On Aug 21, 2006, at 10:13 PM, Chip M. wrote:
While skimming thru my daily rejected spam pile, did a double take
when a
GIF spam seemed to "blink" at me. Thought it was a sw glitch at
first...
then realized the sneaky Borg had adapted again.
Took a look at the frames in PaintShopPro's AnimationShop, and the
first
three are all but blank (wee bit of noise), followed by the payload.
Below are links to the raw message, and the extracted GIF:
http://Puffin.net/software/spam/samples/0001a_animated_gif.eml
http://Puffin.net/software/spam/samples/0001b_been.gif
Decoder/Chris, I'd view this as a compliment to your FuzzyOCR. ;)
The good news is that ImageInfo should have no problem with this
particular
instance, as the initial width x height are "correct".
Time to recalibrate those phaser frequencies! :)
- "Chip"
I also heard that interlaced gif spam is appearing now.
It'd be interesting to see how to counter them.
For animated, is there a clean break between "frames" of animation,
something that netpbm or whatever can easily identify and break out
into individual images? It would be CPU intensive, but the right way
to fight it might be to run the FuzzyOCR on each frame. And/or have a
setting for "maximum frames to process", and if the GIF goes over that
number of frames, give it a huge spam score. Or "add this score per
frame", so that the number of frames increases the spam score directly,
and automatically bail out if they cross a certain threshold (score
from number of animation frames alone >= 20, then just return 20 ... or
something; which saves you on processing the frames themselves).
For interlaced ... I have no idea. Depends a lot on how the interlaced
images are stored, I guess. And whether or not netpbm can generate the
final image for processing, instead of having to work on the interlaced
data.
