Mailing List Archive: Habeas worthless?

Habeas worthless?

Mar 12, 2004, 7:40 AM

Post #1 of 3 (378 views)

I think I'm going to start applying positive scores to habeas. While I think
the underlying idea is good, I'll have to agree with the others. I have
NEVER received and personal mail with Habaes headers.

---------- snip ------------
From fg.melynda@telesp.net.br Fri Mar 12 00:46:52 2004
Return-Path: <fg.melynda@telesp.net.br>
Received: from smtp.exodus.net (smtp.exodus.net [66.35.230.236])
by mail.ftl.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i2C8kmec024985
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO)
for <postmaster@faster-than-light.com>; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:46:49
-0800
Received: from d149-67-234-0.clv.wideopenwest.com
(d149-67-234-0.clv.wideopenwest.com [67.149.0.234])
by smtp.exodus.net (8.12.8/8.12.8) with SMTP id i2CAVjw3007812
for <postmaster@faster-than-light.com>; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 02:31:46
-0800
Received: from 108.72.88.34 by 67.149.0.234; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:50:34 -0600
Message-ID: <KUXTJCRYCRZVMEXDNOJULEFW@wanadoo.fr>
X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring
X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated
X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm)
X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this
X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas
X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant
X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this
X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to <http://www.habeas.com/report/>.
From: "sherlyn pelton" <uopelton@wanadoo.fr>
Reply-To: "sherlyn pelton" <peltonv@wanadoo.fr>
To: postmaster@faster-than-light.com
Subject: Fwd: All Drugs Stocked. V|cod|^n * V1@gRa < Val.i.um $ Xan|a|x
:P:ntermin ` |S|oma vaikyrzwmyqr
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:51:34 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="--49426989359191643987"
X-Mailer: KMail/1.5.3
X-IP: 152.190.68.68
X-Priority: 5
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.168 required=5
version=SpamAssassin 2.63
tests=BAYES_50,HABEAS_SWE,HTML_MIME_NO_HTML_TAG,J_CHICKENPOX_51,LOCAL_DRUGS_
ANXIETY,LOCAL_DRUGS_ANXIETY_MALEDYS,LOCAL_DRUGS_DEPRESSION,LOCAL_DRUGS_DEPRE
SSION_MALEDYS,LOCAL_DRUGS_MALEDYSFUNCTION,LOCAL_DRUGS_MALEDYSFUNCTION_OBFU,L
OCAL_DRUGS_MANYKINDS,LOCAL_DRUGS_MUSCLE,LOCAL_DRUGS_SLEEP,MIME_HTML_NO_CHARS
ET,MIME_HTML_ONLY,TW_YQ,TW_ZW
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.40
Status: RO
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 44350

----49426989359191643987
Content-Type: text/html;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit

We take the risk out of finding a safe place to make your online medical
decisions. Your health, safety, and shopping experience are very important
to us.

Order these pills: , .Soma. < Pn.t.ermin . v1@grA ? Valiu.m. $ xana:x: =
At.|v@n

Plus: Ad|p.&x, I`0nam|n, M3ri:dia, X3ni.ca|, Amb.i3n, S0n'aTa, Fl3xe.ril,
Ce|:3brex, Fi0.ric3t, Tram@do'|, U, L3v|t.ra, Pr'0p3cia, Acy'c|0vir,
P:r0z@c, P@x.il, Bus`p@r

No complicated formalities of any kind.

No waiting rooms. Here. http://www.moderndrugstore.biz.

Lashed to the helm, all stiff and stark,
He cut a rope from a broken spar,
It murmurs and whispers still:
Whose songs gushed from his heart,

----49426989359191643987--
--------- snip -----------

Re: Habeas worthless? [ In reply to ]

kevin.peuhkurinen at hepcoe

Mar 12, 2004, 7:51 AM

Post #2 of 3 (378 views)

Permalink

I have to agree with the person who said not to assign a positive score
to Habeas. Just score it 0. That's what I have done. It looks like
spammers who use Habeas are sloppy since they figure the Habeas mark
will get them through. If you score it 0, the rest of the rules will
take care of catching the spam and you don't penalize the albiet few
people who use Habeas legitimately.

Mike Smith wrote:

>I think I'm going to start applying positive scores to habeas. While I think
>the underlying idea is good, I'll have to agree with the others. I have
>NEVER received and personal mail with Habaes headers.
>
>---------- snip ------------
>>>From fg.melynda@telesp.net.br Fri Mar 12 00:46:52 2004
>Return-Path: <fg.melynda@telesp.net.br>
>Received: from smtp.exodus.net (smtp.exodus.net [66.35.230.236])
> by mail.ftl.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i2C8kmec024985
> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO)
> for <postmaster@faster-than-light.com>; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 00:46:49
>-0800
>Received: from d149-67-234-0.clv.wideopenwest.com
>(d149-67-234-0.clv.wideopenwest.com [67.149.0.234])
> by smtp.exodus.net (8.12.8/8.12.8) with SMTP id i2CAVjw3007812
> for <postmaster@faster-than-light.com>; Fri, 12 Mar 2004 02:31:46
>-0800
>Received: from 108.72.88.34 by 67.149.0.234; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 14:50:34 -0600
>Message-ID: <KUXTJCRYCRZVMEXDNOJULEFW@wanadoo.fr>
>X-Habeas-SWE-1: winter into spring
>X-Habeas-SWE-2: brightly anticipated
>X-Habeas-SWE-3: like Habeas SWE (tm)
>X-Habeas-SWE-4: Copyright 2002 Habeas (tm)
>X-Habeas-SWE-5: Sender Warranted Email (SWE) (tm). The sender of this
>X-Habeas-SWE-6: email in exchange for a license for this Habeas
>X-Habeas-SWE-7: warrant mark warrants that this is a Habeas Compliant
>X-Habeas-SWE-8: Message (HCM) and not spam. Please report use of this
>X-Habeas-SWE-9: mark in spam to <http://www.habeas.com/report/>.
>From: "sherlyn pelton" <uopelton@wanadoo.fr>
>Reply-To: "sherlyn pelton" <peltonv@wanadoo.fr>
>To: postmaster@faster-than-light.com
>Subject: Fwd: All Drugs Stocked. V|cod|^n * V1@gRa < Val.i.um $ Xan|a|x
>:P:ntermin ` |S|oma vaikyrzwmyqr
>Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:51:34 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
> boundary="--49426989359191643987"
>X-Mailer: KMail/1.5.3
>X-IP: 152.190.68.68
>X-Priority: 5
>X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.168 required=5
> version=SpamAssassin 2.63
>tests=BAYES_50,HABEAS_SWE,HTML_MIME_NO_HTML_TAG,J_CHICKENPOX_51,LOCAL_DRUGS_
>ANXIETY,LOCAL_DRUGS_ANXIETY_MALEDYS,LOCAL_DRUGS_DEPRESSION,LOCAL_DRUGS_DEPRE
>SSION_MALEDYS,LOCAL_DRUGS_MALEDYSFUNCTION,LOCAL_DRUGS_MALEDYSFUNCTION_OBFU,L
>OCAL_DRUGS_MANYKINDS,LOCAL_DRUGS_MUSCLE,LOCAL_DRUGS_SLEEP,MIME_HTML_NO_CHARS
>ET,MIME_HTML_ONLY,TW_YQ,TW_ZW
>X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.40
>Status: RO
>X-Status:
>X-Keywords:
>X-UID: 44350
>
>----49426989359191643987
>Content-Type: text/html;
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
>
>
>We take the risk out of finding a safe place to make your online medical
>decisions. Your health, safety, and shopping experience are very important
>to us.
>
>Order these pills: , .Soma. < Pn.t.ermin . v1@grA ? Valiu.m. $ xana:x: =
>At.|v@n
>
>Plus: Ad|p.&x, I`0nam|n, M3ri:dia, X3ni.ca|, Amb.i3n, S0n'aTa, Fl3xe.ril,
>Ce|:3brex, Fi0.ric3t, Tram@do'|, U, L3v|t.ra, Pr'0p3cia, Acy'c|0vir,
>P:r0z@c, P@x.il, Bus`p@r
>
>No complicated formalities of any kind.
>
>No waiting rooms. Here. http://www.moderndrugstore.biz.
>
>Lashed to the helm, all stiff and stark,
>He cut a rope from a broken spar,
>It murmurs and whispers still:
>Whose songs gushed from his heart,
>
>
>----49426989359191643987--
>--------- snip -----------
>
>
>
>

Re: Habeas worthless? [ In reply to ]

dbfunk at engineering

Mar 12, 2004, 9:16 PM

Post #3 of 3 (377 views)

Permalink

On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, Mike Smith wrote:

> I think I'm going to start applying positive scores to habeas. While I think
> the underlying idea is good, I'll have to agree with the others. I have
> NEVER received and personal mail with Habaes headers.

OK, I did a quick survey of a couple hundred inboxes on our mail server
and scanned 30,000 messages, looking for Habeas usage.

Results: (Excluding this list ;)

Spam: 5
Personal: 2
Business: 41

The telling part was the business usage. It was mostly from online
survey companys (BizRate & greenfieldonline) who want to make sure
that their messages get to their subscribers and which send messages
that tend to look "spammy".
The other commercial usage was by groups such as ZDNet and BriansBuzz.

So from this site, Habeas looks like it's doing what it's purported
to do, get "spammy" appearing messages delivered to people who
want them.

FYI, I've adjusted the HABEAS_SWE score to a -3 (so that it would
do what it's supposed to but not swamp out the spam scores for
the scumbags ;)

Dave

--
Dave Funk University of Iowa
<dbfunk (at) engineering.uiowa.edu> College of Engineering
319/335-5751 FAX: 319/384-0549 1256 Seamans Center
Sys_admin/Postmaster/cell_admin Iowa City, IA 52242-1527
#include <std_disclaimer.h>
Better is not better, 'standard' is better. B{