Re: Empty message apparently not tokenized
tBB <tbb-MQwlIdhhGh0tX/[email protected]> Tue, 14 Feb 2006 22:18:37 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.spam.spamprobe.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> Thanks for the hint, > but I don't think this would be a good way > to handle the problem, even if it works. Well, it forces SpamProbe to process the headers in this case but nevertheless I misunderstood the issue. I was under the impression you were suggesting that there are no useful tokens at all in those empty mails including the headers SP normally processes. Even if it turned to out to be a bug I'd like to comment on it: Some weeks ago I wrote a mail to Brian about this issue, that mails with empty bodys are not caught by SP but to my shame I didn't bother to check if SP tokenized those mails at all :( Besides that I wrote a filter for my server similar to the one Brian just suggested, I had also enabled the mentioned "-H all" option and since then SP correctly classified all of those mails so I assumed it was due to the reason mentioned above (no useful tokens), therefore the hint. > There is no reason to think it would be smart > to tokenize all of the fields in _every_ header, > which is what would be required to avoid > having all messages with no body become false negatives, > assuming that that even does the job. > Presumably Brian Burton avoided tokenizing some header fields > for good reason. I wouldn't be too sure that mails with empty bodys are caught if this bug is fixed because many of them originate from zombies so the tokens SP pulls out might be not that useful either. See the related discussion on this list a while ago. As I mentioned above, I have the "-H all" option enabled since a few weeks and the processing of all headers noticeably increased the overall accuracy of SpamProbe and that *not* only for those mails with empty bodys (of which several hundred reach my server each day). That suggests that there are rather useful tokens in the headers which are not processed by default. Besides, there are quite a few Bayesian classifiers out which do process all headers by default so I wouldn't go that far to say it is not smart per se. Nico -- +-------------------------------------------+ - Mailto: tbb-MQwlIdhhGh0tX/[email protected] - No pure HTML mails please +-------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642