Dallas has done research on this. The short version is it doesn't turn out good. You have to look at the word length, % of misspelled, ect.... If it isn't in the Dictionary, does it really mean it is misspelled? Links, Acronyms, technical talk, ..........
So overall the findings were, it doesn't work as a simple filter, though it may seem it would have. Getting it to work would cost more CPU time then other easier methods. Research wasn't a complete failure however. It gave great insight into other language/spam patterns. We learn more from our failures then our successes. --Chris > -----Original Message----- > From: Loren Wilton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, February 09, 2004 12:38 AM > To: SpamAssassin Mailing List > Subject: Dictionary lookup? > > > I notice that creative misspelling seems to be the trick of > the day, not to > mention the random "words" like ghoidfs and fdsfreaol that > tend to show up a > lot. > > How hard (or expensive) would it be to do a dictionary lookup > and count the > percentage of misspelled words in the body? Could assign a > score that is > the fraction times 10, so 100% misspelled words would be a > score of 10. > Might have to bias it down a bit for messages with less than > 20 words or so. > > Loren >
