procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Base64spam documentation

2005-09-02 12:40:33
At 14:45 2005-09-02 -0400, Louis Proyect wrote:
I have just received 2 emails that snuck through the recipe that Gary
supplied. The header and body for one of them can be found at:
http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/base64spam.htm

Any suggestions on how to drive a stake through its heart?


Received headers like this one are suspect:

Received: from midcoast.com (unknown [218.49.49.226])
     by mail1.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B19EE58B29;
     Fri,  2 Sep 2005 14:09:34 -0400 (EDT)

* ^Received:.*\(unknown

There are also only two receieved headers, both created by Panix servers 
(presumably the first receives it from the outside world, filters it, then 
passes it along to an internal server for user delivery).  If it isn't FROM 
a panix user (or domain hosted by panix), then decuct every header showing 
panix as the received BY server.  If you're left with 0, then there's 
something wrong - even a legit web-generated message from some website 
should be relaying the message through their OWN smtp server before passing 
it along to yours.


On the body:

   Content-Type: text/html;
         charset="big5"
   Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64


'big5' is an asian encoding.  Unless you read some asian language, chances 
are, this is a BS message for you.  See the "furrin.rc" script I have 
published at my website (and for this particular type of spam, note the 
comment about using the HB flags).

I also score text/html (ONLY), and multipart/alternative with a "spammishness".


There's also a disparity between the date on the message and the actual 
date it was received: sent 7pm last night GMT, but received


All of these factors have been discussed on this list in the 
past.  Ultimatley, the worst thing you can do for spam filtering is try to 
customize ONE recipe to catch a spam, or use just one set of conditions to 
identify something as spam.  Accumulating a running score of iffy factors 
(which is what a SpamAssassin score is - the total value assigned to the 
various attributes) has proven effective for many, myself included.  Heck, 
one of those attributes is merely that too many attributes were matched - 
thus a number of otherwise piddly issues will still classify a message as 
spam, even if the total score for those piddly issues wouldn't have.

I don't classify something as spam based on just one attribute (okay, there 
are some attributes which score high enough on their own to classify 
something as spam, but I also have offsets - some mailing lists such as 
this one for instance which often discuss spam, receive a credit).


Consider SAVING your spam.  Also, SA has a "learning" capability - contact 
your ISP and see where you should be forwarding stuff which has gotten by 
it, but which is definatley spam (DO NOT AUTOMATE SUBMISSIONS!).

---
  Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering

  Procmail disclaimer: <http://www.professional.org/procmail/disclaimer.html>
  Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies.  I'll get my copy from the list.


____________________________________________________________
procmail mailing list   Procmail homepage: http://www.procmail.org/
procmail(_at_)lists(_dot_)RWTH-Aachen(_dot_)DE
http://MailMan.RWTH-Aachen.DE/mailman/listinfo/procmail

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>