R. Scott Perry wrote:
Just for the record, we don't have plans to implement more Bayes
filtering in Declude (we did years ago, before the Paul Graham
article, and found that it just wasn't as effective as the weighting
system).
Yeah, I tested the HERU filters and found them to be remarkably s
nclude in their products.
Andrew 8)
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Bramble [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2003 4:56 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] Detecting gibberish
Thanks Scott, that explains pretty much everything.
I'm sure you a
I'm sure you are well aware of the problem with gibberish in spam,
especially if you are moving towards Bayes filtering with Declude.
Just for the record, we don't have plans to implement more Bayes filtering
in Declude (we did years ago, before the Paul Graham article, and found
that it just w
Thanks Scott, that explains pretty much everything.
I'm sure you are well aware of the problem with gibberish in spam,
especially if you are moving towards Bayes filtering with Declude. Is
it possible to come up with a filter like say BODYTEXT that processes
just decoded text and ignores anyth
Regarding the gibberish detection and decoding...I am running the most
recent version and have not disabled decoding, however the following test
message gets a hit on [BODY 0 CONTAINS qi] even though that string
only appears in the link:
Ah, I was mistaken. What happens is Declude JunkMa
First, I must correct myself...the SUBJECT test for the ISO/Base64 line
is working without any changes and after further testing. I have no
clue as to how I screwed this up on so many tests, but apparently I did
unless that is related to the other mysterious behavior with my system
not decodin
Could you let me know what it is exactly a BODY filter will search, and if
this searching happens after BASE64 decoding? Does it search every
character that appears below the header, including things like the message
boundaries and attachments?
The entire body will be searched (including MIME