Skip to main content

Yet more spammer image optimization; this time it's pretty

These something new in the image-spam wave: pretty colours! This spammer is working hard to randomize his images and avoid OCR. Here's a sample:

And to give you an idea of the randomization here's another:

Thanks to Nick FitzGerald and Sorin Mustaca for samples. Notice how the letters are misaligned both vertically and horizontally to try to avoid OCR, and the background polygons are randomized. Also the aspect ratio and size of the messages have been changed for each image.


Anonymous said…
Now they are posting this crap:

Return-Path: < ttgoimue @ >
X-Original-To: [email protected]
Delivered-To: [email protected]st
Received: from ( [])
by localhost (Postfix) with ESMTP id E177FA23CC05
for < me @ localhost >; Fri, 17 Nov 2006 16:38:09 +0100 (CET)
From: "song Linesquot" < ttgoimue @ >
To: [email protected]
Subject: smokes nego philly
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 16:38:11 +0100
Message-ID: < xxx @ yyy >
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6626
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962

15387358535238560 755372760277 55857682315583 028174 74848820252 55202212841433
84662524653688135 68546443787324 7126205248871645 30041108 83647686711703 810047324420013
03386 44751 20258 1384 4082 6757641475 68774 12663 0037 3653
71072 30327 46643 0264 6734 7784 4822 00415 36444 4018 0313
84118 71551 45378 6633551637118483 3767 7458 10588 64842 20264825123186
12366 31221 74650 05846146875851 826651 05211 50126 36543 127482773717882
26252 01310 80081 881508537240 168460125817862 54614 84864 0622 3583
36572 55608 31350 1257 0406 2737234764451043 10580 73415 3581 151
56676 32535 33217 2560 28658 48271 1236 52826 50508 31632 6132 5253
32782 28041615146325 4781 6822 48522 8641 26510 10073148884806 802502876385402
32346 805544351641 4102 8000 51203 7324 68382 876748017021 70065312554724

Popular posts from this blog

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

All the symmetrical watch faces (and code to generate them)

If you ever look at pictures of clocks and watches in advertising they are set to roughly 10:10 which is meant to be the most attractive (smiling!) position for the hands . They are actually set to 10:09.14 if the hands are truly symmetrical. CC BY 2.0 image by Shinji I wanted to know what all the possible symmetrical watch faces are and so I wrote some code using Processing. Here's the output (there's one watch face missing, 00:00 or 12:00, because it's very boring): The key to writing this is to figure out the relationship between the hour and minute hands when the watch face is symmetrical. In an hour the minute hand moves through 360° and the hour hand moves through 30° (12 hours are shown on the watch face and 360/12 = 30). The core loop inside the program is this:   for (int h = 0; h <= 12; h++) {     float m = (360-30*float(h))*2/13;     int s = round(60*(m-floor(m)));     int col = h%6;     int row = floor(h/6);     draw_clock((r+f)*(2*col+1), (r+f)*(row*2+1),

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