On Wed, 27 Sep 2006, Peter Smith wrote: > The messages are simply a random stream of words, with punctuation > scattered in them. No HTML, no URLs being advertised, no excessive > capitalisation, just meaningless text.
Technically, then, it's not spam. Spam requires a commercial message of some sort. :) > As such, SA is finding very little to complain about, and is even > lowering the scoring because the bayes filtering deems it to be > good. I'm torn about whether or not to train on such messages. I do hand training so I keep pretty tight control over what gets trained. I would agree that it's an attempt to poison your bayes database, assuming that you have autolearn turned on, either by skewing the scores towards ham or by bloating the database. > Any thoughts on what I can do about these messages? Even with > bayes turned off, they would still fail to score more than say 2 > or 3. Each message contains a different paragraph of random text, > so it's not possible to pick out keywords; and the messages are > coming from dialup machines, so blocking IP isn't going to be very > effective. Look for punctuation? A good deal of the random bayes poison at one time was totally without punctuation. -- John Hardin KA7OHZ ICQ#15735746 http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] FALaholic #11174 pgpk -a [EMAIL PROTECTED] key: 0xB8732E79 - 2D8C 34F4 6411 F507 136C AF76 D822 E6E6 B873 2E79 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ...every time I sit down in front of a Windows machine I feel as if the computer is just a place for the manufacturers to put their advertising. -- fwadling on Y! SCOX ----------------------------------------------------------------------
