surreal spam from the third mind (?)
I just got this e-mail spam, which reads like a William Burroughs cut-up.:
Subject: I laughed so hard at the balding jagoff driving I thought he was going to follow me home and.One ticket to Interzone, please. The radioman is on, and the radioman is speaking.
From: Guzman L. Theresa
thoughtfully
"We ask that the media respect her privacy as well as those of her family and friends at this time," Rudolph was quoted as saying.
Sugarland is bland garbage, Rascal Flatts does a good Take That!
It's like a meditative state. but mostly because I didn't have anything
interesting to say. "I'm a good father," Federline has said.

Please don't drink and post.
A public service message from Readers Against Drunk Bloggers.
Posted by: LinksMonkey Brian | February 21, 2007 at 11:43 AM
I spend hours each day analyzing spam messages for my company. Each day we get upwards of 50,000 messages that make it to my spam filter. Of those 50,000, we actually only accept about 4,000 on average. Of those 4,000 perhaps 20% of those are still spam. It never ceases to amaze me at the subject lines and message content these spammers come up with. I just take their spam subjects and create new anti-spam rules in my spam filter. I have really good logging, but the down side is I actually have to spend my time reading through all this crap. I must say that even at the rates we are receiving SPAM, our filter is doing well. I'm using a windows (yeah I know sorry), version of SpamAssassin compiled by a german company. It works great and we don't have much spam to deal with that makes it through. Our rates of false positives are also very low. So if anyone has SPAM questions, I'm the guy to ask! Chances are, I've seen your SPAM! :-)
Posted by: Joe Church | February 21, 2007 at 12:05 PM
While the word soup SPAM has been interesting, probably some of the most effective spam I've seen lately are the ones that seem to scour news headlines, etc., to come up with complete sentences to make up the body of the text. I can't think of a good way to filter that stuff out, since A) it is always changing, and B) can often contain stuff I'd normally be talking about with people.
Turning images off (since that's where the SPAM's true content usually lays in wait) is usually good for keeping the spammers from getting thier messages across, but it doesn't prevent me from having 50 random e-mails I have to sort through and delete on any given day.
Posted by: Anonymouse | February 21, 2007 at 12:21 PM
and the radioman said
women were a curse...
m doughty could write spam i'd read...
Posted by: rasa | February 21, 2007 at 12:22 PM
I got an interesting one last week.
Message title: WonderCum is an all natural male enhancement
shortcake, waffles, berries and cream
Now that you notice it
have just moved past
Writhing their stunted limbs,
the foul pole relaxes. She's raged all afternoon
giddy as good kids playing hookey. Now,
When I am heard, and what I say is solely
XIII. The Route to the North
Or by the loud hand of painting, always puts.
Beneath the snowflakes I notice fades
The line between the outside and this room
The ordinary, wide scene which begins
Partly stone, partly the absence of stone,
And Me Chose's square of world, even as they
Are gliding toward me on the ice into
Only a whiter absence to my mind,
Everywhere, utterly.
Trampled snow is the only rose.
End of the comedy.
So you can watch me watch uplifted snow
...and I liked some of those lines so much [not the message title, I should add] that I tracked down the page from which they were untimely ripp'd:
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/News/winterpoems.html
So spam can be educational!
Posted by: Tom | February 21, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Strangely, I recognize that subject line. It's a line from yesterday's post on one of my favorite blogs, A Perfectly Cromulent Blog: http://www.whiterose.org/pete/blog/archives/010244.html
Posted by: Dan | February 21, 2007 at 01:00 PM
I applaud the use of the word 'jagoff'. I haven't heard that since I left Pittsburgh 20 years ago. Bravo!
Posted by: Wissa | February 21, 2007 at 01:16 PM
Nova Express rulezz
Posted by: Erwin Blonk | February 21, 2007 at 01:27 PM
All I ever get is SPAM telling me they can make my Dick bigger. Like I don't have enough problems without having a big dick.
Spamcop does a good job for me.
___________________________
Number of Operations Iraq Freedom and Enduring Freedom casualties
as confirmed by U.S. Central Command: 3467
___________________________
Posted by: tjp | February 21, 2007 at 02:07 PM
Filtering images with the inline GIF or JPG attachments can be dangerous, especially for companies, as some valid senders have GIF or JPG signature lines that might include a business logo. These will also get tagged/deleted depending on your settings. I recommend using many spam settings each with a low score, so that multiple checks will match a real spam message and delete based on content. Also doing SURBL and DNSBL checks is good. There are so many ways to filter spam, it really is a mixture of personal preference for the spam product and lots of time for training and tweaking and adjusting for the types of SPAM you receive. SpamAssassin is great, and its written in perl, so you can use Perl RegEx which is great, cause you can write one spam rule that might filter the subject line or message body of hundreds of obvious spam words and even pick it up if someone tries to obfuscate the spelling of a word.
Posted by: Joe Church | February 21, 2007 at 02:25 PM
Wow, small world. I was about to marvel at how the subject line came from my friend's blog, but I see Tom beat me to it. I wonder how that happened.
Posted by: DrAngelo | February 21, 2007 at 02:36 PM
Oops - I meant Dan, not Tom.
Posted by: DrAngelo | February 21, 2007 at 02:36 PM
...and the radioman laughs, because the radioman fucks a model, too.
Posted by: iamhoff | February 21, 2007 at 03:01 PM
I've been tweaking the SpamAssassin rules on my IMAP account and right now I have it working pretty well with few false positives.
GMail's spam filters, on the other hand, seem to be getting less effective and/or spammers are getting better at bypassing their filters.
Posted by: Mike Cohen | February 21, 2007 at 03:16 PM
Uh, yeah. That's from my blog. I don't know what to tell you, except I'm pretty sure I had nothing to do with that e-mail.
Though I have been drinking a lot of late.
Posted by: Pete | February 21, 2007 at 06:36 PM
I'm glad to say that our company doesn't get much spam (with a couple exceptions...that'll teach THEM to use work email for personal use!). But it seems the most common one(s) we get include sales for "via(insert random characters here)gra" and "cia(more jibberish)lis", and end with a 100-character snippet from some Harry Potter book.
WTF!?
I guess the book quote is to help it get through the spam filters, as our mail server (contracted out) uses SpamAssassin, which uses a 'Bayesian' probability feature.
Posted by: xanadian | February 22, 2007 at 05:50 AM
Opening spam is bad, man. Especially the food kind.
Posted by: Mewfymewf | February 22, 2007 at 05:33 PM