Scoring SPAM based on spellcheckers has been plagued with problems. No
dictionary is complete, multiple languages, etc, etc.
I use RBLs, extensive SA rules, a well-tuned Bayes, and SURBL on my
mailserver. Beyond all doubt, SURBL is where it is at. Bar none the most
useful anti-spam measure devised yet.
Greg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Udstrand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "The Hardware List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 6:56 PM
Subject: Re: [H] OT - Ins't Tihs Wreid?
Seems to me that the Bayesian filters should be just fine, they just
need to run a spell check against the message prior to ranking and
scoring it. FWIW, I already get several SPAM messages a day that are
already doing this.....
-Gary
Veech Malone said the following on 7/11/2005 4:40 PM:
Half the spam I get already has purposely misspelled words in the
subject line or punctuation marks instead of letters. There oughtta
be a law against it.
Thane Sherrington wrote:
At 07:04 PM 06/07/2005, Veech Malone wrote:
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer
in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is
taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can
be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is
bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but,
the wrod as a wlohe.
Just wait until spammers start using this. Bayesian'll be screwed.
T
