From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,c7ee0d960296483 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-23 11:00:17 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Brian Catlin" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: Subject: Re: Current "Swen" worm attack - a tip Organization: Sannas Consulting X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 18:00:17 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.167.2.130 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net 1064340017 68.167.2.130 (Tue, 23 Sep 2003 11:00:17 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 11:00:17 PDT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42817 Date: 2003-09-23T18:00:17+00:00 List-Id: "Jeffrey Carter" 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 >