-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Monday 08 April 2002 16:10 pm, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> The first thing you need is an algorithm for determining
> whether two messages are similar enough to be considered the
> same.  E.g., Razor uses a hash of a stripped subset of the
> message.
>
> Using your example of a "honeypot" account, a sufficient
> measure of "looks like spam" might be that the sender has
> previously mailed to the honeypot.

However, if one is just interested in using a honeypot, it's a 
lot more effective to just send the messages into Razor. The 
advantage of finding a better solution is obvious: If you can 
compare 1000 mailboxes, for example, and any message that 
occurs more than X times should be deleted from all of them. 
(As pointed out by someone else, you'd need to detect 
legitimate mass mailings.)

I'm not trying to cut down your idea. My goal is to promote 
some good discussion. Does anyone have ideas for this system?

I'm thinking it may be possible to modify the Razor server 
code (if/when that is released -- I'm not up to date on the 
Razor server situation.) so that the server would tally the 
number of times a particular checksum was entered. Once it's 
above a certain threshold, it would begin reporting this to 
clients that are asking if a certain checksum is in the 
database. (Or, possibly, the checksum would then be pushed 
out to other Razor servers.) In this plan, all mail would be 
reported to the Razor server.

I think this is similar to how the DCC system works. I could 
be off-base here though, as this isn't my area of expertise.

Just some food for thought.
Richie Laager
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE8sg5obfU6uV4fG84RAhtzAKDSKL+b4s15OZEo0IPsM0EuWbeQ5wCgnGQ4
whC/Z58Hqzf8vA9kOXjHDOA=
=xj19
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Spamassassin-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk

Sponsored by http://www.ThinkGeek.com/

Reply via email to