> A quite interesting HTML code to cheat the filters
>
> http://www=2espyware-killer-software=2ecom/cgi-bin/rd=2ecgi=
>
?IvC7R3lvJb">http://www=2espyware-killer-software=2ecom/cgi-bin/rd=2ecgi?=Iv
C7R3lvJb
>
> space substituted by "3d"
> dot (.) substituted by "=2e"
> ? substituted by "=?"
This is
Justin Mason said:
In the technology, when a mail comes in it is first cleared of the HTML
tags so words like viagra is brought to its original
clear text form. Then on this cleared message the entropy type
compression that you have suggested is carried out and the ratio of
similarity is matche
Justin Mason said:
>> In the technology, when a mail comes in it is first cleared of the HTML
>> tags so words like viagra is brought to its original
>> clear text form. Then on this cleared message the entropy type
>> compression that you have suggested is carried out and the ratio of
>> similar
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Rakesh writes:
> Lucas,
>
> The concept seems to be interesting, but BrightMail one of the biggest
> Spam Control company, uses a combination of these two tests (Entropy and
> HTML test). Which they call it as BrightSig2 technology and is
> unfort
On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 05:31:35 -0700, "Loren Wilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just reading their summary, I think it is nice research, but not
> really useful. The correlation method seems like a good idea.
> Except as they point out it makes granite flow look swift. So not
> actually useful
Just reading their summary, I think it is nice research, but not really
useful.
The correlation method seems like a good idea. Except as they point out it
makes granite flow look swift. So not actually useful at this point intime,
but it should be kept in mind.
On their second point with html, t
On 25 Jul 2004, at 03:58, John Andersen wrote:
On Saturday 24 July 2004 10:45 pm, Lucas Albers wrote:
The article states
The HTML Test: Most people do not send messages in HTML and there are
many
good reasons for this --
What planet does that writer live on?
The estimates I've seen are that at lea
On Saturday 24 July 2004 10:45 pm, Lucas Albers wrote:
The article states
> The HTML Test: Most people do not send messages in HTML and there are many
> good reasons for this --
What planet does that writer live on?
The estimates I've seen are that at least 70% of mail users
send html, especially
Justin Mason said:
> Well, we already do the second, and I think it's in 2.6x too (HTML_90_100
> et al).
>
> We took a look at the first one a while back, but it was very slow.
> I wonder if these guys have any more info on their success rate
> with it?
>>compression/entropy test: For each new m
Found another spam detection algorithm:
http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/inst/ag-db/software/ties/text-class-exp.html
description below:
Before normalization:
1. Number of errors on the last 10x500 mails
2. False negatives (spam misclassified as nonspam) on the last 10x500 mails
3. False positives (n
Lucas,
The concept seems to be interesting, but BrightMail one of the biggest
Spam Control company, uses a combination of these two tests (Entropy and
HTML test). Which they call it as BrightSig2 technology and is
unfortunately patented.
In the technology, when a mail comes in it is first clear
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lucas Albers writes:
> This webpage:
> http://lynx.auton.cs.cmu.edu/~agoode/spam/spam
>
> Mentions two other spamassassin algorithms for spam detecting in addition
> to the current ones.
Well, we already do the second, and I think it's in 2.6x too (
This webpage:
http://lynx.auton.cs.cmu.edu/~agoode/spam/spam
Mentions two other spamassassin algorithms for spam detecting in addition
to the current ones.
Ideas on whether they are worthwhile?
"
With Professor Atkeson's spam problem in mind, we devised the following
tests:
The compression/entrop
13 matches
Mail list logo
