At 8:22 AM -0200 4/10/03, Kurt Magnusson wrote:
these URL's and phone numbers and shrunk my indata to ca 1500
entries, but it got far more effective. From ca 20 spam a day, to 1
(always a completely new, due to spammers address trading). And all
I am using a simple, own procmail-like filter, just regex:ing the
incoming mails for the URL/phone nos. I suspect we have not seen the
forest for all the trees. Using "earnest" data, makes all filtering
simpler, faster and more reliable.
I agree that it's a good filtering technique. However there are an
infinite number of email addresses and web urls. Plus there are many
many ways to encode those, making the filtering process time
consuming unless it takes place on the end-user machine. It is also
a reactive solution. Spam gets through until someone someone adds
the new data to the database. And that has to be a manual process.
Spammers frequently include links to legit sites in their spam--you
don't want to accidentally blacklist those. Finally, there's a
question of how you share this information, and how you trust what
gets shared. Spammers could pollute a database with valid URLs, thus
making people less likely to use it. And even the best intentioned
users screw up--that's one reason why people don't universally use
IP blacklists--too many false positives.
I think the technique is a great addition to a BCP for filtering.
But I can't see a way that it can be used universally. (Is anyone
doing a BCP for filtering?)
--
Kee Hinckley
http://www.messagefire.com/ Junk-Free Email Filtering
http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/ Writings on Technology and Society
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg