Forum Moderators: open
Of course, I recognize that the "HTML mail is evil" thing is always good for a few heated exchanges ;)
Of course this filter should come prety low down your procmail/whatever recipe, as there is a fair amount of grunt involved (I guess) in scanning body as opposed to header.
Nevertheless, I prefer HTML newsletters that present their articles in a well-formatted way and can include charts and the like. I get a few text-only newsletters and find them rather unenticing & rarely read them. Ditto for flyers & sale notifications from companies where I shop - illustrations and formatting make them far more interesting and much more likely to be read.
I also find formatting commands useful for business e-mails. While text is fine for a quick note to confirm a meeting, a detailed series of answers to a client's questions is easier to read when enhanced with bold, italics, & indents. Others must think so, too, because I get a fair number of incoming business e-mails that are formatted with HTML commands.
With ever-increasing bandwidth and ever-cheaper storage, pure text e-mail will eventually be seen as a relic of 300-baud modem days.
Whether HTML-formatted mail is currently a good spam filter depends on your willingness to accept the loss of non-spam e-mail. My tolerance for false positives is very low, so I wouldn't do it. To use Brett's original example, I get far more than 200 spam e-mails per day, but throwing out even 13 non-spam e-mails would be a potential disaster.
<added>Only 200 HTML e-mails out of 4000 seems like an unusually low percentage... I've never studied mine, but I'd guess I'm well over 25%. Of course, most I delete without actually opening...</added>
on't /dev/null html mail, /dev/null html mail with <img in the body. Mom's formatted text'll get through, but the real html cr*p, images 'n all won't.
Oooh, good idea!
Anyone care to help with the procmail recipe? - I can do the search for Content-Type: text/html but how might I incorporate an <img> search in the body to that?
Cheers
Nick
So, caveat emptor:
:0 B
* \<img
{
LOG="img"
:0
/send/to/wherever
}
What I hate to recieve is those HTML spam using images instead of text not to trip in my filters...
Hello world!?! I dont need viagra (yet)!
<!--fixed another typo of mine, now I am going to get spammed with English courses ;-)-->
[edited by: Macguru at 6:57 pm (utc) on Sep. 29, 2003]
I am so tired of deleting spam I usually go real quick while just looking at the subject line. That is how I am throwing away real mail.
In one year I have come full circle in my hate of e-mail spam. If I ever come face-to-face with a e-mail spammer again it is not going to be pretty.
I too, do not need any prescription services (for the record).
However, I've just been playing with Bogofilter, and with a little bit of training it's already so good that I might consider sending anything with "X-Bogosity: Yes" to /dev/null.
(what do you call the mom of the man you live in sin with? I never quite knew...)
I think I must get a higher proportion of legit mails than anyone else, because i get a lot of HTML with images from people I really want to hear from. Including the long-lost college buddy who finds a picture of me on her hard drive and emails me out of the blue with it wanting to get back in touch...
I don't get much spam, though, so I'm really not qualified to offer views. (I've got totally clean addresses... except I just started getting weird African con artist spams recently and don't know how. Growl.)
>filled out some papers to share benefits
That's how I see it, too. I said as much to my mom and she was scandalized at how cavalier or mercenary I was about it. So I guess the key is not to put it that way.
I guess my boyfriend doesn't feel the same way, though, so I don't think we'll be filling out those papers anytime soon. I guess it's just as well-- if he took it more seriously than me, it would probably not be a good start. Anyhow I don't even dare bring up the topic for fear of sounding like the stereotypical woman who just wants a wedding.
I like "mother-out-law" better. It sounds cool. I might start using it and see if i can get it to catch on.
I think I must get a higher proportion of legit mails than anyone else...I don't get much spam
I use my ISP's filter which can be set pretty strict. I've set it up so anyone not in my address book has to fill out a short form sent to them requesting permission for mail delivery. It's a pain on their part, but the less than 1% who do so and are legit get added so they don't have to do it next time. The remaining 99% all get trashed without review.
I am amazed that you guys dont use an ISP that filters robot generated traffic.
ispwest.com for instance can be had for under ten dollars a month. With them my spam dropped from several hundred a month to one or two.
They are not robot generated.
When I get one I forward it to abuse@ispwest.com and they add it to their "no no" list!
Lee Clark
I think I must get a higher proportion of legit mails than anyone else ... I've got totally clean addresses.
Me too. The problem I had training Bogofilter was that I had so much more legit mail than spam that there weren't enough examples of "bad" messages. The accounts I have advertised in WHOIS records, of course, generate much more spam than legit mail, but my personal boxes don't. Even the one I've had for six years and haven't been very careful about spreading around doesn't get much spam. I like to think that my habbit of reading headers and complaining to ISPs helps, though more and more of it seems to come from Asia, where I can't tell if they don't care or just can't understand me.
anyone not in my address book has to fill out a short form
I'm sure challenge-response works, but my problem isn't *nearly* bad enough to make me want to hassle my friends, family, aquaintances, and business contacts witht that. Hopefully it never will be.
Anyhow I don't even dare bring up the topic for fear of sounding like the stereotypical woman who just wants a wedding.
I like "mother-out-law" better. It sounds cool. I might start using it and see if i can get it to catch on.
I'm sure challenge-response works, but my problem isn't *nearly* bad enough to make me want to hassle my friends, family, aquaintances, and business contacts witht that.
I'm dubious about the challenge/response system for anything other than personal users. I get far too many auto-generated e-mails that I need to see ...
This is what I am using
1) OutLook XP (2003 is suppose to be having inbuild spam filter.... :) )
2) Spam Inspector
3) Huge block list in Rule Wizard.
This is the result.
Only 1 email of every 500 spams makes it to the inbox.
Lol.. I guess. it would be actually a good idea to make a small web site and start sharing the rule wizard list.
NS
Fighting spam take a multifaceted approach-- like fighting juvenile delinquency, terrorism, all the other troubles of the world. Source filtering and content filtering, server-side rejects from open relays and client-side plugins, possible legal challenges and so on have to be used in combination to control it.
93.9% actually.
Best way to stop spam is to use a shared database of known offenders coupled with some intelligent rules. Kill it all you can't....kill 99% of it you can.
And afterall life would be boring without the occasional spam message getting though!