Re: [Asrg] Standardization of RFC headers for email contentanalysis?

Kee Hinckley <nazgul@somewhere.com> Wed, 05 March 2003 02:49 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA19755 for <asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 21:49:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h252xtD04237 for asrg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 21:59:55 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h252xt504234 for <asrg-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 21:59:55 -0500
Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA19741; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 21:48:39 -0500 (EST)
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h252x0504203; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 21:59:00 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h252wf504185 for <asrg@optimus.ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 21:58:41 -0500
Received: from somewhere.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA19716 for <asrg@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Mar 2003 21:47:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from [192.168.1.104] (account nazgul HELO [192.168.1.104]) by somewhere.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.7) with ESMTP-TLS id 2080053 for asrg@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Mar 2003 21:49:29 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: nazgul@somewhere.com@puremessaging.com
Message-Id: <p06000910ba8b14b120d5@[192.168.1.104]>
To: asrg@ietf.org
From: Kee Hinckley <nazgul@somewhere.com>
Subject: Re: [Asrg] Standardization of RFC headers for email contentanalysis?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Sender: asrg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: asrg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: asrg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/asrg/>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 21:49:21 -0500

Keith Moore writes:
>that and for the purpose of this discussion it's probably sufficient if we
>classify a few kinds of things that analysis tools look for (e.g. originator
>characteristics, signal path, gross message characteristics, specific
>items in the content) and some of the kinds of filtering that are done based
>on the analysis (e.g. discard, bounce, alter, delay, require confirmation)

General characteristics would be nice.  However I know some companies 
will balk at providing too much detail about what characteristics 
they examine.  However it would be useful to have some list of 
attributes.  Our experience with most spam repositories has been that 
they assume content-filtering, and have so emasculated the headers 
that non-content-filtering solutions can't use them at all.
-- 
Kee Hinckley
http://www.puremessaging.com/        Junk-Free Email Filtering
http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/   Writings on Technology and Society

I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg