The point of open-source software is supposed to be that it's for the benefit of the users not the corporations, this kind of shenanigans is the kind of thing I'd expect from Microsoft or Apple to be honest.

 

[Infopro]

I'm curious to know why you'd choose to not use it.

 

[AndyCivil]

I could tell you why, but I'm reluctant to do so because it would change the topic to a discussion about whether my reasons were valid or not, and that's not the point. Why should I have to justify my choice? It should be enough that as a paying customer, I choose to do my spam filtering on my own computer, in my own way. It shouldn't be anyone else's business.

Incidentally, my reasons aren't a secret, when I get a satisfactory answer to my question, I will post them.

 

[Infopro]

Why should I have to justify my choice? It should be enough that as a paying customer, I choose to do my spam filtering on my own computer, in my own way. It shouldn't be anyone else's business.

I agree with you, choice is a good thing. If your WebHost isn't giving you what you want, find a new one. I'm not sure this is one I'd be troubled by though and is why I asked about it.

 

[cPanelLauren]

Why is there even an option "Global Forced ON"? What benefit is there to preventing users from turning it off if they don't want it?

Some providers and users prefer this to eliminate spam, especially in cases where the cPanel user is not knowledgeable enought to configure this themselves.

but in the case of spam (assuming there's no virus attached) the only harm is to the user, so why can't the user choose?

The user can choose, in the event, the user cannot, this is not a cPanel specific policy this is a Provider policy and needs to be addressed with them.

My hosting company is trying to be helpful, and has allowed me the option to turn it off, but SOMETHING is turning it back on again without my permission. Why is it so hard?

This sounds again like an issue with your provider, if you've disabled SpamAssassin it should stay disabled.


cPanel/WHM gives server administrators options they find useful while I understand this specific feature hasn't seemed helpful to you, if your provider does not meet your needs in this respect I would as @Infopro suggested find a new provider.

 

[AndyCivil]

@cPanelLauren your logic would definitely support making spam protection the default. However, I don't see how it supports removing the option for those who go to the trouble of trying to turn it off. Thank you for taking the time to answer.
@Infopro Since I now have my solution (enter a simple wildcard as a whitelist entry) I will tell you why I don't want spam protection. I decided ten years ago how I wanted to handle spam, it's described at - Removed - and it's been working fine. With all the things in the world to worry about, I can do without also worrying about false positive spam diversion. If I had a spam folder, I would have to check it, and that's extra work. Thunderbird fetches all my mail and collects it in the right category, according to the email address. If I wanted to also check the spam folders, which I realise I could do with POP3, I would have to double the number of 'accounts' under Thunderbird. I don't want that complexity, it's simpler to have it all in one place. And yes, they're rare, but false positives do occur. I had a reminder notice from MagicJack that they were going to auto-renew the service for a phone I no longer use - it went to spam. I can provide the header if necessary. Fortunately, another email from them did not go to spam, and I was able to cancel it in time, but I can do without being charged $39 for a service I'm not using. Incidentally, most of my accounts do not get spam, and if they do, I want to know about it. This is part of an intellectual curiosity about how emails get leaked, but this won't be answered if my service diverts my spam and doesn't even tell me about it. (What makes me kind of angry about this whole thing is, NO ONE TOLD ME that spam protection was going to be forced on me, and I only discovered because I wondered why my email accounts were using space on the server when they should have been empty, being fetched every five minutes.)

 

[Infopro]

I've read your link (removed from your post, no need here), I don't agree with your comments there. Your way of handling your mail seems to work for you though, so, whoami to try and persuade you to do something different?