Observed trends in spam construction techniques: A case study of spam evolution

3rd Conference on Email and Anti-Spam - Proceedings, CEAS 2006

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages

  Pu, Calton ^a   Webb, Steve ^a  

^a Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COLLABORATIVE FILTERING; ELECTRONIC MAIL; INTERNET; TESTING;

CO-EXISTENCE; CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE; ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE; EVOLUTIONARY TREND; POPULATION STUDIES; SPAM MESSAGES;

POPULATION DYNAMICS;

EID: 84904808498     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (22)

1. I. Androutsopoulos, G. Paliouras, and E. Michelakis. Learning to filter unsolicited commercial e-mail. Technical Report 2004/2, National Center for Scientific Research "Demokritos", 2004.
2. T. Berners-Lee, L. Masinter, and M. McCahill. RFC 1738 - uniform resource locators (url). http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1738.html, 1994.
3. Brightmail. Spam percentages and spam categories. http://www.nospam-pl. net/pub/brightmail.com/spamstats-Dec2003.html, 2003.
4. Brightmail. Spam percentages and spam categories. http://www.nospam-pl. net/pub/brightmail.com/spamstats-March2004.html, 2004.
5. J. Chan. Surbl - spam uri realtime blocklists. http://www.surbl.org/, 2006.
6. W. W. Cohen. Learning rules that classify e-mail. In Proceedings of the AAA! Spring Symposium on Machine Learning and Information Access, pages 18-25, 1996.
7. N. Dalvi et al. Adversarial classification. In Proceedings of the 10th Int'l Conf. on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD '04), pages 99-108, 2004.
8. T. Fawcett. "In vivo" spam filtering: a challenge problem for KDD. SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 5(2):140-148, 2003.
9. N. Freed and N. Borenstein. RFC 2045 - multipurpose internet mail extensions (mime) part one. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2045.txt, 1996.
10. P. Graham. A plan for spam. http ://www.paulgraham.com/spam.html, 2002.
11. G. Hulten et al. Trends in spam products and methods. In Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Email and Anti-Spam (CEAS '04), 2004.
12. JLCom Publishing Co. Senate unanimously approves creation of do-not-spam list. http://www.lawpublish.com/spam.html, 2003.
13. D. Lowd and C. Meek. Good word attacks on statistical spam filters. In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Email and Anti-Spam (CEAS '05), 2005.
14. G. Ollmann. The phishing guide: Understanding & preventing phishing attacks, http://www.ngssoftware.com/papers/NISR-WP-Phishing.pdf, 2004.
15. PCWorld.com. California anti-spam law. http://www.pcworld.com/downloads/ file.description/0,fid,23113,tfg,tfg,0%,0.asp, 2006.
16. V. V. Prakash. Vipul's razor. http ://razor.sourceforge.net/, 2006.
17. C. Pu et al. A case study of learning filters in the spam arms race: Resistance to camouflage attacks. 2006. submitted to Journal of Machine Learning Research.
18. M. Sahami, S. Dumais, D. Heckerman, and E. Horvitz. A bayesian approach to filtering junk e-mail. In Proceedings of the A A Al Workshop on Learning for Text Categorization, pages 55-62, 1998.
19. Sophos. Sophos identifies the most prevalent spam categories of 2005. http://www.sophos.com/pressoffice/news/articles/ 2005/08/pr-us-20050803t%, opfive-cats.html, 2005.
20. SpamAssassin Development Team. The apache spamassassin project. http: //spamassassin.apache.org/, 2005.
21. S. Webb, S. Chitti, and C. Pu. An experimental evaluation of spam filter performance and robustness against attack. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Collaborative Computing (CollaborateCom '05), 2005.
22. L. Zhang, J. Zhu, and T. Yao. An evaluation of statistical spam filtering techniques. ACM Transactions on Asian Language Information Processing, 3(4):243-269, 2004.