Slashdot Mirror

I read the patent and WebSeeker from Blue Squirrel appears to me to be prior art.

It was developed in 1994 and released in 1995. It is a meta search tool that pre-dates the patent and pre-dates Google. It is web and browser based. It has a toolbar that allows you to enter a search term. The pages are modified to highlight the search terms in the browser. While it was never patented, it is prior and appears to be the same thing as the patent claims.

It was developed at a time when every search engine such as Lycos, HotBot, AltaVista, etc. had a portion of the web indexed. WebSeeker searched them all simultaneously, and combined the results into a single list while removing duplicates. The "Filter Find" feature of WebSeeker would downloaded every page, re-index, and display the pages with your keyword highlighted in an embedded IE browser instance.

WebSeeker still exists, still sells, but does not have the market that it once did. Ironically, the dominance of Google meant that searching using multiple search engines wasn't needed anymore. It still works great to keep on top of a specific narrow search term because it remembers what you've seen and monitors for new pages. Still useful for research or competitive analysis in a narrow field.

I was one of the original developers on the project.

I read the patent and WebSeeker from Blue Squirrel appears to me to be prior art.

It was developed in 1994 and released in 1995. It is a meta search tool that pre-dates the patent and pre-dates Google. It is web and browser based. It has a toolbar that allows you to enter a search term. The pages are modified to highlight the search terms in the browser. While it was never patented, it is prior and appears to be the same thing as the patent claims.

It was developed at a time when every search engine such as Lycos, HotBot, AltaVista, etc. had a portion of the web indexed. WebSeeker searched them all simultaneously, and combined the results into a single list while removing duplicates. The "Filter Find" feature of WebSeeker would downloaded every page, re-index, and display the pages with your keyword highlighted in an embedded IE browser instance.

WebSeeker still exists, still sells, but does not have the market that it once did. Ironically, the dominance of Google meant that searching using multiple search engines wasn't needed anymore. It still works great to keep on top of a specific narrow search term because it remembers what you've seen and monitors for new pages. Still useful for research or competitive analysis in a narrow field.

I was one of the original developers on the project.

Where is ClickBook in the list?

Another option for DIY books is ClickBook from Blue Squirrel.

Print from any Windows or Macintosh app. ClickBook intercepts the print job and does the page imposition to make a book. It handles double-sided, even for simplex printers. Fold the pages to make a book, or cut the pages and bind. Also formats as a book while turning the output into a PDF file for Kinkos.

Disclosure: I'm biased because I work for the company, but it really is a great program.

ClickBook for Macintosh OS X

I use Spam Sleuth Enterprise and it uses the IP blacklists as one of many determinations.

The e-mail servera that simply rely on the RBL for a go/no-go answer are asking for trouble.

The spammers, by necessity must disguise the text to elude simple Outlook filters. By doing this, they have introduced more accurate, yet harder to detect, indicators that the message is spam.

By understanding the tricks used by spammer, and using "real intelligence" to detect the tricks, it becomes possible to accurately detect spam without relying on training and other burdensome processes.

Blue Squirrel's anti-spam products detect spam using the text as well as detecting the tricks used to disguise the text.

Almost all of the methods for detecting spam are included.

• Whitelist (by e-mail)
• Blacklist (by e-mail)
• Blacklist - RBL (by IP)
• Dictionary - detects tricks used to throw off Bayesian analyzers
• Bayesian Analyzer - Trainable
• Challenge/Response for false positives
• EMail Stamps - Give spammers the option to pay
• Bouncer - Trick spammers into taking you off their list
• Good Words - Make sure you get messages you are interested in
• Anti-Virus Detection and removal
• Script removal
• Dangerous attachment removal
• Detection and removal of Web Bugs
• HTML "loudness" detection
• SPF / MS Caller ID
• Reply possible detection

There is an SDK available upon request for plug-in analysis.

Nothing is hidden. Every message gets a report. A web interface lets users see the quarantined messages and a detailed report on why it was not allowed through.

It learns the valid users. Or, the program links into LDAP or Active Directory, or RADIUS (for ISPs), or allows the import of users and automatic generation of passwords.

It may be the most complete anti-spam system developed to date. It does not rely on one technique or method, but rather combines them all, and then allows for new techniques.

In the US paper sizes, the aspect ratio changes and the photos appear slightly squeezed. It is not noticable with text, but the effect is there.

With the metric paper sizes (A4), the aspect ratio is perfect and the pages render flawlessly.

A malfunctioning IP blacklist will give a message more points, but only a fraction necessary to send the message to dev/null

Thought of in another way is that the decision of whether the message is spam or not is distributed among lots of "decision makers" The weight of those decision makers is determined by the number of points they are allowed to assign to a given message.

We also use Spam Sleuth Enterprise to protect our server from SoBig.F. We just look for the text "X-MailScanner: Found to be clean" and set it to enough points to delete the message. It takes the load off of our internal servers.

Hope this helps somebody.

A malfunctioning IP blacklist will give a message more points, but only a fraction necessary to send the message to dev/null

Thought of in another way is that the decision of whether the message is spam or not is distributed among lots of "decision makers" The weight of those decision makers is determined by the number of points they are allowed to assign to a given message.

We also use Spam Sleuth Enterprise to protect our server from SoBig.F. We just look for the text "X-MailScanner: Found to be clean" and set it to enough points to delete the message. It takes the load off of our internal servers.

Hope this helps somebody.

Spam Sleuth also does all the other things like Whitelists, Blacklists, RBL, Challenge-Response (Turing), etc. It combines the results to determine "spaminess" and takes action.

Another advantage of Spam Sleuth is that it begins working without Bayesian, until it can build up a set of messages it can use for training. It also lets you correct any mistakes before training so you don't get a bad statistical data set.

It is naive (no pun intended) to think that Bayesian will be able to perform better than a multi-view solution.

Spam Sleuth also does all the other things like Whitelists, Blacklists, RBL, Challenge-Response (Turing), etc. It combines the results to determine "spaminess" and takes action.

Another advantage of Spam Sleuth is that it begins working without Bayesian, until it can build up a set of messages it can use for training. It also lets you correct any mistakes before training so you don't get a bad statistical data set.

It is naive (no pun intended) to think that Bayesian will be able to perform better than a multi-view solution.

You might take a look at Spam Sleuth Enterprise I suspect it has what you want, since it has trainable Bayesian (individual to each user), works with any e-mail server, has a web client interface, and a lot more that you may or may not be interested in.

I've found it easy to use and it automatically configured and read in my contacts from Eudora. I hate Outlook, but I think it's also supported.

Any e-mail I get, I can block with some type of rule. I even wrote a regular expression to detect comments inside words (a new trick of theirs).

The Spam Sleuth program from Blue Squirrel has added Challenge-Response. They call it the Turing Test. The same program also has other methods built-in like Bayesian, EMail Stamps, Simulated NDR (Bounce), Whitelists (Friends), RBLs, executable attachment detection and removal, regular expressions, etc.

It appears their Enterprise version works with any e-mail server, but the POP3 version is Windows only :(

The laws are necessary because it forces the spammers to modify their messages in such a way that they (the spammers) won't get caught.

Then, programs like Spam Sleuth can easily detect the deception and remove the messages.

Pass the laws, and use technology. The solutions exist already. Receiving spam is a nuisance (bandwidth). Seeing spam is a choice.

There will not be a "new" SMTP because the existing one is too well established.

There have been many wonderful suggestions posted as previous stories and also as responses to previous stories. Many, perhaps most, of the great solutions require a critcal mass of people to adopt a technical solution at the server. None of those will happen.

The best solution will be individuals or companies adopting products like Spam Sleuth or Spam Sleuth Enterprise which have a variety of detection methods including Bayesian (statistical analysis), EMail Stamps (shift cost to sender), Bouncing (trick the spammers), as well as the usual Whitelists, IP Blacklists, e-mail address Blacklists, etc.

Just like computer viruses, those people who use the technical solutions will be immune, and those that don't will continue to suffer. The tools exist. Slogging through spam each day is a choice.

There will not be a "new" SMTP because the existing one is too well established.

There have been many wonderful suggestions posted as previous stories and also as responses to previous stories. Many, perhaps most, of the great solutions require a critcal mass of people to adopt a technical solution at the server. None of those will happen.

The best solution will be individuals or companies adopting products like Spam Sleuth or Spam Sleuth Enterprise which have a variety of detection methods including Bayesian (statistical analysis), EMail Stamps (shift cost to sender), Bouncing (trick the spammers), as well as the usual Whitelists, IP Blacklists, e-mail address Blacklists, etc.

Just like computer viruses, those people who use the technical solutions will be immune, and those that don't will continue to suffer. The tools exist. Slogging through spam each day is a choice.

I know there aren't a lot of Bill Gate's fans hanging out here, but what about The Road Ahead (copyright 1996) as prior art. I'm pretty sure the concept of paying per e-mail was mentioned in the book.

Maybe the EMail Stamp concept could be added to Spam Sleuth so it would work with all e-mail accounts, all clients, and all servers.

On Linux, these solutions either exist, or are being built, and on Windows there is Spam Sleuth for individuals with ISP accounts, or an Enterprise version for companies, ISPs and schools.

The proposed solutions are not mutually exclusive. Most proponents of Bayesian analysis recommend also using a white list. Add RBLs, Profanity Filter, Bad Word Filter, Valid Sender tests, etc. and it really works great. Keep the spam for a "short time" to train the Bayesian Analyzer, and just-in-case an important message slips through.

These are not solutions where everyone has to comply, or it doesn't work. These tools will stop the spam immediately for those who use them. They instantly have an effect, although probably minor, on the spammers.

If we have a way to approach 100% adoption and install software on everybody's server, lets install Spam Sleuth Enterprise or another similar tool and solve the problem completely.

We can't even get administrators to patch their systems. What are the odds on getting this thing widely used?