Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
User interfacesUser interfacesPosted Feb 23, 2006 17:30 UTC (Thu) by vmole (guest, #111)In reply to: User interfaces by gdt Parent article: The Grumpy Editor's guide to bayesian spam filters
The problem with feeding back the message the user sees is that by that time the user sees it, Outlook has already destroyed the headers - there is no standard way to extract an undamaged, as-delivered message from Outlook and send it back to the anti-spam system. Dspam work around this by inserting a hash into the ongoing message. When it's sent back for "rescoring", it extracts the hash code and then just reassigns the tokens associated with that hash. The downside is that the users wonder about that weird code in all their e-mails. Another method is used by Maia Mailguard, which just keeps a cache of all the mail. The user needs to go to a web interface to mark false negatives, but it also let's them look through the spam cache to find and release false positives. (Maia is "just" a front-end to amavisd/spamassassin).
(Log in to post comments)
User interfaces Posted Feb 23, 2006 22:09 UTC (Thu) by NightMonkey (subscriber, #23051) [Link] DSPAM can put the Signature in the headers. Then, your users won't wonder about anything. ;)
User interfaces Posted Feb 28, 2006 13:46 UTC (Tue) by vmole (guest, #111) [Link] If it's in the headers, it doesn't do any good: Outlook won't send it back to the filter when the message is forwarded.
User interfaces Posted Feb 26, 2006 15:21 UTC (Sun) by job (guest, #670) [Link] What headers does Outlook destroy? I understand that the Stats-headers is modified, but that's the same with all MUAs and could easily be fixed by excluding that specific line.
Are other headers destroyed too? Do different MUAs destroy different headers? I would be very interested to know!
User interfaces Posted Feb 28, 2006 13:44 UTC (Tue) by vmole (guest, #111) [Link] There's no way (that I've found[1]) to bounce a message from Outlook. By "bounce" (aka "redirect"), I mean to send the message to a different address w/o mucking with headers, so that it goes to the second address looking just as if it had been sent there originally (modulo any "Received" headers, but those aren't particularly relevant at this point). Forwarding is not equivalent. as that adds all sorts of crap to the body of the message *and* loses the headers. Why is this a big deal? Because to retrain Bayesian-type spam filters, you need to provide something relatively close to the original message. Outlook just can't do it. Steve [1] There are add-on modules that will do this for Outlook. The chance of getting one installed and working on an existing collection of ~20,000 pcs of various vintages is 0.
User interfaces Posted Mar 25, 2006 11:27 UTC (Sat) by job (guest, #670) [Link] Moving a message doesn't destroy the headers.
User interfaces Posted Sep 22, 2006 6:47 UTC (Fri) by bobpriston (guest, #40434) [Link] You can use the field PR_TRANSPORT_MESSAGE_HEADERS from IMessage for programming or Options.. in right click menu to get "original" internet headers for email. Outlook spam filter http://www.spam-reader.com Spam Reader and others get all necessary information in this way. And work with good effeciency.
|
|||||||||||||