> -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, March 22, 2004 4:27 PM > To: James Nelson; 'Bob George'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Spamassassin not scoring all incoming e-mails > > At 05:15 PM 3/22/2004, James Nelson wrote: > >Do those emails have habeas info in the headers? I found some emails not > >being scanned in SA 2.63 when habeas headers are included. > > Bah, that's complete coincidence, if factual at all... SA still scores > habeased emails, it just detracts 8 points.
I thought the same thing, as I can find some spam blocked normally that contained habeas data. But facts don't lie. I have been tracking this for a few weeks now, and every single spam some how making it through with out being scanned contains the habeas water mark. I think its more than just a coincidence as I have not received a single email not scanned that doesn't contain it. The test account in question that is being monitored receives well over 500 message a day, many legit but about 60% spam. May be a coincidence, but I am doubting that based on my data. > Are we? Are you familiar with how fast the US legal system works? This > abuse has been around only since January.. Do you honestly believe any > company can successfully file suit against _anyone_ in 2 months without > prior preparation? I wasn't attacking habeas, so don't take offense. I just think it's a dumb idea. It's easily spoofed. Other companies who have a similar "watermark" idea have way better implementations. DNSWLs for example, check out bondedsender.com for a good reference to a more sound solution for "watermarking" email. And it doesn't take that long to file a lawsuit, especially for copyright infringement. On January 1, the "you" CAN_SPAM act took effect. In the first week of March, Microsoft and AOL filled lawsuits on hundreds of spammers violating the act. Since habeas, marketed their product on the fact they would go after offenders, I think we would have seen at least one instance at this point. james
