'Empty Spam' Feasts on In-Boxes

[Tom Anderson]

Tony L. Svanstrom wrote:
>  <URL: http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB115448102123224125-lMyQjAxMDE2NTA0MjQwODIxWj.html >

I agree with the "others" in this article who argue that "hashbusting
text" is a weak attempt at breaking filters if in fact that is the
purpose.  Causing more and more words to look spammy does not help
spammers get their emails registered as ham.  All it does is cause
filters to become more of a positive security model than negative (ie.
the ham tokens are the key to filtering instead of the spam tokens).
I'm glad to see the statistic that spam is down 17% from 2003 to 2005,
and that is a testiment to the fact that spammers are losing the battle.
  I've seen no convincing Bayesian-killer technique yet.

Tom