The whole point of these are to beat Bayesian filters which use word
occurrence as a spam filtering policy. Basically (and I'm probably
getting this at least 50% wrong) is that a Bayesian filter would do
something like note: "All emails which have the word Viagra are ALWAYS
spam" so it would always filter out some of those spam.
I think the Bayesian filter doesn't have any info on words like clarify
or directorate (or at least they're rare in spam mails) so the filter
doesn't tag those as spam.
Adam
On 27/02/2004, at 5:38 AM, Bill Parker wrote:
I have been with Westnet for a while now and the spam deluge I used to
get at IINET has gone. Now I am just beginning to get trickle. At
the bottom of one today selling fuel additives was this:
"rusk nylon amber bash avesta lois committable ate clarify directorate
bullwhack advocacy multiplicative chuff womanhood intonate inaugural
bufflehead some saskatchewan bushy sidecar clergyman barry
quantitative alvarez lieutenant oyster toluene cauldron soliloquy
almighty voice trisodium gorilla meningitis swoop"
Apart from the fact that it is an interesting collection of words, why
would anyone stick this to spam? Two of the words look like ECHELON
triggers, but ?
www.agitprop.org.au/echelon.htm
Bill
-- The WA Macintosh User Group Mailing List --
Archives - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/archives.shtml>
Guidelines - <http://www.wamug.org.au/mailinglist/guidelines.shtml>
Unsubscribe - <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
WAMUG is powered by Stalker CommuniGatePro
