Skip to main content

Do spammers fear OCR?

Nick FitzGerald recently sent me two sample spams that seem to indicate that some spammers fear that using images in place of words isn't enough. They've started to obscure their messages to prevent optical character recognition.

The first spam appears to be a scan of a document that's been skewed slightly. Now this could be a simple and bad scan.



But the second is even more interesting. It appears to be perfectly normal:



Until you look at the fact that this was actually constructed using <DIV> tags for layout and the breaks between the lines are in the middle of words. Here Nick has kindly inserted borders showing that the words are broken horizontally and then put back in the right position:



But is anyone doing OCR, or are spam filters getting good enough that the spammers are being really paranoid about what they are sending?

The funny think about the second example is that the URL they include is not obfuscated, is clickable and appears in the SURBL :-) So despite the effort to obscure the content a simple check of the spamminess of the URL gets this email canned.

Comments

Justin Mason said…
That *is* interesting!

Typically, when I've seen something like this before, it indicates that one of the proprietary services (AOL? GMail?) is indeed using OCR, and I just didn't know it yet -- but the spammers do.
Nick also mentioned another, non-OCR, possibility for doing this... if the images are skewed or split in different ways over time then the spammer prevents a spam filter from being able to track a common hash for each image.
mr g said…
On the other hand, most e-mail clients (even webmail services) do not show images by default, so what's the point of using images?

If I get such an e-mail, it'll probably land in my Junk E-mail. If it does not, it will be a blank e-mail with image placeholders.

Or am I missing something here?
Anonymous said…
"... most e-mail clients (even webmail services) do not show images by default, so what's the point of using images? ... Or am I missing something here?" -- mr g

I think what you missed is that, by default, the _most used_ Email clients do show inline HTML images from MHTML format messages that use the cid: protocol to reference those images. Perhaps only 80% of all potential recipients and only 7% of potential recipients who are *nix users will see the spam's graphical ad, but that really does not matter to the spammer, and matters even less if this new approach means that each week s/he gets a few hundred million more ads past the filters until they are further tweaked.

Of course we don't know if this is more successful or not, BUT the spam-trap address that snagged both the samples John referred to is still getting a goodly amount of the "skewed scan" style of "junk shares" spam so maybe that tells us something?
Anonymous said…
"But is anyone doing OCR, or are spam filters getting good enough that the spammers are being really paranoid about what they are sending?" -- jgc

Well, back in January, I think the answer was no-one was doing OCR, although there had been some talk about it. However, on 14 April 2006, Martin Blapp posted a link to his "Image validator/OCR SA plugin" for Spamassassin, to the MIMEDefang (and other??) lists. An archived copy of that mesage is at:

http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/pipermail/mimedefang/2006-April/029999.html
Sorin said…
They went even deeper in this anti-ocr issue. Now they send emails with an image inside which is created from multiple parts. The parts seem to be created with a generator.

See an email here:
http://www.mustaca.de/blog

Popular posts from this blog

How to write a successful blog post

First, a quick clarification of 'successful'. In this instance, I mean a blog post that receives a large number of page views. For my, little blog the most successful post ever got almost 57,000 page views. Not a lot by some other standards, but I was pretty happy about it. Looking at the top 10 blog posts (by page views) on my site, I've tried to distill some wisdom about what made them successful. Your blog posting mileage may vary. 1. Avoid using the passive voice The Microsoft Word grammar checker has probably been telling you this for years, but the passive voice excludes the people involved in your blog post. And that includes you, the author, and the reader. By using personal pronouns like I, you and we, you will include the reader in your blog post. When I first started this blog I avoid using "I" because I thought I was being narcissistic. But we all like to read about other people, people help anchor a story in reality. Without people your bl

Your last name contains invalid characters

My last name is "Graham-Cumming". But here's a typical form response when I enter it: Does the web site have any idea how rude it is to claim that my last name contains invalid characters? Clearly not. What they actually meant is: our web site will not accept that hyphen in your last name. But do they say that? No, of course not. They decide to shove in my face the claim that there's something wrong with my name. There's nothing wrong with my name, just as there's nothing wrong with someone whose first name is Jean-Marie, or someone whose last name is O'Reilly. What is wrong is that way this is being handled. If the system can't cope with non-letters and spaces it needs to say that. How about the following error message: Our system is unable to process last names that contain non-letters, please replace them with spaces. Don't blame me for having a last name that your system doesn't like, whose fault is that? Saying "Your

The Elevator Button Problem

User interface design is hard. It's hard because people perceive apparently simple things very differently. For example, take a look at this interface to an elevator: From flickr Now imagine the following situation. You are on the third floor of this building and you wish to go to the tenth. The elevator is on the fifth floor and there's an indicator that tells you where it is. Which button do you press? Most people probably say: "press up" since they want to go up. Not long ago I watched someone do the opposite and questioned them about their behavior. They said: "well the elevator is on the fifth floor and I am on the third, so I want it to come down to me". Much can be learnt about the design of user interfaces by considering this, apparently, simple interface. If you think about the elevator button problem you'll find that something so simple has hidden depths. How do people learn about elevator calling? What's the right amount of