Wishlist Item - Option to Strip Phony HTML Tags

Rob LIndauer · Guest

I'd like to see a B9 option to strip unrecognized html tags from messages.

For example, spammers have taken to inserting phony HTML tags (e.g., <JRELW> and </JRELW>) into their messages to break up "trigger" words so that antispam programs don't recognize the words.

Since I feed B9's output to my antispam program, this capability would permit my antispam program to recognize more spam messages. (I'm using McAffee on one machine, Mailwasher Pro on another - both are fooled by the phony tags.)

Thanks!

Ikeb · Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2004 12:30 pm Post subject:

IMO, B9 should focus on cleaning up legit messages. That's not to say that MWP shouldn't allow me to filter on the stripped message. However I'm finding that the phony tags inserted into messages is a better SPAM "fingerprint" than the actual words used. Wink

rusticdog · Posted: Mon Jan 05, 2004 11:07 pm Post subject:

Ikeb · Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 2:11 am Post subject:

Ok but then my question is, "why would I have to strip anything like that out of legit messages?"

And a followon, "Why can't I find out immediately that I've accepted such a message and which message it was?"

rusticdog · Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 2:17 am Post subject:

Six good reasons why HTML is bad...http://forum.gladiator-antivirus.com/index.php?showtopic=3098

Ikeb · Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:02 am Post subject:

rusticdog · Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:14 am Post subject:

No, there's no need to panic either if the alteration to the email is a simple tidy up, or cautionary removal of script.

In saying that we acknowledge that there is insufficient information provided by B9 as to what alterations to the email have been made, this will be addressed later this year.

Is alerts something you and anyone else reading this wayward post would want ?

Wayward · Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 11:36 pm Post subject:

Ikeb · Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:55 am Post subject:

Ikeb · Posted: Fri Jan 09, 2004 11:35 pm Post subject:

BTW Wayward, I should have mentioned that it's hard enough finding the messages without a search option, they aren't sortable either! They aren't even sorted chronologically by default!

Just tonight I was looking for the record for a message I received today that had some attachments removed. Knowing it was one of the last few received, you'd figure it should be near the top of the list right? Nope. I had to page down until I found today's messages all grouped together.

To add insult to injury, the log only said that three files had been removed. No reason, just that they were removed. No indication of size, attachment type, that sort of thing.

Just an illustration of my point. If you actually want to use the logs, they are, to put it bluntly, pretty useless.

Wayward · Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2004 12:32 am Post subject:

Ikeb · Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2004 1:43 am Post subject:

Obviously I use B9 as well. In fact I wouldn't want to be without it. I'm limiting my criticism to the logs, which in my mind are inferior and do a disservice to the product. I also see the inability to effectively analyze and quickly find out if a message needs further attention as an area where the product could be improved.

Standing back from this a bit, it's been many months since there's been any sort of B9 upgrade. Based on the lack of demand for changes, why would FireTrust change anything? Take this topic for instance. Only two of us bothered to respond to RD's question above and while one of us is being somewhat vocal about the need for a change, the other's tone is rather less urgent. I know if I were a FireTrust product manager, I'd take that as an indication that any change can wait until some unspecified future date when there's more of a demonstrated need for change.

rusticdog · Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2004 5:41 pm Post subject:

Great. We do have a list of changes to be making to B9 later in the year, and I feel that what we've come up with relates well to what you are saying.

Chnages to B9 though are on hold, once we have MW to a point of satisfaction the priorities will shift to B9

Wayward · Posted: Sat Jan 10, 2004 6:02 pm Post subject:

rusticdog,

That goes along with my thinking. While I would like to have everything right now, I understand there must be some development resource and priority considerations on both your end and the user end.

In considering my personal needs, MailWasher Pro is at the top of the list. FirstAlert! is next and Benign pulling in at a very strong third. I can live with some of the current Benign stuff as long as there is good progress on all of the products.

Just get it all done as fast as you can. Wink

Eisenson · Posted: Tue May 25, 2004 4:48 pm Post subject:

OK...
So I understand that B9 will compress emails into text, removing spurious (anti-antispam) html?

I'm buying B9 immediately to go with my 90% satisfactory MWP! This pair just might get the job done.


	Home ˇ Topics ˇ Submit News ˇ Top 10 This entire site, Cops Themes, and Computer Cops are Š 2002 - 2004 Computer Cops, LLC. All rights reserved. You can syndicate our news using the file RSS 0.91, ultramode.txt, or RSS 1.0. Acceptable Use Policy. Use signifies your agreement. Engine Copyright Š 2002 by PHP-Nuke, GNU/GPL Licensed. ICRA Member. Paul Laudanski, Member of Computer Cops, LLC Server Load: 692 pages served in previous 5 minutes. Page Rendered: 0.492 seconds.