Urgent - Image Filtering Needs Improvemen |
Post Reply ![]() |
Author | |
pcmatt ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 15 February 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 116 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Posted: 31 October 2006 at 11:42am |
It's hard to be too critical, because overall we know this is the best program available to fight spam, however, always room for improvement. The image filter needs improvement. Others use more than just the image itself to determine if the image should be the basis for failing a spam check. For example, if there is 50 lines of text and then and embedded image so the image is not even likely being seen by the user without scrolling down to it, it's likely the image is a signature and should not fail unless other characteristics of the image make it so obvious. I don't believe any type of OCR is wise at all, but I urge Logsat to look into expanding the logic and accuracy of the image filtering in SpamFilter. We can't run without it now and it is the number one cause of false positives in the program. -MJR |
|
-Matt R
|
|
![]() |
|
pcmatt ![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() Joined: 15 February 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 116 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Ok, Let me turn this into one simple request: Please consider the number of lines down the body of the email before the first image is displayed so silly little signature images are not scanned or are weighted based on their being the only image so far down in the message body that you have to scroll to see it, please?
|
|
-Matt R
|
|
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
|
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.148 seconds.