Subject: Re: Careful with those spamtools.....

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 21:04:08 -0400

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 08:21:00 +0800, Shelby Moore said:

> Then again such a hypothetical database would be mostly useless in
> implementation, because dishonest proxies come and go faster than we could
> database them.  Could test in real-time, but tests can be lied to.

There's an even bigger problem - you have to make the difficult choice between:

1) Flag the DMZ mail server of every site that uses RFC1918 space, since the "previous
hop" is in their 1918 space.  This won't win you friends....

2) Allow a "pass" for 1918 space, and just accept that spammers will use a dummy
RFC1918 network (of possibly 1 node looped back to itself) to "look like" (1).

---

From: Shelby Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 11:09:12 +0800

> Valdis wrote:

No need to flag it as being dishonest when it is not dishonest.

> Valdis wrote:

But as I said in previous post I know of at least one proprietary way to detect
this.

> Dean wrote:
>I do not think that _all_ anti-spam is useless.

I asserted here _how_ all existing (that are in public domain and I am aware
of) can be rendered useless (eventually):

http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg22190.html 

> Dean wrote:
>I think that content analysis holds much promise.

Agreed but not by ... [phrase withheld due to IP charter of this list] ... due
to information theory.  I can not say more until the patent is pending.

> Only a few years ago, we
>thought that speaker-independent voice recognition was science fiction.

I personally did not think so since I got into studying filtering theory in
1986.  Much of my early work was due to an interest I had in robotics and A.I..

>Along similar lines, I think it will be possible for intelligent agents to
>decide whether email is likely to be interesting to us.

Yes it already exists and will hopefully be demonstrated publicly soon.  I
guess (according to Vernon) that means I am a "Kook" until demonstrated :)

Shelby Moore
http://AntiViotic.com

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 00:08:07 -0400

> But as I said in previous post I know of at least one proprietary way to detect

Do tell.  Apply to this message.