Hello Matt, John, Tuesday, May 24, 2005, 7:15:16 PM, you wrote:
MK> John August wrote: >> I've noticed spam which has a section of "extracted" text after the spam >> content. It seems to me that by taking things line by line, you'll reach >> a point at which the spam index peaks, and then trails off after. This >> is a pattern which would remain even if the "overall" spam index is low. >> >> Does the current spam assassin implement such an approach ? Or is the >> algorithm sufficiently subtle to null out these attempts ? MK> AFAIK, no part of SA takes such an approach. MK> However, these attempts are only going to be effective against the bayes portion MK> of SA. As I've said before, my opinion is that these attempts are NOT effective against SpamAssassin's Bayes system. As a rule, we do NOT receive hams which contain such extracted text. No matter where the spammers extract their text from, they're going to extract words that are not found in ham, and Bayes is going to learn that the presence of such words means S P A M. Works here. Bayes is confused by short messages, no extracted text, with words that are not spam-specific. Add to the length of the messages by adding extracted text, and my Bayes system recognizes the extractions for what they are. Bob Menschel
