[sniffer] Stock obfuscation question

2004-08-25 Thread Scott Fisher 
Are there any rules in place to deal with this obfuscation?

Sec. tion
2. 7, A o, f the Sec, urities A, ct of 19. 33 and Se.ction 2. 1B
of the Se. curities Excha. nge A, ct of 19. 34.

Scott Fisher
Director of IT
Farm Progress Companies


This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and 
(un)subscription instructions go to 
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html

Re: [sniffer] Stock obfuscation question

2004-08-25 Thread Pete McNeil 
On Wednesday, August 25, 2004, 2:11:47 PM, Scott wrote:

SF Are there any rules in place to deal with this obfuscation?

SF Sec. tion
SF 2. 7, A o, f the Sec, urities A, ct of 19. 33 and Se.ction 2. 1B
SF of the Se. curities Excha. nge A, ct of 19. 34.

Yes... When we get a pump and dump spam we look for obfuscations like
this and code rules to capture similar cases. For instance, a good
candidate here would be:

sec,_+urities~+_se.ction

These two patterns appearing on the same line are statistically
unique to spam - or at least that would be my hypothesis.

This technique is largely effective, but there is a lot of room for
new variants and we must see them to code them.

Hope this helps,

_M




This E-Mail came from the Message Sniffer mailing list. For information and 
(un)subscription instructions go to 
http://www.sortmonster.com/MessageSniffer/Help/Help.html