> On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 05:50 -0700, John Rudd wrote: > > You're assuming that spammers will perfectly update all existing spam. > > There might be crud floating around out there for a while to come.
On 27.10.09 13:06, rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote: > I'm not assuming anything John. Spam with no endgame is pointless spam. > All spam has a point and purpose - or it would not exist. Most spammers > staging or springboarding from such places turn their links around > mighty fast - they know they wont be up for long, so whilst I sure there > may be the odd 'floater' around, the enemy is formidable and ahead of > the game. Are we talking that the spam should not exist or about the spam still exists? The fact is, that if we get old spam, we should detect it, regardless if spammers make money on it or not. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Windows 2000: 640 MB ought to be enough for anybody
