Re: Current "Swen" worm attack - a tip

["Brian Catlin" <BrianC@sannas.org>]

"Jeffrey Carter" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
news:WD%bb.785$RW4.309@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Preben Randhol wrote:
> >
> > I have found that the baysian filtering is very good when you have
> > taught it what is spam and what is not. It takes a bit effort in the
> > beginning, but now I get about 40-50 spams a day and I have some 5-7
> > mailinglists and it filters all for me into correct folders. Sometimes a
> > spam ends in the wrong place, but then it is simply (for me) to press a
> > key and it is relearnt as spam and moved into that folder.
> >
> > I have heard talk that the naive baysian statisical methods used could
> > be improved and other statistical methods might do better, however there
> > has not been an implementation yet. So if anybody here knows statistics
> > it is a nice chance to make a killer spam filter :-)
>
> I've long felt that a neural network should be able to learn to
> distinguish spam from real mail very accurately. The problem is figuring
> out a good way to represent a mail message to the network. I haven't had
> much success on that, but once you have that, training the network is
> simple.

You might want to take a look at SpamPal (www.SpamPal.org).  While it doesn't
use a neural net, it has a RegEx and Bayesian filter module.  It sits between
your email client and the server and marks spam so your email client's rules can
dispose of the unwanted spam

 -Brian

> -- 
> Jeff Carter
> "I've got to stay here, but there's no reason
> why you folks shouldn't go out into the lobby
> until this thing blows over."
> Horse Feathers
> 50
>