[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <400345CC.4375.41446916@localhost>
From: nick at virus-l.demon.co.uk (Nick FitzGerald)
Subject: spam with anti-bayesian parts
vogt@...senet.com wrote:
<<snip>>
> What I'm wondering is:
> Why do the spammers even go to the length of using random words? Those are
> easy to filter out with some heuristics (e.g. missing punctuation). Why
> don't they grab some real text, say from a news site? There's an endless
> supply of new, proper text out there.
...and some of them have been using some of it.
That is not a new idea. Spam with "normal text" filler "stolen" from
various sources has existed for a while. The problem with this typeof
thing is that to hide the extra text (so it does not interfere with the
desired message) they have to put ti in a really small font and/or make
the font colour (very close to) the message background. (Of course, if
you use a text-only MUA you will either see nothing (because the spam
contains no text/plain component) or the gibberish or stolen text.
In theory the existence of the HTML markup to perform either of the
"hiding" tricks should quickly gain high spam-specificity value...
Regards,
Nick FitzGerald
Powered by blists - more mailing lists