US20050108340A1 - Method and apparatus for filtering email spam based on similarity measures - Google Patents
Method and apparatus for filtering email spam based on similarity measures Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20050108340A1 US20050108340A1 US10/846,723 US84672304A US2005108340A1 US 20050108340 A1 US20050108340 A1 US 20050108340A1 US 84672304 A US84672304 A US 84672304A US 2005108340 A1 US2005108340 A1 US 2005108340A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- spam
- message
- data
- data characterizing
- email message
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L51/00—User-to-user messaging in packet-switching networks, transmitted according to store-and-forward or real-time protocols, e.g. e-mail
- H04L51/21—Monitoring or handling of messages
- H04L51/212—Monitoring or handling of messages using filtering or selective blocking
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
- H04L51/00—User-to-user messaging in packet-switching networks, transmitted according to store-and-forward or real-time protocols, e.g. e-mail
- H04L51/06—Message adaptation to terminal or network requirements
- H04L51/063—Content adaptation, e.g. replacement of unsuitable content
Definitions
- the present invention relates to filtering electronic mail (email); more particularly, the present invention relates to filtering email spam based on similarity measures.
- the Internet is growing in popularity, and more and more people are conducting business over the Internet, advertising their products and services by generating and sending electronic mass mailings.
- These electronic messages are usually unsolicited and regarded as nuisances by the recipients because they occupy much of the storage space needed for the necessary and important data processing.
- a mail server may have to reject accepting an important and/or desired email when its storage capacity is filled to the maximum with the unwanted emails containing advertisements.
- thin client systems such as set top boxes, PDA's, network computers, and pagers all have limited storage capacity. Unwanted emails in any one of such systems can tie up a finite resource for the user.
- a typical user wastes time by downloading voluminous but useless advertisement information. These unwanted emails are commonly referred to as spam.
- a spam block method exists which keeps an index list of all spam agents (i.e., companies that generate mass unsolicited e-mails), and provides means to block any e-mail sent from a company on the list.
- Another “junk mail” filter currently available employs filters which are based on predefined words and patterns as mentioned above. An incoming mail is designated as an unwanted mail, if the subject contains a known spam pattern.
- the method includes receiving an incoming email message, generating data characterizing the incoming email message based on the content of the incoming email message, and comparing the generated data with a set of data characterizing spam messages. The method further includes determining whether a resemblance between the data characterizing the incoming email message and any data item from the set of data characterizing spam messages exceeds a threshold.
- FIG. 1 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a system for controlling delivery of spam electronic mail.
- FIG. 2 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a spam content preparation module.
- FIG. 3 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a similarity determination module.
- FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for handling a spam message.
- FIG. 5 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for filtering email spam based on similarities measures.
- FIG. 6A is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for creating a signature of an email message.
- FIG. 6B is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for detecting spam using a signature of an email message.
- FIG. 7 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for a character-based comparison of documents.
- FIG. 8 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for determining whether two documents are similar.
- FIG. 9 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for reducing noise in an email message.
- FIG. 10 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for modifying an email message to reduce noise.
- FIG. 11 is a block diagram of an exemplary computer system.
- the present invention also relates to apparatus for performing the operations herein.
- This apparatus may be specially constructed for the required purposes, or it may comprise a general purpose computer selectively activated or reconfigured by a computer program stored in the computer.
- a computer program may be stored in a computer readable storage medium, such as, but is not limited to, any type of disk including floppy disks, optical disks, CD-ROMs, and magnetic-optical disks, read-only memories (ROMs), random access memories (RAMs), EPROMs, EEPROMs, magnetic or optical cards, or any type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions, and each coupled to a computer system bus.
- a machine-readable medium includes any mechanism for storing or transmitting information in a form readable by a machine (e.g., a computer).
- a machine-readable medium includes read only memory (“ROM”); random access memory (“RAM”); magnetic disk storage media; optical storage media; flash memory devices; electrical, optical, acoustical or other form of propagated signals (e.g., carrier waves, infrared signals, digital signals, etc.); etc.
- FIG. 1 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a system for controlling delivery of spam electronic mail (email).
- the system includes a control center 102 coupled to a communications network 100 such as a public network (e.g., the Internet, a wireless network, etc.) or a private network (e.g., LAN, Intranet, etc.).
- the control center 102 communicates with multiple network servers 104 via the network 100 .
- Each server 104 communicates with user terminals 106 using a private or public network.
- the control center 102 is an anti-spam facility that is responsible for analyzing messages identified as spam, developing filtering rules for detecting spam, and distributing the filtering rules to the servers 104 .
- a message may be identified as spam because it was sent by a known spam source (as determined, for example, using a “spam probe”, i.e., an email address specifically selected to make its way into as many spammer mailing lists as possible).
- a server 104 may be a mail server that receives and stores messages addressed to users of corresponding user terminals sent. Alternatively, a server 104 may be a different server coupled to the mail server 104 . Servers 104 are responsible for filtering incoming messages based on the filtering rules received from the control center 102 .
- control center 102 includes a spam content preparation module 108 that is responsible for generating data characterizing the content associated with a spam attack and sending this data to the servers 104 .
- Each server 104 includes a similarity determination module 110 that is responsible for storing spam data received from the control center 102 and identifying incoming email messages resembling the spam content using the stored data.
- each server 104 hosts both the spam content preparation module 108 that generates data characterizing the content associated with a spam attack and the similarity determination module 110 that uses the generated data to identify email messages resembling the spam content.
- FIG. 2 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a spam content preparation module 200 .
- the spam content preparation module 200 includes a spam content parser 202 , a spam data generator 206 , and a spam data transmitter 208 .
- the spam content parser 202 is responsible for parsing the body of email messages resulting from spam attacks (referred to as spam messages).
- the spam data generator 206 is responsible for generating data characterizing a spam message.
- data characterizing a spam message includes a list of hash values calculated for sets of tokens (e.g., characters, words, lines, etc.) composing the spam message.
- Data characterizing a spam message or any other email message is referred to herein as a message signature.
- Signatures of spam messages or any other email messages may contain various data identifying the message content and may be created using various algorithms that enable the use of similarity measures in comparing signatures of different email messages.
- the spam content preparation module 200 also includes a noise reduction algorithm 204 that is responsible for detecting data indicative of noise and removing the noise from spam messages prior to generating signatures of spam messages. Noise represents data invisible to a recipient that was added to a spam message to hide its spam nature.
- the spam content preparation module 200 also includes a message grouping algorithm (not shown) that is responsible for grouping messages originated from a single spam attack. Grouping may be performed based on specified characteristics of spam messages (e.g., included URLs, message parts, etc.). If grouping is used, the spam data generator 206 may generate a signature for a group of spam messages rather than for each individual message.
- a message grouping algorithm (not shown) that is responsible for grouping messages originated from a single spam attack. Grouping may be performed based on specified characteristics of spam messages (e.g., included URLs, message parts, etc.). If grouping is used, the spam data generator 206 may generate a signature for a group of spam messages rather than for each individual message.
- the spam data transmitter 208 is responsible for distributing signatures of spam messages to participating servers such as servers 104 of FIG. 1 .
- each server 104 periodically (e.g., each 5 minutes) initiates a connection (e.g., a secure HTTPS connection) with the call center 102 .
- a connection e.g., a secure HTTPS connection
- signatures are transmitted from the call center 102 to the relevant server 106 .
- FIG. 3 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a similarity determination module 300 .
- the similarity determination module 300 includes an incoming message parser 302 , a spam data receiver 306 , a message data generator 310 , a resemblance identifier 312 , and a spam database 304 .
- the incoming message parser 302 is responsible for parsing the body of incoming email messages.
- the spam data receiver 306 is responsible for receiving signatures of spam messages and storing them in the spam database 304 .
- the message data generator 310 is responsible for generating signatures of incoming email messages.
- a signature of an incoming email message includes a list of hash values calculated for sets of tokens (e.g., characters, words, lines, etc.) composing the incoming email message.
- a signature of an incoming email message includes various other data characterizing the content of the email message (e.g., a subset of token sets composing the incoming email message).
- signatures of email messages may be created using various algorithms that allow for use of similarity measures in comparing signatures of different email messages.
- the similarity determination module 300 also includes an incoming message cleaning algorithm 308 that is responsible for detecting data indicative of noise and removing the noise from the incoming email messages prior to generating their signatures, as will be discussed in more detail below.
- the resemblance identifier 312 is responsible for comparing the signature of each incoming email message with the signatures of spam messages stored in the spam database 304 and determining, based on this comparison, whether an incoming email message is similar to any spam message.
- the spam database 304 stores signatures generated for spam messages before they undergo the noise reduction process (i.e., noisy spam messages) and signatures generated for these spam messages after they undergo the noise reduction process (i.e., spam message with reduced noise).
- the message data generator 310 first generates a signature of an incoming email message prior to noise reduction, and the resemblance identifier 312 compares this signature with the signatures of noisy spam messages. If this comparison indicates that the incoming email message is similar to one of these spam messages, then the resemblance identifier 312 marks this incoming email message as spam. Alternatively, the resemblance identifier 312 invokes the incoming message cleaning algorithm 308 to remove noise from the incoming email message. Then, the message data generator 310 generates a signature for the modified incoming message, which is then compared by the resemblance identifier 312 with the signatures of spam messages with reduced noise.
- FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process 400 for handling a spam message.
- the process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- processing logic resides at a control center 102 of FIG. 1 .
- process 400 begins with processing logic receiving a spam message (processing block 402 ).
- processing logic modifies the spam message to reduce noise.
- One embodiment of a noise reduction algorithm will be discussed in more detail below in conjunction with FIGS. 9 and 10 .
- processing logic generates a signature of the spam message.
- a signature of the spam message includes a list of hash values calculated for sets of tokens (e.g., characters, words, lines, etc.) composing the incoming email message, as will be discussed in more detail below in conjunction with FIG. 6A .
- a signature of an incoming email message includes various other data characterizing the content of the email message.
- processing logic transfers the signature of the spam message to a server (e.g., a server 104 of FIG. 1 ), which uses the signature of the spam message to find incoming email messages resembling the spam message (block 410 ).
- a server e.g., a server 104 of FIG. 1
- FIG. 5 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process 500 for filtering email spam based on similarities measures.
- the process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- processing logic resides at a server 104 of FIG. 1 .
- process 500 begins with processing logic receiving an incoming email message (processing block 502 ).
- processing logic modifies the incoming message to reduce noise.
- noise reduction algorithm One embodiment of a noise reduction algorithm will be discussed in more detail below in conjunction with FIGS. 9 and 10 .
- processing logic generates a signature of the incoming message based on the content of the incoming message.
- a signature of an incoming email message includes a list of hash values calculated for sets of tokens (e.g., characters, words, lines, etc.) composing the incoming email message, as will be discussed in more detail below in conjunction with FIG. 6A .
- a signature of an incoming email message includes various other data characterizing the content of the email message.
- processing compares the signature of the incoming messages with signatures of spam messages.
- processing logic determines that the resemblance between the signature of the incoming message and a signature of some spam message exceeds a threshold similarity measure.
- a threshold similarity measure One embodiment of a process for determining the resemblance between two messages is discussed in more detail below in conjunction with FIG. 6B .
- processing logic marks the incoming email message as spam.
- FIG. 6A is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process 600 for creating a signature of an email message.
- the process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- processing logic resides at a server 104 of FIG. 1 .
- process 600 begins with processing logic dividing an email message into sets of tokens (processing block 602 ).
- Each set of tokens may include a predefined number of sequential units from the email message. The predefined number may be equal to, or greater than, 1.
- a unit may represent a character, a word or a line in the email message.
- each set of tokens is combined with the number of occurrences of this set of tokens in the email message.
- processing logic calculates hash values for the sets of tokens.
- a hash value is calculated by applying a hash function to each combination of a set of tokens and a corresponding token occurrence number.
- processing logic creates a signature for the email message using the calculated hash values.
- the signature is created by selecting a subset of calculated hash values and adding a parameter characterizing the email message to the selected subset of calculated hash values.
- the parameter may specify, for example, the size of the email message, the number of calculated hash values, the keyword associated with the email message, the name of an attachment file, etc.
- a signature for an email message is created using a character-based document comparison mechanism that will be discussed in more detail below in conjunction with FIGS. 7 and 8 .
- FIG. 6B is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process 650 for detecting spam using a signature of an email message.
- the process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- processing logic resides at a server 104 of FIG. 1 .
- process 650 compares data in a signature of an incoming email message with data in a signature of each spam message.
- the signature data includes a parameter characterizing the content of an email message and a subset of hash values generated for the tokens contained in the email message.
- the parameter may specify, for example, the size of the email message, the number of tokens in the email message, the keyword associated with the email message, the name of an attachment file, etc.
- Processing logic begins with comparing a parameter in a signature of the incoming email message with a corresponding parameter in a signature of each spam message (processing block 652 ).
- a decision box 654 processing logic determines whether any spam message signatures contain a parameter similar to the parameter of the incoming message signature.
- the similarity may be determined, for example, based on the allowed difference between the two parameters or the allowed ratio of the two parameters.
- processing logic decides that the incoming email message is legitimate (i.e., it is not spam) (processing block 662 ).
- processing logic determines whether the signature of he first spam message has hash values similar to the hash values in the signature of the incoming email (decision box 656 ). Based on the similarity threshold, the hash values may be considered similar if, for example, a certain number of them matches or the ratio of matched and unmatched hash values exceeds a specified threshold.
- processing logic decides that the incoming email message is spam (processing block 670 ). Otherwise, processing logic further determines if there are more spam message signatures with the similar parameter (decision box 658 ). If so, processing logic determines whether the next spam message signature has hash values similar to the hash values of the incoming email signature (decision box 656 ). If so, processing logic decides that the incoming email message is spam (processing block 670 ). If not, processing logic returns to processing block 658 .
- processing logic determines that no other spam message signatures have the similar parameter, then it decides that the incoming mail message is not spam (processing block 662 ).
- FIG. 7 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process 700 for a character-based comparison of documents.
- the process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- processing logic may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- process 700 begins with processing logic pre-processing a document (processing block 702 ).
- the document is pre-processed by changing each upper case alphabetic character within the document to a lower case alphabetic character. For example, the message “I am Sam, Sam I am.” may be pre-processed into an expression “i.am.sam.sam.i.am”.
- processing logic divides the document into tokens, with each token including a predefined number of sequential characters from the document.
- each token is combined with its occurrence number. This combination is referred to as a labeled shingle. For example, if the predefined number of sequential characters in the token is equal to 3, the expression specified above includes the following set of labeled shingles:
- the shingles are represented as a histogram.
- processing logic calculates hash values for the tokens.
- the hash values are calculated for the labeled shingles. For example, if a hashing function H(x) is applied to each labeled shingle illustrated above, the following results are produced:
- processing logic then sorts the hash values as follows:
- processing logic selects a subset of hash values from the calculated hash values.
- processing logic creates a signature of the document by adding to the sketch a parameter pertaining to the tokens of the document.
- the parameter specifies the number of original tokens in the document. In the example above, the number of original tokens is 15.
- the signature of the document can be expressed as follows:
- FIG. 8 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process 800 for determining whether two documents are similar.
- the process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- processing logic may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- process 800 begins with processing logic comparing the token numbers specified in the signatures of documents 1 and 2, and determining whether the token number in the first signature is within the allowed range with respect to the token number from the second signature (decision box 802 ).
- the allowed range may be a difference of 1 or less or a ratio of 90 percent or higher.
- processing logic decides that documents 1 and 2 are different (processing block 808 ). Otherwise, if the token number in the first signature is within the allowed range with respect to the token number from the second signature, processing logic determines whether the resemblance between hash values in signatures 1 and 2 exceeds a threshold (e.g., more than 95 percent of hash values are the same) (decision box 804 ). If so, processing logic decides that the two documents are similar (processing block 806 ). If not, processing logic decides that documents 1 and 2 are different (processing block 808 ).
- a threshold e.g., more than 95 percent of hash values are the same
- FIG. 9 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process 900 for reducing noise in an email message.
- the process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- processing logic may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- process 900 begins with processing logic detecting in an email message data indicative of noise (processing block 902 ).
- noise represents data that is invisible to a recipient of the mail message and was added to the email message to avoid spam filtering.
- data may include, for example, formatting data (e.g., HTML tags), numeric character references, character entity references, URL data of predefined categories, etc.
- Numeric character references specify the code position of a character in the document character set.
- Character entity references use symbolic names so that authors need not remember code positions. For example, the character entity reference å refers to the lowercase “a” character topped with a ring.
- processing logic modifies the content of the email message to reduce the noise.
- the content modification includes removing formatting data, translating numeric character references and charcater entity references to their ASCII equivalents, and modifying URL data.
- processing logic compares the modified content of the email message with the content of a spam message. In one embodiment, the comparison is performed to identify an exact match. Alternatively, the comparison is performed to determine whether the two documents are similar.
- FIG. 10 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process 1000 for modifying an email message to reduce noise.
- the process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- processing logic may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both.
- process 1000 begins with processing logic searching an email message for formatting data (e.g., HTML tags) (processing block 1002 ).
- formatting data e.g., HTML tags
- processing logic determines whether the found formatting data qualifies as an exception.
- HTML formatting does not add anything to the information content of a message.
- exceptions are the tags that contain useful information for further processing of the message (e.g., tags ⁇ BODY>, ⁇ A>, ⁇ IMG>, and ⁇ FONT>).
- tags ⁇ BODY>, ⁇ A>, ⁇ IMG>, and ⁇ FONT> are needed for “white on white” text elimination, and the ⁇ A> and ⁇ IMG> tags typically contain link information that may be used for passing data to other components of the system.
- the formatting data is extracted from the email message (processing block 1006 ).
- processing logic converts each numerical character reference and character entity reference into a corresponding ASCII character (processing block 1008 ).
- numeric character references may take two forms:
- the string “&” corresponds to the string “&” in ASCII
- the string “#” corresponds to the string “#” in ASCII
- the string “3” corresponds to 3 in ASCII
- the string “#56;” corresponds to 8 in ASCII
- “#59;” corresponds to the string “; ” in ASCII.
- processing logic checks whether the converted data still includes numeric character references or character entity references (decision box 1010 ). If the check is positive, processing logic repeats the conversion operation at processing block 1008 . Otherwise, processing logic proceeds to processing block 1012 .
- processing logic modifies URL data of predefined categories. These categories may include, for example, numerical character references contained in the URL that are converted by processing logic into corresponding ASCII characters.
- URL “password” syntax may be used to add characters before an “@” in the URL hostname. These characters are ignored by the target web server but they add significant amounts of noise information to each URL.
- Processing logic modifies the URL data by removing these additional characters. Finally, processing logic removes the “query” part of the URL, following a string “?” at the end of the URL.
- FIG. 11 is a block diagram of an exemplary computer system 1100 that may be used to perform one or more of the operations described herein.
- the machine may comprise a network router, a network switch, a network bridge, Personal Digital Assistant (PDA), a cellular telephone, a web appliance or any machine capable of executing a sequence of instructions that specify actions to be taken by that machine.
- PDA Personal Digital Assistant
- the computer system 1100 includes a processor 1102 , a main memory 1104 and a static memory 1106 , which communicate with each other via a bus 1108 .
- the computer system 1100 may further include a video display unit 1110 (e.g., a liquid crystal display (LCD) or a cathode ray tube (CRT)).
- the computer system 1100 also includes an alpha-numeric input device 1112 (e.g., a keyboard), a cursor control device 1114 (e.g., a mouse), a disk drive unit 1116 , a signal generation device 1120 (e.g., a speaker) and a network interface device 1122 .
- the disk drive unit 1116 includes a computer-readable medium 1124 on which is stored a set of instructions (i.e., software) 1126 embodying any one, or all, of the methodologies described above.
- the software 1126 is also shown to reside, completely or at least partially, within the main memory 1104 and/or within the processor 1102 .
- the software 1126 may further be transmitted or received via the network interface device 1122 .
- the term “computer-readable medium” shall be taken to include any medium that is capable of storing or encoding a sequence of instructions for execution by the computer and that cause the computer to perform any one of the methodologies of the present invention.
- the term “computer-readable medium” shall accordingly be taken to included, but not be limited to, solid-state memories, optical and magnetic disks, and carrier wave signals.
Abstract
A method and system for filtering email spam based on similarity measures are described. In one embodiment, the method includes receiving an incoming email message, generating data characterizing the incoming email message based on the content of the incoming email message, and comparing the generated data with a set of data characterizing spam messages. The method further includes determining whether a resemblance between the data characterizing the incoming email message and any data item from the set of data characterizing spam messages exceeds a threshold.
Description
- The present application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 60/471,242, filed May 15, 2003, which is incorporated herein in its entirety.
- The present invention relates to filtering electronic mail (email); more particularly, the present invention relates to filtering email spam based on similarity measures.
- The Internet is growing in popularity, and more and more people are conducting business over the Internet, advertising their products and services by generating and sending electronic mass mailings. These electronic messages (emails) are usually unsolicited and regarded as nuisances by the recipients because they occupy much of the storage space needed for the necessary and important data processing. For example, a mail server may have to reject accepting an important and/or desired email when its storage capacity is filled to the maximum with the unwanted emails containing advertisements. Moreover, thin client systems such as set top boxes, PDA's, network computers, and pagers all have limited storage capacity. Unwanted emails in any one of such systems can tie up a finite resource for the user. In addition, a typical user wastes time by downloading voluminous but useless advertisement information. These unwanted emails are commonly referred to as spam.
- Presently, there are products that are capable of filtering out unwanted messages. For example, a spam block method exists which keeps an index list of all spam agents (i.e., companies that generate mass unsolicited e-mails), and provides means to block any e-mail sent from a company on the list.
- Another “junk mail” filter currently available employs filters which are based on predefined words and patterns as mentioned above. An incoming mail is designated as an unwanted mail, if the subject contains a known spam pattern.
- However, as spam filtering grows in sophistication, so do the techniques of spammers in avoiding the filters. Examples of tactics incorporated by recent generation of spammers include randomization, origin concealment, and filter evasion using HTML.
- A method and system for filtering email spam based on similarity measures are described. According to one aspect, the method includes receiving an incoming email message, generating data characterizing the incoming email message based on the content of the incoming email message, and comparing the generated data with a set of data characterizing spam messages. The method further includes determining whether a resemblance between the data characterizing the incoming email message and any data item from the set of data characterizing spam messages exceeds a threshold.
- Other features of the present invention will be apparent from the accompanying drawings and from the detailed description that follows.
- The present invention will be understood more fully from the detailed description given below and from the accompanying drawings of various embodiments of the invention, which, however, should not be taken to limit the invention to the specific embodiments, but are for explanation and understanding only.
-
FIG. 1 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a system for controlling delivery of spam electronic mail. -
FIG. 2 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a spam content preparation module. -
FIG. 3 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a similarity determination module. -
FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for handling a spam message. -
FIG. 5 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for filtering email spam based on similarities measures. -
FIG. 6A is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for creating a signature of an email message. -
FIG. 6B is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for detecting spam using a signature of an email message. -
FIG. 7 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for a character-based comparison of documents. -
FIG. 8 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for determining whether two documents are similar. -
FIG. 9 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for reducing noise in an email message. -
FIG. 10 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of a process for modifying an email message to reduce noise. -
FIG. 11 is a block diagram of an exemplary computer system. - A method and apparatus for filtering email spam based on similarity measures are described. In the following description, numerous details are set forth. It will be apparent, however, to one skilled in the art, that the present invention may be practiced without these specific details. In other instances, well-known structures and devices are shown in block diagram form, rather than in detail, in order to avoid obscuring the present invention.
- Some portions of the detailed descriptions which follow are presented in terms of algorithms and symbolic representations of operations on data bits within a computer memory. These algorithmic descriptions and representations are the means used by those skilled in the data processing arts to most effectively convey the substance of their work to others skilled in the art. An algorithm is here, and generally, conceived to be a self-consistent sequence of steps leading to a desired result. The steps are those requiring physical manipulations of physical quantities. Usually, though not necessarily, these quantities take the form of electrical or magnetic signals capable of being stored, transferred, combined, compared, and otherwise manipulated. It has proven convenient at times, principally for reasons of common usage, to refer to these signals as bits, values, elements, symbols, characters, terms, numbers, or the like.
- It should be borne in mind, however, that all of these and similar terms are to be associated with the appropriate physical quantities and are merely convenient labels applied to these quantities. Unless specifically stated otherwise as apparent from the following discussion, it is appreciated that throughout the description, discussions utilizing terms such as “processing” or “computing” or “calculating” or “determining” or “displaying” or the like, refer to the action and processes of a computer system, or similar electronic computing device, that manipulates and transforms data represented as physical (electronic) quantities within the computer system's registers and memories into other data similarly represented as physical quantities within the computer system memories or registers or other such information storage, transmission or display devices.
- The present invention also relates to apparatus for performing the operations herein. This apparatus may be specially constructed for the required purposes, or it may comprise a general purpose computer selectively activated or reconfigured by a computer program stored in the computer. Such a computer program may be stored in a computer readable storage medium, such as, but is not limited to, any type of disk including floppy disks, optical disks, CD-ROMs, and magnetic-optical disks, read-only memories (ROMs), random access memories (RAMs), EPROMs, EEPROMs, magnetic or optical cards, or any type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions, and each coupled to a computer system bus.
- The algorithms and displays presented herein are not inherently related to any particular computer or other apparatus. Various general purpose systems may be used with programs in accordance with the teachings herein, or it may prove convenient to construct more specialized apparatus to perform the required method steps. The required structure for a variety of these systems will appear from the description below. In addition, the present invention is not described with reference to any particular programming language. It will be appreciated that a variety of programming languages may be used to implement the teachings of the invention as described herein.
- A machine-readable medium includes any mechanism for storing or transmitting information in a form readable by a machine (e.g., a computer). For example, a machine-readable medium includes read only memory (“ROM”); random access memory (“RAM”); magnetic disk storage media; optical storage media; flash memory devices; electrical, optical, acoustical or other form of propagated signals (e.g., carrier waves, infrared signals, digital signals, etc.); etc.
- Filtering Email Spam Based on Similarity Measures
-
FIG. 1 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a system for controlling delivery of spam electronic mail (email). The system includes acontrol center 102 coupled to acommunications network 100 such as a public network (e.g., the Internet, a wireless network, etc.) or a private network (e.g., LAN, Intranet, etc.). Thecontrol center 102 communicates withmultiple network servers 104 via thenetwork 100. Eachserver 104 communicates withuser terminals 106 using a private or public network. - The
control center 102 is an anti-spam facility that is responsible for analyzing messages identified as spam, developing filtering rules for detecting spam, and distributing the filtering rules to theservers 104. A message may be identified as spam because it was sent by a known spam source (as determined, for example, using a “spam probe”, i.e., an email address specifically selected to make its way into as many spammer mailing lists as possible). - A
server 104 may be a mail server that receives and stores messages addressed to users of corresponding user terminals sent. Alternatively, aserver 104 may be a different server coupled to themail server 104.Servers 104 are responsible for filtering incoming messages based on the filtering rules received from thecontrol center 102. - In one embodiment, the
control center 102 includes a spam content preparation module 108 that is responsible for generating data characterizing the content associated with a spam attack and sending this data to theservers 104. Eachserver 104 includes asimilarity determination module 110 that is responsible for storing spam data received from thecontrol center 102 and identifying incoming email messages resembling the spam content using the stored data. - In an alternative embodiment, each
server 104 hosts both the spam content preparation module 108 that generates data characterizing the content associated with a spam attack and thesimilarity determination module 110 that uses the generated data to identify email messages resembling the spam content. -
FIG. 2 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a spamcontent preparation module 200. The spamcontent preparation module 200 includes aspam content parser 202, aspam data generator 206, and aspam data transmitter 208. - The
spam content parser 202 is responsible for parsing the body of email messages resulting from spam attacks (referred to as spam messages). - The
spam data generator 206 is responsible for generating data characterizing a spam message. In one embodiment, data characterizing a spam message includes a list of hash values calculated for sets of tokens (e.g., characters, words, lines, etc.) composing the spam message. Data characterizing a spam message or any other email message is referred to herein as a message signature. Signatures of spam messages or any other email messages may contain various data identifying the message content and may be created using various algorithms that enable the use of similarity measures in comparing signatures of different email messages. - In one embodiment, the spam
content preparation module 200 also includes anoise reduction algorithm 204 that is responsible for detecting data indicative of noise and removing the noise from spam messages prior to generating signatures of spam messages. Noise represents data invisible to a recipient that was added to a spam message to hide its spam nature. - In one embodiment, the spam
content preparation module 200 also includes a message grouping algorithm (not shown) that is responsible for grouping messages originated from a single spam attack. Grouping may be performed based on specified characteristics of spam messages (e.g., included URLs, message parts, etc.). If grouping is used, thespam data generator 206 may generate a signature for a group of spam messages rather than for each individual message. - The
spam data transmitter 208 is responsible for distributing signatures of spam messages to participating servers such asservers 104 ofFIG. 1 . In one embodiment, eachserver 104 periodically (e.g., each 5 minutes) initiates a connection (e.g., a secure HTTPS connection) with thecall center 102. Using this pull-based connection, signatures are transmitted from thecall center 102 to therelevant server 106. -
FIG. 3 is a block diagram of one embodiment of asimilarity determination module 300. Thesimilarity determination module 300 includes anincoming message parser 302, aspam data receiver 306, amessage data generator 310, aresemblance identifier 312, and aspam database 304. - The
incoming message parser 302 is responsible for parsing the body of incoming email messages. - The
spam data receiver 306 is responsible for receiving signatures of spam messages and storing them in thespam database 304. - The
message data generator 310 is responsible for generating signatures of incoming email messages. In some embodiments, a signature of an incoming email message includes a list of hash values calculated for sets of tokens (e.g., characters, words, lines, etc.) composing the incoming email message. In other embodiments, a signature of an incoming email message includes various other data characterizing the content of the email message (e.g., a subset of token sets composing the incoming email message). As discussed above, signatures of email messages may be created using various algorithms that allow for use of similarity measures in comparing signatures of different email messages. - In one embodiment, the
similarity determination module 300 also includes an incomingmessage cleaning algorithm 308 that is responsible for detecting data indicative of noise and removing the noise from the incoming email messages prior to generating their signatures, as will be discussed in more detail below. - The
resemblance identifier 312 is responsible for comparing the signature of each incoming email message with the signatures of spam messages stored in thespam database 304 and determining, based on this comparison, whether an incoming email message is similar to any spam message. - In one embodiment, the
spam database 304 stores signatures generated for spam messages before they undergo the noise reduction process (i.e., noisy spam messages) and signatures generated for these spam messages after they undergo the noise reduction process (i.e., spam message with reduced noise). In this embodiment, themessage data generator 310 first generates a signature of an incoming email message prior to noise reduction, and theresemblance identifier 312 compares this signature with the signatures of noisy spam messages. If this comparison indicates that the incoming email message is similar to one of these spam messages, then theresemblance identifier 312 marks this incoming email message as spam. Alternatively, theresemblance identifier 312 invokes the incomingmessage cleaning algorithm 308 to remove noise from the incoming email message. Then, themessage data generator 310 generates a signature for the modified incoming message, which is then compared by theresemblance identifier 312 with the signatures of spam messages with reduced noise. -
FIG. 4 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of aprocess 400 for handling a spam message. The process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both. In one embodiment, processing logic resides at acontrol center 102 ofFIG. 1 . - Referring to
FIG. 4 ,process 400 begins with processing logic receiving a spam message (processing block 402). - At
processing block 404, processing logic modifies the spam message to reduce noise. One embodiment of a noise reduction algorithm will be discussed in more detail below in conjunction withFIGS. 9 and 10 . - At
processing block 406, processing logic generates a signature of the spam message. In one embodiment, a signature of the spam message includes a list of hash values calculated for sets of tokens (e.g., characters, words, lines, etc.) composing the incoming email message, as will be discussed in more detail below in conjunction withFIG. 6A . In other embodiments, a signature of an incoming email message includes various other data characterizing the content of the email message. - At
processing block 408, processing logic transfers the signature of the spam message to a server (e.g., aserver 104 ofFIG. 1 ), which uses the signature of the spam message to find incoming email messages resembling the spam message (block 410). -
FIG. 5 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of aprocess 500 for filtering email spam based on similarities measures. The process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both. In one embodiment, processing logic resides at aserver 104 ofFIG. 1 . - Referring to
FIG. 5 ,process 500 begins with processing logic receiving an incoming email message (processing block 502). - At
processing block 504, processing logic modifies the incoming message to reduce noise. One embodiment of a noise reduction algorithm will be discussed in more detail below in conjunction withFIGS. 9 and 10 . - At
processing block 506, processing logic generates a signature of the incoming message based on the content of the incoming message. In one embodiment, a signature of an incoming email message includes a list of hash values calculated for sets of tokens (e.g., characters, words, lines, etc.) composing the incoming email message, as will be discussed in more detail below in conjunction withFIG. 6A . In other embodiments, a signature of an incoming email message includes various other data characterizing the content of the email message. - At
processing block 508, processing compares the signature of the incoming messages with signatures of spam messages. - At
processing block 510, processing logic determines that the resemblance between the signature of the incoming message and a signature of some spam message exceeds a threshold similarity measure. One embodiment of a process for determining the resemblance between two messages is discussed in more detail below in conjunction withFIG. 6B . - At
processing block 512, processing logic marks the incoming email message as spam. -
FIG. 6A is a flow diagram of one embodiment of aprocess 600 for creating a signature of an email message. The process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both. In one embodiment, processing logic resides at aserver 104 ofFIG. 1 . - Referring to
FIG. 6A ,process 600 begins with processing logic dividing an email message into sets of tokens (processing block 602). Each set of tokens may include a predefined number of sequential units from the email message. The predefined number may be equal to, or greater than, 1. A unit may represent a character, a word or a line in the email message. In one embodiment, each set of tokens is combined with the number of occurrences of this set of tokens in the email message. - At
processing block 604, processing logic calculates hash values for the sets of tokens. In one embodiment, a hash value is calculated by applying a hash function to each combination of a set of tokens and a corresponding token occurrence number. - At
processing block 606, processing logic creates a signature for the email message using the calculated hash values. In one embodiment, the signature is created by selecting a subset of calculated hash values and adding a parameter characterizing the email message to the selected subset of calculated hash values. The parameter may specify, for example, the size of the email message, the number of calculated hash values, the keyword associated with the email message, the name of an attachment file, etc. - In one embodiment, a signature for an email message is created using a character-based document comparison mechanism that will be discussed in more detail below in conjunction with
FIGS. 7 and 8 . -
FIG. 6B is a flow diagram of one embodiment of aprocess 650 for detecting spam using a signature of an email message. The process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both. In one embodiment, processing logic resides at aserver 104 ofFIG. 1 . - Referring to
FIG. 6B ,process 650 compares data in a signature of an incoming email message with data in a signature of each spam message. The signature data includes a parameter characterizing the content of an email message and a subset of hash values generated for the tokens contained in the email message. The parameter may specify, for example, the size of the email message, the number of tokens in the email message, the keyword associated with the email message, the name of an attachment file, etc. - Processing logic begins with comparing a parameter in a signature of the incoming email message with a corresponding parameter in a signature of each spam message (processing block 652).
- A
decision box 654, processing logic determines whether any spam message signatures contain a parameter similar to the parameter of the incoming message signature. The similarity may be determined, for example, based on the allowed difference between the two parameters or the allowed ratio of the two parameters. - If none of the spam message signatures contain a parameter similar to the parameter of the incoming message signature, processing logic decides that the incoming email message is legitimate (i.e., it is not spam) (processing block 662).
- Alternatively, if one or more spam message signatures have a similar parameter, processing logic determines whether the signature of he first spam message has hash values similar to the hash values in the signature of the incoming email (decision box 656). Based on the similarity threshold, the hash values may be considered similar if, for example, a certain number of them matches or the ratio of matched and unmatched hash values exceeds a specified threshold.
- If the first spam message signature has hash values similar to the hash values of the incoming email signature, processing logic decides that the incoming email message is spam (processing block 670). Otherwise, processing logic further determines if there are more spam message signatures with the similar parameter (decision box 658). If so, processing logic determines whether the next spam message signature has hash values similar to the hash values of the incoming email signature (decision box 656). If so, processing logic decides that the incoming email message is spam (processing block 670). If not, processing logic returns to
processing block 658. - If processing logic determines that no other spam message signatures have the similar parameter, then it decides that the incoming mail message is not spam (processing block 662). Character-Based Document Comparison Mechanism
-
FIG. 7 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of aprocess 700 for a character-based comparison of documents. The process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both. - Referring to
FIG. 7 ,process 700 begins with processing logic pre-processing a document (processing block 702). In one embodiment, the document is pre-processed by changing each upper case alphabetic character within the document to a lower case alphabetic character. For example, the message “I am Sam, Sam I am.” may be pre-processed into an expression “i.am.sam.sam.i.am”. - At
processing block 704, processing logic divides the document into tokens, with each token including a predefined number of sequential characters from the document. In one embodiment, each token is combined with its occurrence number. This combination is referred to as a labeled shingle. For example, if the predefined number of sequential characters in the token is equal to 3, the expression specified above includes the following set of labeled shingles: -
- i.a1
- .am1
- am.1
- m.s1
- .sa1
- sam1
- sm.2
- m.s1
- .sm2
- sam2
- am.3
- m.i1
- .i.1
- i.a2
- .am4
- In one embodiment, the shingles are represented as a histogram.
- At
processing block 706, processing logic calculates hash values for the tokens. In one embodiment, the hash values are calculated for the labeled shingles. For example, if a hashing function H(x) is applied to each labeled shingle illustrated above, the following results are produced: -
- H(i.a1)->458348732
- H(.am1)->200404023
- H(am.1)->692939349
- H(m.s1)->220443033
- H(.sa1)->554034022
- H(8am1)->542929292
- H(am.2)->629292229
- H(m.s1)->702202232
- H(.sa2)->322243349
- H(8am2)->993923828
- H(am.3)->163393269
- H(m.i1)->595437753
- H(.i.1)->843438583
- H(i.a2)->244485639
- H(.am4)->493869359
- In one embodiment, processing logic then sorts the hash values as follows:
-
- 163393269
- 200604023
- 220643033
- 246685639
- 322263369
- 458368732
- 493869359
- 542929292
- 554034022
- 595637753
- 629292229
- 692939349
- 702202232
- 843438583
- 993923828
- At
processing block 708, processing logic selects a subset of hash values from the calculated hash values. In one embodiment, processing logic selects X smallest values from the sorted hash values and creates from them a “sketch” of the document. For example, for X=4, the sketch can be expressed as follows: -
- [163393269 200404023 220443033 244485639].
- At
processing block 710, processing logic creates a signature of the document by adding to the sketch a parameter pertaining to the tokens of the document. In one embodiment, the parameter specifies the number of original tokens in the document. In the example above, the number of original tokens is 15. Hence, the signature of the document can be expressed as follows: -
- [15 163393269 200404023 220443033 244485639].
Alternatively, the parameter may specify any other characteristic of the content of the document (e.g., the size of the document, the keyword associated with the document, etc.).
- [15 163393269 200404023 220443033 244485639].
-
FIG. 8 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of aprocess 800 for determining whether two documents are similar. The process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both. - Referring to
FIG. 8 ,process 800 begins with processing logic comparing the token numbers specified in the signatures ofdocuments - If the token number in the first signature is outside of the allowed range with respect to the token number from the second signature, processing logic decides that
documents signatures documents - Email Spam Filtering Using Noise Reduction
-
FIG. 9 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of aprocess 900 for reducing noise in an email message. The process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both. - Referring to
FIG. 9 ,process 900 begins with processing logic detecting in an email message data indicative of noise (processing block 902). As discussed above, noise represents data that is invisible to a recipient of the mail message and was added to the email message to avoid spam filtering. Such data may include, for example, formatting data (e.g., HTML tags), numeric character references, character entity references, URL data of predefined categories, etc. Numeric character references specify the code position of a character in the document character set. Character entity references use symbolic names so that authors need not remember code positions. For example, the character entity reference å refers to the lowercase “a” character topped with a ring. - At
processing block 904, processing logic modifies the content of the email message to reduce the noise. In one embodiment, the content modification includes removing formatting data, translating numeric character references and charcater entity references to their ASCII equivalents, and modifying URL data. - At
processing block 906, processing logic compares the modified content of the email message with the content of a spam message. In one embodiment, the comparison is performed to identify an exact match. Alternatively, the comparison is performed to determine whether the two documents are similar. -
FIG. 10 is a flow diagram of one embodiment of aprocess 1000 for modifying an email message to reduce noise. The process may be performed by processing logic that may comprise hardware (e.g., dedicated logic, programmable logic, microcode, etc.), software (such as run on a general purpose computer system or a dedicated machine), or a combination of both. - Referring to
FIG. 10 ,process 1000 begins with processing logic searching an email message for formatting data (e.g., HTML tags) (processing block 1002). - At
decision box 1004, processing logic determines whether the found formatting data qualifies as an exception. Typically, HTML formatting does not add anything to the information content of a message. However, a few exceptions exist. These exceptions are the tags that contain useful information for further processing of the message (e.g., tags <BODY>, <A>, <IMG>, and <FONT>). For example, the <FONT> and <BODY> tags are needed for “white on white” text elimination, and the <A> and <IMG> tags typically contain link information that may be used for passing data to other components of the system. - If the formatting data does not qualify as an exception, the formatting data is extracted from the email message (processing block 1006).
- Next, processing logic converts each numerical character reference and character entity reference into a corresponding ASCII character (processing block 1008).
- In HTML, numeric character references may take two forms:
-
- 1. The syntax “&#D;”, where D is a decimal number, refers to the ISO 10646 decimal character number D; and
- 2. The syntax “&#xH;” or “&#XH;”, where H is a hexadecimal number, refers to the ISO 10646 hexadecimal character number H. Hexadecimal numbers in numeric character references are case-insensitive.
For example, randomized characters in the body may appear as a following expression:
- The SavingsReg is terwants you.
This expression has a meaning of the phrase “The SavingsRegister wants you.” - Some times the conversion performed at
processing block 1008 may need to be repeated. For example, the string “&” corresponds to the string “&” in ASCII, the string “#” corresponds to the string “#” in ASCII, the string “3” corresponds to 3 in ASCII, the string “#56;” corresponds to 8 in ASCII, and “#59;” corresponds to the string “; ” in ASCII. Hence, the combined string “&#38;”, when converted, results in the string “&” that needs to be converted. - Accordingly, after the first conversion operation at
processing block 1008, processing logic checks whether the converted data still includes numeric character references or character entity references (decision box 1010). If the check is positive, processing logic repeats the conversion operation atprocessing block 1008. Otherwise, processing logic proceeds toprocessing block 1012. - At
processing block 1012, processing logic modifies URL data of predefined categories. These categories may include, for example, numerical character references contained in the URL that are converted by processing logic into corresponding ASCII characters. In addition, the URL “password” syntax may be used to add characters before an “@” in the URL hostname. These characters are ignored by the target web server but they add significant amounts of noise information to each URL. Processing logic modifies the URL data by removing these additional characters. Finally, processing logic removes the “query” part of the URL, following a string “?” at the end of the URL. - An example of a URL is as follows:
- http %3a %2f%2flotsofjunk@www.foo.com%2fbar.html?muchmorejunk
Processing logic modifies the above URL data into http://www.foo.com/bar.hmil.
An Exemplary Computer System -
FIG. 11 is a block diagram of anexemplary computer system 1100 that may be used to perform one or more of the operations described herein. In alternative embodiments, the machine may comprise a network router, a network switch, a network bridge, Personal Digital Assistant (PDA), a cellular telephone, a web appliance or any machine capable of executing a sequence of instructions that specify actions to be taken by that machine. - The
computer system 1100 includes aprocessor 1102, amain memory 1104 and astatic memory 1106, which communicate with each other via abus 1108. Thecomputer system 1100 may further include a video display unit 1110 (e.g., a liquid crystal display (LCD) or a cathode ray tube (CRT)). Thecomputer system 1100 also includes an alpha-numeric input device 1112 (e.g., a keyboard), a cursor control device 1114 (e.g., a mouse), adisk drive unit 1116, a signal generation device 1120 (e.g., a speaker) and anetwork interface device 1122. - The
disk drive unit 1116 includes a computer-readable medium 1124 on which is stored a set of instructions (i.e., software) 1126 embodying any one, or all, of the methodologies described above. Thesoftware 1126 is also shown to reside, completely or at least partially, within themain memory 1104 and/or within theprocessor 1102. Thesoftware 1126 may further be transmitted or received via thenetwork interface device 1122. For the purposes of this specification, the term “computer-readable medium” shall be taken to include any medium that is capable of storing or encoding a sequence of instructions for execution by the computer and that cause the computer to perform any one of the methodologies of the present invention. The term “computer-readable medium” shall accordingly be taken to included, but not be limited to, solid-state memories, optical and magnetic disks, and carrier wave signals. - Whereas many alterations and modifications of the present invention will no doubt become apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art after having read the foregoing description, it is to be understood that any particular embodiment shown and described by way of illustration is in no way intended to be considered limiting. Therefore, references to details of various embodiments are not intended to limit the scope of the claims which in themselves recite only those features regarded as essential to the invention.
Claims (29)
1. The method comprising:
receiving an email message;
generating data characterizing the email message based on content of the email message;
comparing the data characterizing the email message with a set of data characterizing a plurality of spam messages; and
determining whether a resemblance between the data characterizing the email message and any data item within the set of data characterizing the plurality of spam messages exceeds a threshold.
2. The method of claim 1 further comprising:
marking the email message as spam if the resemblance between the data characterizing the email message and any data item within the set of data characterizing the plurality of spam messages exceeds a threshold.
3. The method of claim 1 further comprising:
receiving data characterizing a new spam message; and
storing the received data in a database.
4. The method of claim 1 further comprising:
upon receiving the email message, evaluating the email message for a presence of noise added to avoid spam filtering; and
modifying content of the email message to reduce the noise.
5. The method of claim 4 wherein evaluating the email message for the presence of noise comprises detecting at least one of formatting data, a numeric character reference, a character entity reference, and predefined URL data.
6. The method of claim 1 wherein generating the data characterizing the email message comprises:
dividing the email message into a plurality of tokens; and
calculating a plurality of hash values for the plurality of tokens.
7. The method of claim 6 wherein comparing the data characterizing the email message with the set of data characterizing the plurality of spam messages comprises:
finding, in the set of data characterizing the plurality of spam messages, one or more data items having additional information similar to additional information contained in the data characterizing the plurality of spam messages; and
comparing the subset of hash values in the data characterizing the email message with a subset of hash values in each found data item until finding a similar subset of hash values.
8. The method of claim 3 further comprising:
evaluating the new spam message for a presence of noise;
modifying content of the new spam message to reduce the noise; and
generating data characterizing the spam message based on content of the modified new spam message.
9. The method comprising:
receiving a spam message;
generating data characterizing the spam message based on content of the spam message; and
transferring the data characterizing the spam message to a server, the data characterizing the spam message being subsequently used to find incoming messages resembling the spam message.
10. The method of claim 9 further comprising:
upon receiving the spam message, evaluating the spam message for a presence of noise; and
modifying content of the spam message to reduce the noise.
11. The method of claim 9 wherein evaluating the spam message for the presence of noise comprises detecting at least one of formatting data, a numeric character reference, a character entity reference, and predefined URL data.
12. The method of claim 9 wherein generating the data characterizing the spam message comprises:
dividing the spam message into a plurality of tokens; and
calculating a plurality of hash values for the plurality of tokens.
13. A system comprising:
an incoming message parser to receive an email message;
a message data generator to generate data characterizing the email message based on content of the email message; and
a resemblance identifier to compare the data characterizing the email message with a set of data characterizing a plurality of spam messages, and to determine whether a resemblance between the data characterizing the email message and any data item within the set of data characterizing the plurality of spam messages exceeds a threshold.
14. The system of claim 13 further comprising:
a database to store data characterizing a new spam message.
15. The system of claim 13 further comprising:
a message cleaning algorithm to evaluate the email message for a presence of noise added to avoid spam filtering, and to modify content of the email message to reduce the noise.
16. A system comprising:
a spam content parser to receive a spam message;
a spam data generator to generate data characterizing the spam message based on content of the spam message; and
a spam data transmitter to transfer the data characterizing the spam message to a server, the data characterizing the spam message being subsequently used to find incoming messages resembling the spam message.
17. The system of claim 16 further comprising a noise reduction algorithm to evaluate the spam message for a presence of noise, and to modify content of the spam message to reduce the noise.
18. The system of claim 17 wherein the noise reduction algorithm is to evaluate the spam message for the presence of noise by detecting at least one of formatting data, a numeric character reference, a character entity reference, and predefined URL data.
19. An apparatus comprising:
means for receiving an email message;
means for generating data characterizing the email message based on content of the email message;
means for comparing the data characterizing the email message with a set of data characterizing a plurality of spam messages; and
means for determining whether a resemblance between the data characterizing the email message and any data item within the set of data characterizing the plurality of spam messages exceeds a threshold.
20. The apparatus of claim 19 further comprising:
means for receiving data characterizing a new spam message; and
a database to storing the received data.
21. An apparatus comprising:
means for receiving a spam message;
means for generating data characterizing the spam message based on content of the spam message; and
means for transferring the data characterizing the spam message to a server, the data characterizing the spam message being subsequently used to find incoming messages resembling the spam message.
22. The apparatus of claim 21 further comprising:
means for evaluating the spam message for a presence of noise; and
means for modifying content of the spam message to reduce the noise.
23. The apparatus of claim 21 wherein means for evaluating the spam message for the presence of noise comprises means for detecting at least one of formatting data, a numeric character reference, a character entity reference, and predefined URL data.
24. A computer readable medium comprising executable instructions which when executed on a processing system cause said processing system to perform a method comprising:
receiving an email message;
generating data characterizing the email message based on content of the email message;
comparing the data characterizing the email message with a set of data characterizing a plurality of spam messages; and
determining whether a resemblance between the data characterizing the email message and any data item within the set of data characterizing the plurality of spam messages exceeds a threshold.
25. The computer readable medium of claim 24 wherein the method further comprises:
receiving data characterizing a new spam message; and
storing the received data in a database.
26. The computer readable medium of claim 24 wherein the method further comprises:
upon receiving the email message, evaluating the email message for a presence of noise added to avoid spam filtering; and
modifying content of the email message to reduce the noise.
27. A computer readable medium comprising executable instructions which when executed on a processing system cause said processing system to perform a method comprising:
receiving a spam message;
generating data characterizing the spam message based on content of the spam message; and
transferring the data characterizing the spam message to a server, the data characterizing the spam message being subsequently used to find incoming messages resembling the spam message.
28. The computer readable medium of claim 27 wherein the method further comprises:
upon receiving the spam message, evaluating the spam message for a presence of noise; and
modifying content of the spam message to reduce the noise.
29. The computer readable medium of claim 27 wherein evaluating the spam message for the presence of noise comprises detecting at least one of formatting data, a numeric character reference, a character entity reference, and predefined URL data.
Priority Applications (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US10/846,723 US20050108340A1 (en) | 2003-05-15 | 2004-05-13 | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam based on similarity measures |
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US47124203P | 2003-05-15 | 2003-05-15 | |
US10/846,723 US20050108340A1 (en) | 2003-05-15 | 2004-05-13 | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam based on similarity measures |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US20050108340A1 true US20050108340A1 (en) | 2005-05-19 |
Family
ID=33476818
Family Applications (4)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US10/845,648 Abandoned US20050132197A1 (en) | 2003-05-15 | 2004-05-13 | Method and apparatus for a character-based comparison of documents |
US10/845,819 Expired - Fee Related US7831667B2 (en) | 2003-05-15 | 2004-05-13 | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam using email noise reduction |
US10/846,723 Abandoned US20050108340A1 (en) | 2003-05-15 | 2004-05-13 | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam based on similarity measures |
US12/941,939 Expired - Fee Related US8402102B2 (en) | 2003-05-15 | 2010-11-08 | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam using email noise reduction |
Family Applications Before (2)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US10/845,648 Abandoned US20050132197A1 (en) | 2003-05-15 | 2004-05-13 | Method and apparatus for a character-based comparison of documents |
US10/845,819 Expired - Fee Related US7831667B2 (en) | 2003-05-15 | 2004-05-13 | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam using email noise reduction |
Family Applications After (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US12/941,939 Expired - Fee Related US8402102B2 (en) | 2003-05-15 | 2010-11-08 | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam using email noise reduction |
Country Status (5)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (4) | US20050132197A1 (en) |
EP (1) | EP1649645A2 (en) |
JP (1) | JP4598774B2 (en) |
TW (1) | TWI348851B (en) |
WO (1) | WO2004105332A2 (en) |
Cited By (64)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20040003283A1 (en) * | 2002-06-26 | 2004-01-01 | Goodman Joshua Theodore | Spam detector with challenges |
US20040123157A1 (en) * | 2002-12-13 | 2004-06-24 | Wholesecurity, Inc. | Method, system, and computer program product for security within a global computer network |
US20050108339A1 (en) * | 2003-05-15 | 2005-05-19 | Matt Gleeson | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam using email noise reduction |
US20050188032A1 (en) * | 2004-01-14 | 2005-08-25 | Katsuyuki Yamazaki | Mass mail detection system and mail server |
US20060031307A1 (en) * | 2004-05-18 | 2006-02-09 | Rishi Bhatia | System and method for filtering network messages |
US20060095966A1 (en) * | 2004-11-03 | 2006-05-04 | Shawn Park | Method of detecting, comparing, blocking, and eliminating spam emails |
US20060149820A1 (en) * | 2005-01-04 | 2006-07-06 | International Business Machines Corporation | Detecting spam e-mail using similarity calculations |
US20070038705A1 (en) * | 2005-07-29 | 2007-02-15 | Microsoft Corporation | Trees of classifiers for detecting email spam |
US20070064704A1 (en) * | 2002-06-04 | 2007-03-22 | Fortinet, Inc. | Methods and systems for a distributed provider edge |
US20070180031A1 (en) * | 2006-01-30 | 2007-08-02 | Microsoft Corporation | Email Opt-out Enforcement |
US20070208850A1 (en) * | 2006-03-01 | 2007-09-06 | Fortinet, Inc. | Electronic message and data tracking system |
US20080104062A1 (en) * | 2004-02-09 | 2008-05-01 | Mailfrontier, Inc. | Approximate Matching of Strings for Message Filtering |
US20080104712A1 (en) * | 2004-01-27 | 2008-05-01 | Mailfrontier, Inc. | Message Distribution Control |
US20080114843A1 (en) * | 2006-11-14 | 2008-05-15 | Mcafee, Inc. | Method and system for handling unwanted email messages |
US20080259934A1 (en) * | 2000-09-13 | 2008-10-23 | Fortinet, Inc. | Distributed virtual system to support managed, network-based services |
US20080317231A1 (en) * | 2004-11-18 | 2008-12-25 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing hierarchically organized subscriber profiles |
WO2009010634A1 (en) * | 2007-07-17 | 2009-01-22 | Airwide Solutions Oy | Content tracking |
US20090046728A1 (en) * | 2000-09-13 | 2009-02-19 | Fortinet, Inc. | System and method for delivering security services |
US20090073977A1 (en) * | 2002-06-04 | 2009-03-19 | Fortinet, Inc. | Routing traffic through a virtual router-based network switch |
US20090089383A1 (en) * | 2007-09-30 | 2009-04-02 | Tsuen Wan Ngan | System and method for detecting content similarity within emails documents employing selective truncation |
US20090089384A1 (en) * | 2007-09-30 | 2009-04-02 | Tsuen Wan Ngan | System and method for detecting content similarity within email documents by sparse subset hashing |
US20090089539A1 (en) * | 2007-09-30 | 2009-04-02 | Guy Barry Owen Bunker | System and method for detecting email content containment |
US20090089266A1 (en) * | 2007-09-27 | 2009-04-02 | Microsoft Corporation | Method of finding candidate sub-queries from longer queries |
US20090225754A1 (en) * | 2004-09-24 | 2009-09-10 | Fortinet, Inc. | Scalable ip-services enabled multicast forwarding with efficient resource utilization |
US20090319506A1 (en) * | 2008-06-19 | 2009-12-24 | Tsuen Wan Ngan | System and method for efficiently finding email similarity in an email repository |
US20090327430A1 (en) * | 2008-06-27 | 2009-12-31 | Microsoft Corporation | Determining email filtering type based on sender classification |
US20100057707A1 (en) * | 2008-09-03 | 2010-03-04 | Microsoft Corporation | Query-oriented message characterization |
US20100057933A1 (en) * | 2008-09-03 | 2010-03-04 | Microsoft Corporation | Probabilistic mesh routing |
US20100094887A1 (en) * | 2006-10-18 | 2010-04-15 | Jingjun Ye | Method and System for Determining Junk Information |
US20100095378A1 (en) * | 2003-09-08 | 2010-04-15 | Jonathan Oliver | Classifying a Message Based on Fraud Indicators |
US7711779B2 (en) | 2003-06-20 | 2010-05-04 | Microsoft Corporation | Prevention of outgoing spam |
US7720053B2 (en) | 2002-06-04 | 2010-05-18 | Fortinet, Inc. | Service processing switch |
US7739337B1 (en) * | 2005-06-20 | 2010-06-15 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for grouping spam email messages |
US20100162404A1 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2010-06-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | Identifying spam avatars in a virtual universe (vu) based upon turing tests |
US20100162403A1 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2010-06-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method in a virtual universe for identifying spam avatars based upon avatar multimedia characteristics |
US7760684B2 (en) | 2006-02-13 | 2010-07-20 | Airwide Solutions, Inc. | Measuring media distribution and impact in a mobile communication network |
US7761743B2 (en) | 2002-08-29 | 2010-07-20 | Fortinet, Inc. | Fault tolerant routing in a non-hot-standby configuration of a network routing system |
US20100189016A1 (en) * | 2001-06-28 | 2010-07-29 | Fortinet, Inc. | Identifying nodes in a ring network |
US20100241508A1 (en) * | 2007-07-17 | 2010-09-23 | Airwide Solutions Oy | Delivery of Advertisements in Mobile Advertising System |
US7885207B2 (en) | 2000-09-13 | 2011-02-08 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing and provisioning virtual routers |
US20110055332A1 (en) * | 2009-08-28 | 2011-03-03 | Stein Christopher A | Comparing similarity between documents for filtering unwanted documents |
US7912936B2 (en) | 2000-09-13 | 2011-03-22 | Nara Rajagopalan | Managing interworking communications protocols |
US7941490B1 (en) * | 2004-05-11 | 2011-05-10 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for detecting spam in email messages and email attachments |
US20110200044A1 (en) * | 2002-11-18 | 2011-08-18 | Fortinet, Inc. | Hardware-accelerated packet multicasting in a virtual routing system |
US8010609B2 (en) | 2005-06-20 | 2011-08-30 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for maintaining reputation lists of IP addresses to detect email spam |
US8028335B2 (en) | 2006-06-19 | 2011-09-27 | Microsoft Corporation | Protected environments for protecting users against undesirable activities |
US8065370B2 (en) | 2005-11-03 | 2011-11-22 | Microsoft Corporation | Proofs to filter spam |
US8069233B2 (en) | 2000-09-13 | 2011-11-29 | Fortinet, Inc. | Switch management system and method |
US8135778B1 (en) | 2005-04-27 | 2012-03-13 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for certifying mass emailings |
US8145710B2 (en) | 2003-06-18 | 2012-03-27 | Symantec Corporation | System and method for filtering spam messages utilizing URL filtering module |
US8224905B2 (en) | 2006-12-06 | 2012-07-17 | Microsoft Corporation | Spam filtration utilizing sender activity data |
US8271588B1 (en) | 2003-09-24 | 2012-09-18 | Symantec Corporation | System and method for filtering fraudulent email messages |
US8306040B2 (en) | 2002-06-04 | 2012-11-06 | Fortinet, Inc. | Network packet steering via configurable association of processing resources and network interfaces |
US8316094B1 (en) * | 2010-01-21 | 2012-11-20 | Symantec Corporation | Systems and methods for identifying spam mailing lists |
WO2012162676A2 (en) | 2011-05-25 | 2012-11-29 | Microsoft Corporation | Dynamic rule reordering for message classification |
US8495144B1 (en) * | 2004-10-06 | 2013-07-23 | Trend Micro Incorporated | Techniques for identifying spam e-mail |
US8700913B1 (en) | 2011-09-23 | 2014-04-15 | Trend Micro Incorporated | Detection of fake antivirus in computers |
US8848718B2 (en) | 2002-06-04 | 2014-09-30 | Google Inc. | Hierarchical metering in a virtual router-based network switch |
US8925087B1 (en) * | 2009-06-19 | 2014-12-30 | Trend Micro Incorporated | Apparatus and methods for in-the-cloud identification of spam and/or malware |
US8954458B2 (en) | 2011-07-11 | 2015-02-10 | Aol Inc. | Systems and methods for providing a content item database and identifying content items |
US9338132B2 (en) | 2009-05-28 | 2016-05-10 | International Business Machines Corporation | Providing notification of spam avatars |
US9407463B2 (en) * | 2011-07-11 | 2016-08-02 | Aol Inc. | Systems and methods for providing a spam database and identifying spam communications |
US10657182B2 (en) | 2016-09-20 | 2020-05-19 | International Business Machines Corporation | Similar email spam detection |
US20210021617A1 (en) * | 2018-06-01 | 2021-01-21 | Mitsubishi Electric Corporation | Suspicious mail detection device, suspicious mail detection method, and computer readable medium |
Families Citing this family (83)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US8056131B2 (en) * | 2001-06-21 | 2011-11-08 | Cybersoft, Inc. | Apparatus, methods and articles of manufacture for intercepting, examining and controlling code, data and files and their transfer |
WO2004022075A1 (en) | 2002-09-04 | 2004-03-18 | Novartis Ag | Treatment of neurological disorders by dsrna adminitration |
US7899828B2 (en) * | 2003-12-10 | 2011-03-01 | Mcafee, Inc. | Tag data structure for maintaining relational data over captured objects |
US7774604B2 (en) * | 2003-12-10 | 2010-08-10 | Mcafee, Inc. | Verifying captured objects before presentation |
US7814327B2 (en) | 2003-12-10 | 2010-10-12 | Mcafee, Inc. | Document registration |
US7984175B2 (en) * | 2003-12-10 | 2011-07-19 | Mcafee, Inc. | Method and apparatus for data capture and analysis system |
US20050131876A1 (en) * | 2003-12-10 | 2005-06-16 | Ahuja Ratinder Paul S. | Graphical user interface for capture system |
US8548170B2 (en) | 2003-12-10 | 2013-10-01 | Mcafee, Inc. | Document de-registration |
US8656039B2 (en) | 2003-12-10 | 2014-02-18 | Mcafee, Inc. | Rule parser |
US8301702B2 (en) * | 2004-01-20 | 2012-10-30 | Cloudmark, Inc. | Method and an apparatus to screen electronic communications |
US7930540B2 (en) * | 2004-01-22 | 2011-04-19 | Mcafee, Inc. | Cryptographic policy enforcement |
US20050204005A1 (en) * | 2004-03-12 | 2005-09-15 | Purcell Sean E. | Selective treatment of messages based on junk rating |
US8171549B2 (en) * | 2004-04-26 | 2012-05-01 | Cybersoft, Inc. | Apparatus, methods and articles of manufacture for intercepting, examining and controlling code, data, files and their transfer |
US7434058B2 (en) * | 2004-06-07 | 2008-10-07 | Reconnex Corporation | Generating signatures over a document |
US7962591B2 (en) | 2004-06-23 | 2011-06-14 | Mcafee, Inc. | Object classification in a capture system |
US7343624B1 (en) * | 2004-07-13 | 2008-03-11 | Sonicwall, Inc. | Managing infectious messages as identified by an attachment |
US9154511B1 (en) | 2004-07-13 | 2015-10-06 | Dell Software Inc. | Time zero detection of infectious messages |
US7660865B2 (en) * | 2004-08-12 | 2010-02-09 | Microsoft Corporation | Spam filtering with probabilistic secure hashes |
US8560534B2 (en) | 2004-08-23 | 2013-10-15 | Mcafee, Inc. | Database for a capture system |
US7949849B2 (en) | 2004-08-24 | 2011-05-24 | Mcafee, Inc. | File system for a capture system |
US8725705B2 (en) * | 2004-09-15 | 2014-05-13 | International Business Machines Corporation | Systems and methods for searching of storage data with reduced bandwidth requirements |
US7523098B2 (en) * | 2004-09-15 | 2009-04-21 | International Business Machines Corporation | Systems and methods for efficient data searching, storage and reduction |
US8396897B2 (en) * | 2004-11-22 | 2013-03-12 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method, system, and computer program product for threading documents using body text analysis |
US7596700B2 (en) * | 2004-12-22 | 2009-09-29 | Storage Technology Corporation | Method and system for establishing trusting environment for sharing data between mutually mistrusting entities |
CA2493442C (en) * | 2005-01-20 | 2014-12-16 | Certicom Corp. | Method and system of managing and filtering electronic messages using cryptographic techniques |
EP1869858A2 (en) * | 2005-04-13 | 2007-12-26 | France Telecom | Method for controlling the sending of unsolicited voice information |
GB2425855A (en) * | 2005-04-25 | 2006-11-08 | Messagelabs Ltd | Detecting and filtering of spam emails |
US7516130B2 (en) * | 2005-05-09 | 2009-04-07 | Trend Micro, Inc. | Matching engine with signature generation |
JP4559295B2 (en) * | 2005-05-17 | 2010-10-06 | 株式会社エヌ・ティ・ティ・ドコモ | Data communication system and data communication method |
WO2006126202A2 (en) * | 2005-05-26 | 2006-11-30 | Kayote Networks, Inc. | Detection of spit in voip calls |
US7907608B2 (en) * | 2005-08-12 | 2011-03-15 | Mcafee, Inc. | High speed packet capture |
US7818326B2 (en) * | 2005-08-31 | 2010-10-19 | Mcafee, Inc. | System and method for word indexing in a capture system and querying thereof |
US7730011B1 (en) | 2005-10-19 | 2010-06-01 | Mcafee, Inc. | Attributes of captured objects in a capture system |
US7657104B2 (en) | 2005-11-21 | 2010-02-02 | Mcafee, Inc. | Identifying image type in a capture system |
CN1987909B (en) * | 2005-12-22 | 2012-08-15 | 腾讯科技(深圳)有限公司 | Method, System and device for purifying Bayes spam |
US7748022B1 (en) * | 2006-02-21 | 2010-06-29 | L-3 Communications Sonoma Eo, Inc. | Real-time data characterization with token generation for fast data retrieval |
US7627641B2 (en) * | 2006-03-09 | 2009-12-01 | Watchguard Technologies, Inc. | Method and system for recognizing desired email |
JP2007257308A (en) * | 2006-03-23 | 2007-10-04 | Canon Inc | Document management device, document management system, control method, program and storage medium |
US8504537B2 (en) | 2006-03-24 | 2013-08-06 | Mcafee, Inc. | Signature distribution in a document registration system |
US7958227B2 (en) | 2006-05-22 | 2011-06-07 | Mcafee, Inc. | Attributes of captured objects in a capture system |
US7689614B2 (en) | 2006-05-22 | 2010-03-30 | Mcafee, Inc. | Query generation for a capture system |
US8010689B2 (en) | 2006-05-22 | 2011-08-30 | Mcafee, Inc. | Locational tagging in a capture system |
KR100809416B1 (en) * | 2006-07-28 | 2008-03-05 | 한국전자통신연구원 | Appatus and method of automatically generating signatures at network security systems |
US7730316B1 (en) * | 2006-09-22 | 2010-06-01 | Fatlens, Inc. | Method for document fingerprinting |
US20090300012A1 (en) * | 2008-05-28 | 2009-12-03 | Barracuda Inc. | Multilevel intent analysis method for email filtration |
CN101594312B (en) * | 2008-05-30 | 2012-12-26 | 电子科技大学 | Method for recognizing junk mail based on artificial immunity and behavior characteristics |
US8205242B2 (en) | 2008-07-10 | 2012-06-19 | Mcafee, Inc. | System and method for data mining and security policy management |
US9253154B2 (en) | 2008-08-12 | 2016-02-02 | Mcafee, Inc. | Configuration management for a capture/registration system |
US8850591B2 (en) | 2009-01-13 | 2014-09-30 | Mcafee, Inc. | System and method for concept building |
US8706709B2 (en) | 2009-01-15 | 2014-04-22 | Mcafee, Inc. | System and method for intelligent term grouping |
US8473442B1 (en) | 2009-02-25 | 2013-06-25 | Mcafee, Inc. | System and method for intelligent state management |
US8667121B2 (en) | 2009-03-25 | 2014-03-04 | Mcafee, Inc. | System and method for managing data and policies |
US8447722B1 (en) | 2009-03-25 | 2013-05-21 | Mcafee, Inc. | System and method for data mining and security policy management |
KR20100107801A (en) * | 2009-03-26 | 2010-10-06 | 삼성전자주식회사 | Apparatus and method for antenna selection in wireless communication system |
CN101853260B (en) * | 2009-04-01 | 2015-02-18 | 赛门铁克公司 | System and method for detecting e-mail content |
US20110015939A1 (en) * | 2009-07-17 | 2011-01-20 | Marcos Lara Gonzalez | Systems and methods to create log entries and share a patient log using open-ended electronic messaging and artificial intelligence |
US8458268B1 (en) * | 2010-02-22 | 2013-06-04 | Symantec Corporation | Systems and methods for distributing spam signatures |
US8806615B2 (en) | 2010-11-04 | 2014-08-12 | Mcafee, Inc. | System and method for protecting specified data combinations |
US9450781B2 (en) * | 2010-12-09 | 2016-09-20 | Alcatel Lucent | Spam reporting and management in a communication network |
US9384471B2 (en) * | 2011-02-22 | 2016-07-05 | Alcatel Lucent | Spam reporting and management in a communication network |
CN102655480B (en) * | 2011-03-03 | 2015-12-02 | 腾讯科技(深圳)有限公司 | Similar mail treatment system and method |
US9419928B2 (en) | 2011-03-11 | 2016-08-16 | James Robert Miner | Systems and methods for message collection |
US8819156B2 (en) | 2011-03-11 | 2014-08-26 | James Robert Miner | Systems and methods for message collection |
US9559868B2 (en) | 2011-04-01 | 2017-01-31 | Onavo Mobile Ltd. | Apparatus and methods for bandwidth saving and on-demand data delivery for a mobile device |
US8612436B1 (en) | 2011-09-27 | 2013-12-17 | Google Inc. | Reverse engineering circumvention of spam detection algorithms |
US20130246334A1 (en) | 2011-12-27 | 2013-09-19 | Mcafee, Inc. | System and method for providing data protection workflows in a network environment |
US8935783B2 (en) * | 2013-03-08 | 2015-01-13 | Bitdefender IPR Management Ltd. | Document classification using multiscale text fingerprints |
US10496900B2 (en) * | 2013-05-08 | 2019-12-03 | Seagate Technology Llc | Methods of clustering computational event logs |
RU2013144681A (en) | 2013-10-03 | 2015-04-10 | Общество С Ограниченной Ответственностью "Яндекс" | ELECTRONIC MESSAGE PROCESSING SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING ITS CLASSIFICATION |
US20150295869A1 (en) * | 2014-04-14 | 2015-10-15 | Microsoft Corporation | Filtering Electronic Messages |
US9928465B2 (en) * | 2014-05-20 | 2018-03-27 | Oath Inc. | Machine learning and validation of account names, addresses, and/or identifiers |
EP3161662B1 (en) * | 2014-06-26 | 2024-01-31 | Google LLC | Optimized browser render process |
JP6356273B2 (en) | 2014-06-26 | 2018-07-11 | グーグル エルエルシー | Batch optimized rendering and fetch architecture |
WO2015196405A1 (en) | 2014-06-26 | 2015-12-30 | Google Inc. | Optimized browser rendering process |
US10002256B2 (en) * | 2014-12-05 | 2018-06-19 | GeoLang Ltd. | Symbol string matching mechanism |
US10229219B2 (en) * | 2015-05-01 | 2019-03-12 | Facebook, Inc. | Systems and methods for demotion of content items in a feed |
TWI569608B (en) * | 2015-10-08 | 2017-02-01 | 網擎資訊軟體股份有限公司 | A computer program product and e-mail transmission method thereof for e-mail transmission in monitored network environment |
US10049208B2 (en) * | 2015-12-03 | 2018-08-14 | Bank Of America Corporation | Intrusion assessment system |
EP3398301B1 (en) | 2015-12-31 | 2021-02-03 | Axon Enterprise, Inc. | Systems and methods for filtering messages |
CN106372202B (en) * | 2016-08-31 | 2020-04-17 | 北京奇艺世纪科技有限公司 | Text similarity calculation method and device |
JP6533823B2 (en) * | 2017-05-08 | 2019-06-19 | デジタルア−ツ株式会社 | INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, PROGRAM, RECORDING MEDIUM, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD |
US11249965B2 (en) * | 2018-05-24 | 2022-02-15 | Paypal, Inc. | Efficient random string processing |
US11430244B2 (en) | 2020-12-23 | 2022-08-30 | Cylance Inc. | Statistical data fingerprinting and tracing data similarity of documents |
Citations (24)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5377354A (en) * | 1989-08-15 | 1994-12-27 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Method and system for sorting and prioritizing electronic mail messages |
US5909677A (en) * | 1996-06-18 | 1999-06-01 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Method for determining the resemblance of documents |
US6023723A (en) * | 1997-12-22 | 2000-02-08 | Accepted Marketing, Inc. | Method and system for filtering unwanted junk e-mail utilizing a plurality of filtering mechanisms |
US6119124A (en) * | 1998-03-26 | 2000-09-12 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Method for clustering closely resembling data objects |
US6161130A (en) * | 1998-06-23 | 2000-12-12 | Microsoft Corporation | Technique which utilizes a probabilistic classifier to detect "junk" e-mail by automatically updating a training and re-training the classifier based on the updated training set |
US6192360B1 (en) * | 1998-06-23 | 2001-02-20 | Microsoft Corporation | Methods and apparatus for classifying text and for building a text classifier |
US6199103B1 (en) * | 1997-06-24 | 2001-03-06 | Omron Corporation | Electronic mail determination method and system and storage medium |
US6421709B1 (en) * | 1997-12-22 | 2002-07-16 | Accepted Marketing, Inc. | E-mail filter and method thereof |
US20020116463A1 (en) * | 2001-02-20 | 2002-08-22 | Hart Matthew Thomas | Unwanted e-mail filtering |
US6453327B1 (en) * | 1996-06-10 | 2002-09-17 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for identifying and discarding junk electronic mail |
US6460050B1 (en) * | 1999-12-22 | 2002-10-01 | Mark Raymond Pace | Distributed content identification system |
US20020198950A1 (en) * | 1997-11-25 | 2002-12-26 | Leeds Robert G. | Junk electronic mail detector and eliminator |
US20030195937A1 (en) * | 2002-04-16 | 2003-10-16 | Kontact Software Inc. | Intelligent message screening |
US20040003283A1 (en) * | 2002-06-26 | 2004-01-01 | Goodman Joshua Theodore | Spam detector with challenges |
US20040044791A1 (en) * | 2001-05-22 | 2004-03-04 | Pouzzner Daniel G. | Internationalized domain name system with iterative conversion |
US20040083270A1 (en) * | 2002-10-23 | 2004-04-29 | David Heckerman | Method and system for identifying junk e-mail |
US6732157B1 (en) * | 2002-12-13 | 2004-05-04 | Networks Associates Technology, Inc. | Comprehensive anti-spam system, method, and computer program product for filtering unwanted e-mail messages |
US20040177110A1 (en) * | 2003-03-03 | 2004-09-09 | Rounthwaite Robert L. | Feedback loop for spam prevention |
US20040204988A1 (en) * | 2001-11-16 | 2004-10-14 | Willers Howard Francis | Interactively communicating selectively targeted information with consumers over the internet |
US20040210640A1 (en) * | 2003-04-17 | 2004-10-21 | Chadwick Michael Christopher | Mail server probability spam filter |
US20040221062A1 (en) * | 2003-05-02 | 2004-11-04 | Starbuck Bryan T. | Message rendering for identification of content features |
US6931433B1 (en) * | 2000-08-24 | 2005-08-16 | Yahoo! Inc. | Processing of unsolicited bulk electronic communication |
US20060168006A1 (en) * | 2003-03-24 | 2006-07-27 | Mr. Marvin Shannon | System and method for the classification of electronic communication |
US7275089B1 (en) * | 2001-03-15 | 2007-09-25 | Aws Convergence Technologies, Inc. | System and method for streaming of dynamic weather content to the desktop |
Family Cites Families (65)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
JPH0240649A (en) | 1988-07-30 | 1990-02-09 | Konica Corp | Silver halide color photographic sensitive material |
CA1321656C (en) | 1988-12-22 | 1993-08-24 | Chander Kasiraj | Method for restricting delivery and receipt of electronic message |
JPH03117940A (en) | 1989-09-25 | 1991-05-20 | Internatl Business Mach Corp <Ibm> | Method of managing electronic mail |
US5822527A (en) | 1990-05-04 | 1998-10-13 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Method and apparatus for information stream filtration using tagged information access and action registration |
GB2271002B (en) | 1992-09-26 | 1995-12-06 | Digital Equipment Int | Data processing system |
US5634005A (en) | 1992-11-09 | 1997-05-27 | Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba | System for automatically sending mail message by storing rule according to the language specification of the message including processing condition and processing content |
TW237588B (en) | 1993-06-07 | 1995-01-01 | Microsoft Corp | |
JP2837815B2 (en) | 1994-02-03 | 1998-12-16 | インターナショナル・ビジネス・マシーンズ・コーポレイション | Interactive rule-based computer system |
US5675507A (en) | 1995-04-28 | 1997-10-07 | Bobo, Ii; Charles R. | Message storage and delivery system |
US5758257A (en) | 1994-11-29 | 1998-05-26 | Herz; Frederick | System and method for scheduling broadcast of and access to video programs and other data using customer profiles |
US5619648A (en) | 1994-11-30 | 1997-04-08 | Lucent Technologies Inc. | Message filtering techniques |
JP3998710B2 (en) | 1995-05-08 | 2007-10-31 | クランベリー、プロパティーズ、リミテッド、ライアビリティー、カンパニー | Regulation-compliant electronic message management device |
US5696898A (en) | 1995-06-06 | 1997-12-09 | Lucent Technologies Inc. | System and method for database access control |
US5678041A (en) | 1995-06-06 | 1997-10-14 | At&T | System and method for restricting user access rights on the internet based on rating information stored in a relational database |
US5845263A (en) | 1995-06-16 | 1998-12-01 | High Technology Solutions, Inc. | Interactive visual ordering system |
US5826269A (en) | 1995-06-21 | 1998-10-20 | Microsoft Corporation | Electronic mail interface for a network server |
US5889943A (en) | 1995-09-26 | 1999-03-30 | Trend Micro Incorporated | Apparatus and method for electronic mail virus detection and elimination |
US5862325A (en) | 1996-02-29 | 1999-01-19 | Intermind Corporation | Computer-based communication system and method using metadata defining a control structure |
US5826022A (en) | 1996-04-05 | 1998-10-20 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for receiving electronic mail |
US5870548A (en) | 1996-04-05 | 1999-02-09 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for altering sent electronic mail messages |
US5809242A (en) | 1996-04-19 | 1998-09-15 | Juno Online Services, L.P. | Electronic mail system for displaying advertisement at local computer received from remote system while the local computer is off-line the remote system |
US5884033A (en) | 1996-05-15 | 1999-03-16 | Spyglass, Inc. | Internet filtering system for filtering data transferred over the internet utilizing immediate and deferred filtering actions |
US5864684A (en) | 1996-05-22 | 1999-01-26 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for managing subscriptions to distribution lists |
WO1997046962A1 (en) | 1996-06-07 | 1997-12-11 | At & T Corp. | Finding an e-mail message to which another e-mail message is a response |
US5926812A (en) * | 1996-06-20 | 1999-07-20 | Mantra Technologies, Inc. | Document extraction and comparison method with applications to automatic personalized database searching |
US5790789A (en) | 1996-08-02 | 1998-08-04 | Suarez; Larry | Method and architecture for the creation, control and deployment of services within a distributed computer environment |
US5978837A (en) | 1996-09-27 | 1999-11-02 | At&T Corp. | Intelligent pager for remotely managing E-Mail messages |
US5930479A (en) | 1996-10-21 | 1999-07-27 | At&T Corp | Communications addressing system |
US5796948A (en) | 1996-11-12 | 1998-08-18 | Cohen; Elliot D. | Offensive message interceptor for computers |
US6146026A (en) | 1996-12-27 | 2000-11-14 | Canon Kabushiki Kaisha | System and apparatus for selectively publishing electronic-mail |
JPH10240649A (en) | 1996-12-27 | 1998-09-11 | Canon Inc | Device and system for processing electronic mail |
US5995597A (en) | 1997-01-21 | 1999-11-30 | Woltz; Robert Thomas | E-mail processing system and method |
EP0963646A4 (en) | 1997-02-25 | 2000-06-07 | Intervoice Lp | E-mail server for message filtering and routing |
US6189026B1 (en) | 1997-06-16 | 2001-02-13 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Technique for dynamically generating an address book in a distributed electronic mail system |
US6023700A (en) | 1997-06-17 | 2000-02-08 | Cranberry Properties, Llc | Electronic mail distribution system for integrated electronic communication |
JP3148152B2 (en) | 1997-06-27 | 2001-03-19 | 日本電気株式会社 | Delivery method of broadcast mail using electronic mail system |
US7117358B2 (en) * | 1997-07-24 | 2006-10-03 | Tumbleweed Communications Corp. | Method and system for filtering communication |
US6073165A (en) | 1997-07-29 | 2000-06-06 | Jfax Communications, Inc. | Filtering computer network messages directed to a user's e-mail box based on user defined filters, and forwarding a filtered message to the user's receiver |
US5999967A (en) | 1997-08-17 | 1999-12-07 | Sundsted; Todd | Electronic mail filtering by electronic stamp |
US6199102B1 (en) | 1997-08-26 | 2001-03-06 | Christopher Alan Cobb | Method and system for filtering electronic messages |
JP3439330B2 (en) | 1997-09-25 | 2003-08-25 | 日本電気株式会社 | Email server |
US6195686B1 (en) | 1997-09-29 | 2001-02-27 | Ericsson Inc. | Messaging application having a plurality of interfacing capabilities |
US6381592B1 (en) | 1997-12-03 | 2002-04-30 | Stephen Michael Reuning | Candidate chaser |
US6052709A (en) | 1997-12-23 | 2000-04-18 | Bright Light Technologies, Inc. | Apparatus and method for controlling delivery of unsolicited electronic mail |
US5999932A (en) | 1998-01-13 | 1999-12-07 | Bright Light Technologies, Inc. | System and method for filtering unsolicited electronic mail messages using data matching and heuristic processing |
US5968117A (en) | 1998-01-20 | 1999-10-19 | Aurora Communications Exchange Ltd. | Device and system to facilitate accessing electronic mail from remote user-interface devices |
US6157630A (en) | 1998-01-26 | 2000-12-05 | Motorola, Inc. | Communications system with radio device and server |
US6314454B1 (en) | 1998-07-01 | 2001-11-06 | Sony Corporation | Method and apparatus for certified electronic mail messages |
US6226630B1 (en) | 1998-07-22 | 2001-05-01 | Compaq Computer Corporation | Method and apparatus for filtering incoming information using a search engine and stored queries defining user folders |
US6275850B1 (en) | 1998-07-24 | 2001-08-14 | Siemens Information And Communication Networks, Inc. | Method and system for management of message attachments |
US6112227A (en) | 1998-08-06 | 2000-08-29 | Heiner; Jeffrey Nelson | Filter-in method for reducing junk e-mail |
US6654787B1 (en) * | 1998-12-31 | 2003-11-25 | Brightmail, Incorporated | Method and apparatus for filtering e-mail |
US6732149B1 (en) * | 1999-04-09 | 2004-05-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for hindering undesired transmission or receipt of electronic messages |
US6804667B1 (en) * | 1999-11-30 | 2004-10-12 | Ncr Corporation | Filter for checking for duplicate entries in database |
US20040073617A1 (en) * | 2000-06-19 | 2004-04-15 | Milliken Walter Clark | Hash-based systems and methods for detecting and preventing transmission of unwanted e-mail |
US6965919B1 (en) * | 2000-08-24 | 2005-11-15 | Yahoo! Inc. | Processing of unsolicited bulk electronic mail |
US7076527B2 (en) * | 2001-06-14 | 2006-07-11 | Apple Computer, Inc. | Method and apparatus for filtering email |
US7080123B2 (en) * | 2001-09-20 | 2006-07-18 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | System and method for preventing unnecessary message duplication in electronic mail |
US8266215B2 (en) * | 2003-02-20 | 2012-09-11 | Sonicwall, Inc. | Using distinguishing properties to classify messages |
US20050132197A1 (en) * | 2003-05-15 | 2005-06-16 | Art Medlar | Method and apparatus for a character-based comparison of documents |
US8145710B2 (en) * | 2003-06-18 | 2012-03-27 | Symantec Corporation | System and method for filtering spam messages utilizing URL filtering module |
US7941490B1 (en) * | 2004-05-11 | 2011-05-10 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for detecting spam in email messages and email attachments |
JP2006293573A (en) * | 2005-04-08 | 2006-10-26 | Yaskawa Information Systems Co Ltd | Electronic mail processor, electronic mail filtering method and electronic mail filtering program |
US7739337B1 (en) * | 2005-06-20 | 2010-06-15 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for grouping spam email messages |
US8010609B2 (en) | 2005-06-20 | 2011-08-30 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for maintaining reputation lists of IP addresses to detect email spam |
-
2004
- 2004-05-13 US US10/845,648 patent/US20050132197A1/en not_active Abandoned
- 2004-05-13 US US10/845,819 patent/US7831667B2/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
- 2004-05-13 US US10/846,723 patent/US20050108340A1/en not_active Abandoned
- 2004-05-14 JP JP2006533134A patent/JP4598774B2/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
- 2004-05-14 EP EP04752404A patent/EP1649645A2/en not_active Withdrawn
- 2004-05-14 WO PCT/US2004/015383 patent/WO2004105332A2/en active Application Filing
- 2004-05-14 TW TW093113744A patent/TWI348851B/en not_active IP Right Cessation
-
2010
- 2010-11-08 US US12/941,939 patent/US8402102B2/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
Patent Citations (25)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5377354A (en) * | 1989-08-15 | 1994-12-27 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Method and system for sorting and prioritizing electronic mail messages |
US6453327B1 (en) * | 1996-06-10 | 2002-09-17 | Sun Microsystems, Inc. | Method and apparatus for identifying and discarding junk electronic mail |
US5909677A (en) * | 1996-06-18 | 1999-06-01 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Method for determining the resemblance of documents |
US6199103B1 (en) * | 1997-06-24 | 2001-03-06 | Omron Corporation | Electronic mail determination method and system and storage medium |
US20020198950A1 (en) * | 1997-11-25 | 2002-12-26 | Leeds Robert G. | Junk electronic mail detector and eliminator |
US6421709B1 (en) * | 1997-12-22 | 2002-07-16 | Accepted Marketing, Inc. | E-mail filter and method thereof |
US6023723A (en) * | 1997-12-22 | 2000-02-08 | Accepted Marketing, Inc. | Method and system for filtering unwanted junk e-mail utilizing a plurality of filtering mechanisms |
US6349296B1 (en) * | 1998-03-26 | 2002-02-19 | Altavista Company | Method for clustering closely resembling data objects |
US6119124A (en) * | 1998-03-26 | 2000-09-12 | Digital Equipment Corporation | Method for clustering closely resembling data objects |
US6192360B1 (en) * | 1998-06-23 | 2001-02-20 | Microsoft Corporation | Methods and apparatus for classifying text and for building a text classifier |
US6161130A (en) * | 1998-06-23 | 2000-12-12 | Microsoft Corporation | Technique which utilizes a probabilistic classifier to detect "junk" e-mail by automatically updating a training and re-training the classifier based on the updated training set |
US6460050B1 (en) * | 1999-12-22 | 2002-10-01 | Mark Raymond Pace | Distributed content identification system |
US6931433B1 (en) * | 2000-08-24 | 2005-08-16 | Yahoo! Inc. | Processing of unsolicited bulk electronic communication |
US20020116463A1 (en) * | 2001-02-20 | 2002-08-22 | Hart Matthew Thomas | Unwanted e-mail filtering |
US7275089B1 (en) * | 2001-03-15 | 2007-09-25 | Aws Convergence Technologies, Inc. | System and method for streaming of dynamic weather content to the desktop |
US20040044791A1 (en) * | 2001-05-22 | 2004-03-04 | Pouzzner Daniel G. | Internationalized domain name system with iterative conversion |
US20040204988A1 (en) * | 2001-11-16 | 2004-10-14 | Willers Howard Francis | Interactively communicating selectively targeted information with consumers over the internet |
US20030195937A1 (en) * | 2002-04-16 | 2003-10-16 | Kontact Software Inc. | Intelligent message screening |
US20040003283A1 (en) * | 2002-06-26 | 2004-01-01 | Goodman Joshua Theodore | Spam detector with challenges |
US20040083270A1 (en) * | 2002-10-23 | 2004-04-29 | David Heckerman | Method and system for identifying junk e-mail |
US6732157B1 (en) * | 2002-12-13 | 2004-05-04 | Networks Associates Technology, Inc. | Comprehensive anti-spam system, method, and computer program product for filtering unwanted e-mail messages |
US20040177110A1 (en) * | 2003-03-03 | 2004-09-09 | Rounthwaite Robert L. | Feedback loop for spam prevention |
US20060168006A1 (en) * | 2003-03-24 | 2006-07-27 | Mr. Marvin Shannon | System and method for the classification of electronic communication |
US20040210640A1 (en) * | 2003-04-17 | 2004-10-21 | Chadwick Michael Christopher | Mail server probability spam filter |
US20040221062A1 (en) * | 2003-05-02 | 2004-11-04 | Starbuck Bryan T. | Message rendering for identification of content features |
Cited By (134)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US7885207B2 (en) | 2000-09-13 | 2011-02-08 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing and provisioning virtual routers |
US20110128891A1 (en) * | 2000-09-13 | 2011-06-02 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing and provisioning virtual routers |
US20110176552A1 (en) * | 2000-09-13 | 2011-07-21 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing interworking communications protocols |
US8069233B2 (en) | 2000-09-13 | 2011-11-29 | Fortinet, Inc. | Switch management system and method |
US7818452B2 (en) | 2000-09-13 | 2010-10-19 | Fortinet, Inc. | Distributed virtual system to support managed, network-based services |
US7912936B2 (en) | 2000-09-13 | 2011-03-22 | Nara Rajagopalan | Managing interworking communications protocols |
US20090046728A1 (en) * | 2000-09-13 | 2009-02-19 | Fortinet, Inc. | System and method for delivering security services |
US8320279B2 (en) | 2000-09-13 | 2012-11-27 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing and provisioning virtual routers |
US20080259934A1 (en) * | 2000-09-13 | 2008-10-23 | Fortinet, Inc. | Distributed virtual system to support managed, network-based services |
US20110032942A1 (en) * | 2000-09-13 | 2011-02-10 | Fortinet, Inc. | Fast path complex flow processing |
US20100189016A1 (en) * | 2001-06-28 | 2010-07-29 | Fortinet, Inc. | Identifying nodes in a ring network |
US8208409B2 (en) | 2001-06-28 | 2012-06-26 | Fortinet, Inc. | Identifying nodes in a ring network |
US7890663B2 (en) | 2001-06-28 | 2011-02-15 | Fortinet, Inc. | Identifying nodes in a ring network |
US8111690B2 (en) | 2002-06-04 | 2012-02-07 | Google Inc. | Routing traffic through a virtual router-based network switch |
US7720053B2 (en) | 2002-06-04 | 2010-05-18 | Fortinet, Inc. | Service processing switch |
US8064462B2 (en) | 2002-06-04 | 2011-11-22 | Fortinet, Inc. | Service processing switch |
US8085776B2 (en) | 2002-06-04 | 2011-12-27 | Fortinet, Inc. | Methods and systems for a distributed provider edge |
US20100220732A1 (en) * | 2002-06-04 | 2010-09-02 | Fortinet, Inc. | Service processing switch |
US20070064704A1 (en) * | 2002-06-04 | 2007-03-22 | Fortinet, Inc. | Methods and systems for a distributed provider edge |
US8306040B2 (en) | 2002-06-04 | 2012-11-06 | Fortinet, Inc. | Network packet steering via configurable association of processing resources and network interfaces |
US8848718B2 (en) | 2002-06-04 | 2014-09-30 | Google Inc. | Hierarchical metering in a virtual router-based network switch |
US20090073977A1 (en) * | 2002-06-04 | 2009-03-19 | Fortinet, Inc. | Routing traffic through a virtual router-based network switch |
US8046832B2 (en) | 2002-06-26 | 2011-10-25 | Microsoft Corporation | Spam detector with challenges |
US20040003283A1 (en) * | 2002-06-26 | 2004-01-01 | Goodman Joshua Theodore | Spam detector with challenges |
US7761743B2 (en) | 2002-08-29 | 2010-07-20 | Fortinet, Inc. | Fault tolerant routing in a non-hot-standby configuration of a network routing system |
US8412982B2 (en) | 2002-08-29 | 2013-04-02 | Google Inc. | Fault tolerant routing in a non-hot-standby configuration of a network routing system |
US8819486B2 (en) | 2002-08-29 | 2014-08-26 | Google Inc. | Fault tolerant routing in a non-hot-standby configuration of a network routing system |
US8644311B2 (en) | 2002-11-18 | 2014-02-04 | Fortinet, Inc. | Hardware-accelerated packet multicasting in a virtual routing system |
US20110200044A1 (en) * | 2002-11-18 | 2011-08-18 | Fortinet, Inc. | Hardware-accelerated packet multicasting in a virtual routing system |
US7624110B2 (en) | 2002-12-13 | 2009-11-24 | Symantec Corporation | Method, system, and computer program product for security within a global computer network |
US20040123157A1 (en) * | 2002-12-13 | 2004-06-24 | Wholesecurity, Inc. | Method, system, and computer program product for security within a global computer network |
US20110055343A1 (en) * | 2003-05-15 | 2011-03-03 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam using email noise reduction |
US8402102B2 (en) | 2003-05-15 | 2013-03-19 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam using email noise reduction |
US7831667B2 (en) | 2003-05-15 | 2010-11-09 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam using email noise reduction |
US20050108339A1 (en) * | 2003-05-15 | 2005-05-19 | Matt Gleeson | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam using email noise reduction |
US8145710B2 (en) | 2003-06-18 | 2012-03-27 | Symantec Corporation | System and method for filtering spam messages utilizing URL filtering module |
US7711779B2 (en) | 2003-06-20 | 2010-05-04 | Microsoft Corporation | Prevention of outgoing spam |
US8984289B2 (en) | 2003-09-08 | 2015-03-17 | Sonicwall, Inc. | Classifying a message based on fraud indicators |
US8191148B2 (en) * | 2003-09-08 | 2012-05-29 | Sonicwall, Inc. | Classifying a message based on fraud indicators |
US20100095378A1 (en) * | 2003-09-08 | 2010-04-15 | Jonathan Oliver | Classifying a Message Based on Fraud Indicators |
US8661545B2 (en) | 2003-09-08 | 2014-02-25 | Sonicwall, Inc. | Classifying a message based on fraud indicators |
US8271588B1 (en) | 2003-09-24 | 2012-09-18 | Symantec Corporation | System and method for filtering fraudulent email messages |
US20050188032A1 (en) * | 2004-01-14 | 2005-08-25 | Katsuyuki Yamazaki | Mass mail detection system and mail server |
US7853654B2 (en) * | 2004-01-14 | 2010-12-14 | Kddi Corporation | Mass mail detection system and mail server |
US20080104712A1 (en) * | 2004-01-27 | 2008-05-01 | Mailfrontier, Inc. | Message Distribution Control |
US8886727B1 (en) | 2004-01-27 | 2014-11-11 | Sonicwall, Inc. | Message distribution control |
US8713110B2 (en) | 2004-01-27 | 2014-04-29 | Sonicwall, Inc. | Identification of protected content in e-mail messages |
US9454672B2 (en) | 2004-01-27 | 2016-09-27 | Dell Software Inc. | Message distribution control |
US9471712B2 (en) * | 2004-02-09 | 2016-10-18 | Dell Software Inc. | Approximate matching of strings for message filtering |
US20080104062A1 (en) * | 2004-02-09 | 2008-05-01 | Mailfrontier, Inc. | Approximate Matching of Strings for Message Filtering |
US7941490B1 (en) * | 2004-05-11 | 2011-05-10 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for detecting spam in email messages and email attachments |
US7912905B2 (en) * | 2004-05-18 | 2011-03-22 | Computer Associates Think, Inc. | System and method for filtering network messages |
US20060031307A1 (en) * | 2004-05-18 | 2006-02-09 | Rishi Bhatia | System and method for filtering network messages |
US8213347B2 (en) | 2004-09-24 | 2012-07-03 | Fortinet, Inc. | Scalable IP-services enabled multicast forwarding with efficient resource utilization |
US8369258B2 (en) | 2004-09-24 | 2013-02-05 | Fortinet, Inc. | Scalable IP-services enabled multicast forwarding with efficient resource utilization |
US7881244B2 (en) | 2004-09-24 | 2011-02-01 | Fortinet, Inc. | Scalable IP-services enabled multicast forwarding with efficient resource utilization |
US20090225754A1 (en) * | 2004-09-24 | 2009-09-10 | Fortinet, Inc. | Scalable ip-services enabled multicast forwarding with efficient resource utilization |
US20100142527A1 (en) * | 2004-09-24 | 2010-06-10 | Fortinet, Inc. | Scalable IP-Services Enabled Multicast Forwarding with Efficient Resource Utilization |
US8495144B1 (en) * | 2004-10-06 | 2013-07-23 | Trend Micro Incorporated | Techniques for identifying spam e-mail |
WO2006052583A3 (en) * | 2004-11-03 | 2007-07-12 | Shawn Park | Method of detecting, comparing, blocking, and eliminating spam emails |
WO2006052583A2 (en) * | 2004-11-03 | 2006-05-18 | Shawn Park | Method of detecting, comparing, blocking, and eliminating spam emails |
US20060095966A1 (en) * | 2004-11-03 | 2006-05-04 | Shawn Park | Method of detecting, comparing, blocking, and eliminating spam emails |
US20110235548A1 (en) * | 2004-11-18 | 2011-09-29 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing hierarchically organized subscriber profiles |
US7876683B2 (en) | 2004-11-18 | 2011-01-25 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing hierarchically organized subscriber profiles |
US20090007228A1 (en) * | 2004-11-18 | 2009-01-01 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing hierarchically organized subscriber profiles |
US7869361B2 (en) | 2004-11-18 | 2011-01-11 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing hierarchically organized subscriber profiles |
US20080317040A1 (en) * | 2004-11-18 | 2008-12-25 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing hierarchically organized subscriber profiles |
US7961615B2 (en) | 2004-11-18 | 2011-06-14 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing hierarchically organized subscriber profiles |
US20080317231A1 (en) * | 2004-11-18 | 2008-12-25 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing hierarchically organized subscriber profiles |
US8107376B2 (en) | 2004-11-18 | 2012-01-31 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing hierarchically organized subscriber profiles |
US20080320553A1 (en) * | 2004-11-18 | 2008-12-25 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing hierarchically organized subscriber profiles |
US7843813B2 (en) | 2004-11-18 | 2010-11-30 | Fortinet, Inc. | Managing hierarchically organized subscriber profiles |
US20060149820A1 (en) * | 2005-01-04 | 2006-07-06 | International Business Machines Corporation | Detecting spam e-mail using similarity calculations |
US8135778B1 (en) | 2005-04-27 | 2012-03-13 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for certifying mass emailings |
US7739337B1 (en) * | 2005-06-20 | 2010-06-15 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for grouping spam email messages |
US8010609B2 (en) | 2005-06-20 | 2011-08-30 | Symantec Corporation | Method and apparatus for maintaining reputation lists of IP addresses to detect email spam |
US20070038705A1 (en) * | 2005-07-29 | 2007-02-15 | Microsoft Corporation | Trees of classifiers for detecting email spam |
US7930353B2 (en) * | 2005-07-29 | 2011-04-19 | Microsoft Corporation | Trees of classifiers for detecting email spam |
US8065370B2 (en) | 2005-11-03 | 2011-11-22 | Microsoft Corporation | Proofs to filter spam |
US20070180031A1 (en) * | 2006-01-30 | 2007-08-02 | Microsoft Corporation | Email Opt-out Enforcement |
US7760684B2 (en) | 2006-02-13 | 2010-07-20 | Airwide Solutions, Inc. | Measuring media distribution and impact in a mobile communication network |
US20110219086A1 (en) * | 2006-03-01 | 2011-09-08 | Fortinet, Inc. | Electronic message and data tracking system |
US20070208850A1 (en) * | 2006-03-01 | 2007-09-06 | Fortinet, Inc. | Electronic message and data tracking system |
US7668920B2 (en) * | 2006-03-01 | 2010-02-23 | Fortinet, Inc. | Electronic message and data tracking system |
US8028335B2 (en) | 2006-06-19 | 2011-09-27 | Microsoft Corporation | Protected environments for protecting users against undesirable activities |
US20100094887A1 (en) * | 2006-10-18 | 2010-04-15 | Jingjun Ye | Method and System for Determining Junk Information |
US8234291B2 (en) | 2006-10-18 | 2012-07-31 | Alibaba Group Holding Limited | Method and system for determining junk information |
US20080114843A1 (en) * | 2006-11-14 | 2008-05-15 | Mcafee, Inc. | Method and system for handling unwanted email messages |
US8577968B2 (en) * | 2006-11-14 | 2013-11-05 | Mcafee, Inc. | Method and system for handling unwanted email messages |
US9419927B2 (en) | 2006-11-14 | 2016-08-16 | Mcafee, Inc. | Method and system for handling unwanted email messages |
US8224905B2 (en) | 2006-12-06 | 2012-07-17 | Microsoft Corporation | Spam filtration utilizing sender activity data |
WO2009010634A1 (en) * | 2007-07-17 | 2009-01-22 | Airwide Solutions Oy | Content tracking |
US20100185767A1 (en) * | 2007-07-17 | 2010-07-22 | Airwide Solutions Oy | Content Tracking |
US10497009B2 (en) | 2007-07-17 | 2019-12-03 | Mavenir Systems Oy | Delivery of advertisements in mobile advertising system |
AU2008277560B2 (en) * | 2007-07-17 | 2012-06-21 | Mavenir Systems Oy | Content tracking |
US10147116B2 (en) * | 2007-07-17 | 2018-12-04 | Mavenir Systems, OY | Content tracking |
US20100241508A1 (en) * | 2007-07-17 | 2010-09-23 | Airwide Solutions Oy | Delivery of Advertisements in Mobile Advertising System |
US20090089266A1 (en) * | 2007-09-27 | 2009-04-02 | Microsoft Corporation | Method of finding candidate sub-queries from longer queries |
US7765204B2 (en) * | 2007-09-27 | 2010-07-27 | Microsoft Corporation | Method of finding candidate sub-queries from longer queries |
US20090089539A1 (en) * | 2007-09-30 | 2009-04-02 | Guy Barry Owen Bunker | System and method for detecting email content containment |
US20090089384A1 (en) * | 2007-09-30 | 2009-04-02 | Tsuen Wan Ngan | System and method for detecting content similarity within email documents by sparse subset hashing |
US20090089383A1 (en) * | 2007-09-30 | 2009-04-02 | Tsuen Wan Ngan | System and method for detecting content similarity within emails documents employing selective truncation |
US8037145B2 (en) | 2007-09-30 | 2011-10-11 | Symantec Operating Corporation | System and method for detecting email content containment |
US8275842B2 (en) | 2007-09-30 | 2012-09-25 | Symantec Operating Corporation | System and method for detecting content similarity within email documents by sparse subset hashing |
US20090319506A1 (en) * | 2008-06-19 | 2009-12-24 | Tsuen Wan Ngan | System and method for efficiently finding email similarity in an email repository |
US8028031B2 (en) | 2008-06-27 | 2011-09-27 | Microsoft Corporation | Determining email filtering type based on sender classification |
US20090327430A1 (en) * | 2008-06-27 | 2009-12-31 | Microsoft Corporation | Determining email filtering type based on sender classification |
US8473455B2 (en) | 2008-09-03 | 2013-06-25 | Microsoft Corporation | Query-oriented message characterization |
US8898144B2 (en) | 2008-09-03 | 2014-11-25 | Microsoft Corporation | Query-oriented message characterization |
US20100057933A1 (en) * | 2008-09-03 | 2010-03-04 | Microsoft Corporation | Probabilistic mesh routing |
US20100057707A1 (en) * | 2008-09-03 | 2010-03-04 | Microsoft Corporation | Query-oriented message characterization |
US8099498B2 (en) | 2008-09-03 | 2012-01-17 | Microsoft Corporation | Probabilistic mesh routing |
US20170235948A1 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2017-08-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method in a virtual universe for identifying spam avatars based upon avatar multimedia characteristics |
US20100162403A1 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2010-06-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method in a virtual universe for identifying spam avatars based upon avatar multimedia characteristics |
US10922714B2 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2021-02-16 | International Business Machines Corporation | Identifying spam avatars in a virtual universe based upon turing tests |
US10915922B2 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2021-02-09 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method in a virtual universe for identifying spam avatars based upon avatar multimedia characteristics |
US20170235947A1 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2017-08-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | Identifying spam avatars in a virtual universe based upon turing tests |
US9704177B2 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2017-07-11 | International Business Machines Corporation | Identifying spam avatars in a virtual universe (VU) based upon turing tests |
US9697535B2 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2017-07-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method in a virtual universe for identifying spam avatars based upon avatar multimedia characteristics |
US20100162404A1 (en) * | 2008-12-23 | 2010-06-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | Identifying spam avatars in a virtual universe (vu) based upon turing tests |
US9338132B2 (en) | 2009-05-28 | 2016-05-10 | International Business Machines Corporation | Providing notification of spam avatars |
US8925087B1 (en) * | 2009-06-19 | 2014-12-30 | Trend Micro Incorporated | Apparatus and methods for in-the-cloud identification of spam and/or malware |
US8874663B2 (en) * | 2009-08-28 | 2014-10-28 | Facebook, Inc. | Comparing similarity between documents for filtering unwanted documents |
US20110055332A1 (en) * | 2009-08-28 | 2011-03-03 | Stein Christopher A | Comparing similarity between documents for filtering unwanted documents |
US8316094B1 (en) * | 2010-01-21 | 2012-11-20 | Symantec Corporation | Systems and methods for identifying spam mailing lists |
WO2012162676A2 (en) | 2011-05-25 | 2012-11-29 | Microsoft Corporation | Dynamic rule reordering for message classification |
EP2715565A4 (en) * | 2011-05-25 | 2015-07-15 | Microsoft Technology Licensing Llc | Dynamic rule reordering for message classification |
US9116879B2 (en) | 2011-05-25 | 2015-08-25 | Microsoft Technology Licensing, Llc | Dynamic rule reordering for message classification |
US9407463B2 (en) * | 2011-07-11 | 2016-08-02 | Aol Inc. | Systems and methods for providing a spam database and identifying spam communications |
US8954458B2 (en) | 2011-07-11 | 2015-02-10 | Aol Inc. | Systems and methods for providing a content item database and identifying content items |
US8700913B1 (en) | 2011-09-23 | 2014-04-15 | Trend Micro Incorporated | Detection of fake antivirus in computers |
US10657182B2 (en) | 2016-09-20 | 2020-05-19 | International Business Machines Corporation | Similar email spam detection |
US11681757B2 (en) * | 2016-09-20 | 2023-06-20 | International Business Machines Corporation | Similar email spam detection |
US20210021617A1 (en) * | 2018-06-01 | 2021-01-21 | Mitsubishi Electric Corporation | Suspicious mail detection device, suspicious mail detection method, and computer readable medium |
Also Published As
Publication number | Publication date |
---|---|
TWI348851B (en) | 2011-09-11 |
US20050108339A1 (en) | 2005-05-19 |
US20110055343A1 (en) | 2011-03-03 |
JP2007503660A (en) | 2007-02-22 |
US8402102B2 (en) | 2013-03-19 |
TW200527863A (en) | 2005-08-16 |
US20050132197A1 (en) | 2005-06-16 |
WO2004105332A3 (en) | 2005-03-10 |
EP1649645A2 (en) | 2006-04-26 |
JP4598774B2 (en) | 2010-12-15 |
US7831667B2 (en) | 2010-11-09 |
WO2004105332A9 (en) | 2005-12-15 |
WO2004105332A2 (en) | 2004-12-02 |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US7831667B2 (en) | Method and apparatus for filtering email spam using email noise reduction | |
US8145710B2 (en) | System and method for filtering spam messages utilizing URL filtering module | |
US7739337B1 (en) | Method and apparatus for grouping spam email messages | |
US10042919B2 (en) | Using distinguishing properties to classify messages | |
KR101045452B1 (en) | Advanced spam detection techniques | |
EP1738519B1 (en) | Method and system for url-based screening of electronic communications | |
US7941490B1 (en) | Method and apparatus for detecting spam in email messages and email attachments | |
US9537871B2 (en) | Systems and methods for categorizing network traffic content | |
US20050015626A1 (en) | System and method for identifying and filtering junk e-mail messages or spam based on URL content | |
US9246860B2 (en) | System, method and computer program product for gathering information relating to electronic content utilizing a DNS server | |
US20060075099A1 (en) | Automatic elimination of viruses and spam | |
US20050289239A1 (en) | Method and an apparatus to classify electronic communication | |
Kranakis | Combating Spam |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: SYMANTEC CORPORATION, CALIFORNIA Free format text: MERGER;ASSIGNOR:BRIGHTMAIL, INC.;REEL/FRAME:016329/0690 Effective date: 20040618 |
|
STCB | Information on status: application discontinuation |
Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION |