Spam Filtering

I have noticed as I am sure everyone else is noticing, that SPAM is now misspelling words or rearranging words to get past current SPAM filters.  You would think the next step would to put in a spell checked type system at the mail server level.  With a misspelled word thresh-hold.  We all have spell checkers on our mail programs.  This would then get us to use them more and allow the blocking of SPAM with unrecognized words in it, which for the most part is almost every SPAM message I get.

I am not familiar with the current filtering processes of SPAM but does this not seem like a logical way to go or am I just having serious brain seepage?

Published Sunday, February 08, 2004 4:27 PM by bstahlhood

Comments

# re: Spam Filtering

What about your idiot mates who can't spell anyways.

Spam bayes is the best spam filter I've seen, its never allowed any spam into my inbox.

http://spambayes.sourceforge.net/

I dont know how it works but it does.

Sunday, February 08, 2004 4:44 PM by Om3gaSupr3m3

# re: Spam Filtering

If you use Outlook or Outlook Express, Qurb (http://www.qurb.com) is excellent. It builds an intelligent "white list" based on past messages you've sent and received, then only allows messages from those senders into your inbox. For unknown senders, it offers optional challenge-response filtering. It catches 100% of spam, with no false positives. I'm a satisfied customer.

Sunday, February 08, 2004 6:50 PM by Phil Weber

# re: Spam Filtering


The only way to eliminate spam is to shift the paradigm from a user subscribing to a newsletter to a publisher subscribing to an email address. Until then, all efforts are futile and only make the problem worse.

Sunday, February 08, 2004 7:01 PM by Paul D. Murphy

Leave a Comment

(required) 
(required) 
(optional)
(required)