On Sun, 9 Mar 2003 19:33:08 -0500
Paul Judge <paul(_dot_)judge(_at_)ciphertrust(_dot_)com> wrote:
This is a good point. More quantitative rather than anecdotal data
would be useful. We started spamarchive.org a few months ago to
provide such a standard and open spam corpus. (The latest archives are
not online right now as we are changing hosting facilities, but they
are available for those that would like to use them.) Another missing
piece is a set of tools for anonymizing, measuring, and analyzing spam
data. I mention this and give some examples in my talk at the spam
conference(http://www.spamconference.org/proceedings2003.html).
Hmm, it looks as though we're thinking along the same line. As far as
anonymizing mail is concerned, it should be possible to write software
to replace email addresses, names and IP numbers with MD5 checksums.
This would preserve the unique identifiers (more or less) in the data
while providing anonymity.
The key issue is to identify all data elements that must be sanitized.
Also it should be decided at what point in the processing chain the
`sanitization' should take place. Information shouldn't be discarded
until the last possible moment.
Fred Bacon
=======================================================================
Aerodyne Research, Inc. Phone: (978) 663-9500 ext. 273
45 Manning Rd. FAX: (978) 663-4918
Billerica, MA 01821-3976 http://www.aerodyne.com
=======================================================================
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg