On Mon, 2004-01-19 at 18:01, Brad Koehn wrote:
> I've been thinking about a new rule, either for Bayes or for more
> normal processing, and I'd like the group's opinion. It has to do with
> URLs in the message.
>
> My original thought came to me when running SpamCop on a bunch of
> messages. Ta
(followup to my own message ...)
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004, Sylvain Robitaille wrote:
> http://alcor.concordia.ca/~syl/packages/spambounce.pl
Sorry! I'd forgotten about the redirection from there to my home web
server. I've now made sure the script is available via the above URL
...
Anyone who tri
On Tue, 19 Jan 2004, JRiley wrote:
> I'd be interested in seeing that scriptcan you be persuaded to
> share with the class?
Of course. In an effort to avoid bothering others on the list who may
not be interested, I've placed it at
http://alcor.concordia.ca/~syl/packages/spambounce.pl
Plea
I'd be interested in seeing that scriptcan you be persuaded to share
with the class?
-JR
> I recently wrote a script to automate spam complaints to the contact
> address(es) of the previous hop before my mail servers, using both a
> Whois lookup by IP address (see Net-Whois-IP-0.35 Perl modu
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Brad Koehn wrote:
> I'm sure the something like URI::URL could be used to get the host of
> the URLs, and that could in turn be fed to a whois server (although how
> one chooses between ARIN, APNIC, and the like I'm not yet sure).
I recently wrote a script to automate spam co
I've been thinking about a new rule, either for Bayes or for more
normal processing, and I'd like the group's opinion. It has to do with
URLs in the message.
My original thought came to me when running SpamCop on a bunch of
messages. Taking a peek at the SC output I see that they whois the host
