Christopher Eykamp said: > What if, at the end of every message, spammers appended a list of a > thousand or more randomly selected common dictionary words. Wouldn't these > words overwhelm a Bayesian filtering scheme? Sure, the spam phrases would > still be present in the top part of the message, but the common, non-spam > words at the bottom would make the message appear, statistically, less > spam-like, perhaps enough to get it by the filter. Further, as these > messages were included in a user's spam corpus, would not legitimate > messages start to appear, statistically speaking, like spam, thus > increasing false positives?
This is (a) being used already and (b) not that big a deal, if you train Bayes right. Basically, bayes operates (partly) by learning what *your* nonspam looks like, so if spammers do not know what *your* idea of nonspam is, they can't impersonate it. --j. ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: To learn the basics of securing your web site with SSL, click here to get a FREE TRIAL of a Thawte Server Certificate: http://www.gothawte.com/rd524.html _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
