From d018162f098b9a270dc87fe9da4408c83a828c33 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: yamaoka Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 04:25:09 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Translating is being continued... --- texi/gnus-ja.texi | 136 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------------- 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-) diff --git a/texi/gnus-ja.texi b/texi/gnus-ja.texi index 4c345fc..dccf827 100644 --- a/texi/gnus-ja.texi +++ b/texi/gnus-ja.texi @@ -16250,7 +16250,7 @@ short $B=i4|@_DjCM$O(B 0$B!#(B @item spam -gnus $B%(!<%8%'%s%H$,$=$N5-;v$r(B SPAM $B$@$H8+Pv$7$?$i??!#$3$NH/8+E*l9g%9(B $B%3%"EPO?$N(B 5 $BHVL\$NMWAG$,%9%3%"$rIU$1$k%X%C%@!<$NL>A0$K$J$j$^$9!#(B @sc{nntp} $B%5!<%P!<$,(B overview $B$K(B NNTP-Posting-Host $B$r5-O?$7$F$$$k$J$i$P!"(B -@file{all.SCORE} $B%U%!%$%k$N0J2<$NEPO?$O!"C10l$N%[%9%H$+$i%9%Q%`$N967b$,(B +@file{all.SCORE} $B%U%!%$%k$N0J2<$NEPO?$O!"C10l$N%[%9%H$+$i(B spam $B$N967b$,(B $B$"$k>l9g$KM-8z$G$9!#(B @lisp @@ -19790,10 +19790,10 @@ Gnus $B$O$5$^$6$^$J@)8f;R(B @dfn{handlers} $B$rDj5A$9$k$3$H$K$h$C$F$=$N$h$&$J @cindex nocem @cindex spam -$B%9%Q%`(B @dfn{Spam} $B$H$O!"F1$85-;v$r2?2s$b2?2s$b2?2s$bEj9F$9$k$3$H$G$9!#%9(B -$B%Q%`$O0-$$$3$H$G$9!#%9%Q%`$O6'0-$G$9!#(B +@dfn{Spam} $B$H$O!"F1$85-;v$r2?2s$b2?2s$b2?2s$bEj9F$9$k$3$H$G$9!#(BSpam $B$O0-(B +$B$$$3$H$G$9!#(BSpam $B$O6'0-$G$9!#(B -$B%9%Q%`$ODL>o0lF|$+$=$3$i$G!"$5$^$6$^$JH?%9%Q%`5!4X$+$iC$7$5$l$^$9!#(B +Spam $B$ODL>o0lF|$+$=$3$i$G!"$5$^$6$^$JH?(B spam $B5!4X$+$iC$7$5$l$^$9!#(B $B$3$l$i$N5!4X$ODL>o0l=o$K!"(B@dfn{NoCeM} $B%a%C%;!<%8$bAw?.$7$^$9!#(B @dfn{NoCeM} $B$O(B ``no see-'em'' ($BH`$i$r8+$?$/$J$$(B)$B$HH/2;$5$l!"0UL#$O$=$NL>(B $BA0$NDL$j$G$9(B --- $B$3$N%a%C%;!<%8$O!":a$rHH$7$F$$$k5-;v$r!"$D$^$j!">C$7$F(B @@ -19806,7 +19806,7 @@ Gnus $B$O$5$^$6$^$J@)8f;R(B @dfn{handlers} $B$rDj5A$9$k$3$H$K$h$C$F$=$N$h$&$J $B$O(B @samp{alt.nocem.misc} $B%K%e!<%9%0%k!<%W$GG[I[$5$l$F$$$^$9!#(B Gnus $B$O$3$N%0%k!<%W$N%a%C%;!<%8$r<+F0E*$KFI$_!"2rC$75n$j$^$9!#(B +$B$G(B spam $B$r>C$75n$j$^$9!#(B $B$b$A$m$s!"$3$l$i$r%+%9%?%^%$%:$9$k$?$a$NJQ?t$,$$$/$D$+$"$j$^$9!#(B @@ -19829,7 +19829,7 @@ NoCeM $B%a%C%;!<%8$rH/9T$9$k?M$O$?$/$5$s$$$^$9!#$3$N%j%9%H$G$O!"C/$N8@$&$3(B "clewis@@ferret.ocunix.on.ca" "cosmo.roadkill" "SpamHippo" "hweede@@snafu.de")} $B$G$9!#H`$i$O$_$s$J!"N)GI$G9b7i$J;TL1$G$9!#(B -$B$3$N%j%9%H$K4^$a$i$l$kM-L>$JH?%9%Q%`2H$?$A(B +$B$3$N%j%9%H$K4^$a$i$l$kM-L>$JH?(B spam $B2H$?$A(B $B$O(B @uref{http://www.xs4all.nl/~rosalind/nocemreg/nocemreg.html} $B$K:\$C$F(B $B$$$^$9!#(B @@ -19892,7 +19892,7 @@ NoCeM $B%a%C%;!<%8$rH/9T$9$k?M$O$?$/$5$s$$$^$9!#$3$N%j%9%H$G$O!"C/$N8@$&$3(B @item gnus-nocem-expiry-wait @vindex gnus-nocem-expiry-wait $B8E$$(B NoCeM $B9`L\$r%-%c%C%7%e$+$i>C$9$^$G$NF|?t!#=i4|@_DjCM$O(B 15 $B$G$9!#$3(B -$B$l$rC;$/$9$k$[$I(B gnus $B$OB.$/$J$j$^$9$,!"8E$$%9%Q%`$r8+$k$3$H$K$J$C$F$7$^(B +$B$l$rC;$/$9$k$[$I(B gnus $B$OB.$/$J$j$^$9$,!"8E$$(B spam $B$r8+$k$3$H$K$J$C$F$7$^(B $B$&$+$b$7$l$^$;$s!#(B @item gnus-nocem-check-from @@ -20560,72 +20560,70 @@ Gnus $B$O!"%9%3%"IU$1!"%9%l%C%I$N7A@.!"%9%l%C%IHf3S$J$I$r9T$&$H$-$K!"(B @end menu @node The problem of spam -@subsection The problem of spam +@subsection Spam $B$NLdBj(B @cindex email spam @cindex spam filtering approaches @cindex filtering approaches, spam @cindex UCE @cindex unsolicited commercial email -First, some background on spam. - -If you have access to e-mail, you are familiar with spam (technically -termed @acronym{UCE}, Unsolicited Commercial E-mail). Simply put, it exists -because e-mail delivery is very cheap compared to paper mail, so only -a very small percentage of people need to respond to an UCE to make it -worthwhile to the advertiser. Ironically, one of the most common -spams is the one offering a database of e-mail addresses for further -spamming. Senders of spam are usually called @emph{spammers}, but terms like -@emph{vermin}, @emph{scum}, and @emph{morons} are in common use as well. - -Spam comes from a wide variety of sources. It is simply impossible to -dispose of all spam without discarding useful messages. A good -example is the TMDA system, which requires senders -unknown to you to confirm themselves as legitimate senders before -their e-mail can reach you. Without getting into the technical side -of TMDA, a downside is clearly that e-mail from legitimate sources may -be discarded if those sources can't or won't confirm themselves -through the TMDA system. Another problem with TMDA is that it -requires its users to have a basic understanding of e-mail delivery -and processing. - -The simplest approach to filtering spam is filtering. If you get 200 -spam messages per day from @email{random-address@@vmadmin.com}, you -block @samp{vmadmin.com}. If you get 200 messages about -@samp{VIAGRA}, you discard all messages with @samp{VIAGRA} in the -message. This, unfortunately, is a great way to discard legitimate -e-mail. For instance, the very informative and useful RISKS digest -has been blocked by overzealous mail filters because it -@strong{contained} words that were common in spam messages. -Nevertheless, in isolated cases, with great care, direct filtering of -mail can be useful. - -Another approach to filtering e-mail is the distributed spam -processing, for instance DCC implements such a system. In essence, -@code{N} systems around the world agree that a machine @samp{X} in -China, Ghana, or California is sending out spam e-mail, and these -@code{N} systems enter @samp{X} or the spam e-mail from @samp{X} into -a database. The criteria for spam detection vary - it may be the -number of messages sent, the content of the messages, and so on. When -a user of the distributed processing system wants to find out if a -message is spam, he consults one of those @code{N} systems. - -Distributed spam processing works very well against spammers that send -a large number of messages at once, but it requires the user to set up -fairly complicated checks. There are commercial and free distributed -spam processing systems. Distributed spam processing has its risks as -well. For instance legitimate e-mail senders have been accused of -sending spam, and their web sites have been shut down for some time -because of the incident. - -The statistical approach to spam filtering is also popular. It is -based on a statistical analysis of previous spam messages. Usually -the analysis is a simple word frequency count, with perhaps pairs or -words or 3-word combinations thrown into the mix. Statistical -analysis of spam works very well in most of the cases, but it can -classify legitimate e-mail as spam in some cases. It takes time to -run the analysis, the full message must be analyzed, and the user has -to store the database of spam analyses. +$B=i$a$K(B spam $B$NGX7J$+$i!#(B + +$B$"$J$?$,EE;R%a!<%k$r;H$C$F$$$k$J$i$P!"(Bspam ($B@lLgMQ8l$H$7$F$O(B Unsolicited +Commercial E-mail -- $BK>$^$l$J$$>&MQEE;R%a!<%k(B -- $B$NF,J8(B +$B;z(B @acronym{UCE}) $B$N$3$H$O$h$/CN$C$F$$$k$G$7$g$&!#4JC1$K8@$($P$=$l$O;f$N(B +$B%a!<%k$KHf$Y$FEE;R%a!<%k$NG[Aw$,$H$F$b0B$/$D$/$?$a$KB8:_$7!"Hs>o$K>.$5$J(B +$B3d9g$N?M!9$,(B UCE $B$K1~Ez$9$k$@$1$G9-9pl9g$O@\$N_I2a$OM-1W$K$J$jF@$^$9!#(B + +$B$b$&0l$D$NEE;R%a!<%k_I2a$X$Nl9g!"H`$O(B +$B$=$l$i$N(B @code{N} $B8D$N%7%9%F%`$N$&$A$N0l$D$rD4$Y$^$9!#(B + +$BJ,;67?(B spam $B=hM}$OF1;~$KB?$/$N%a%C%;!<%8$rAw$k(B spammers $B$HHs>o$K$h$/@o$C(B +$B$F$/$l$^$9$,!"$=$l$O%f!<%6!<$,$+$J$jJ#;($J%A%'%C%/$r@_Dj$9$k$3$H$r5a$a$^(B +$B$9!#>&MQ$H!"%U%j!<$JJ,;67?(B spam $B=hM}%7%9%F%`$,$"$j$^$9!#J,;67?(B spam $B=hM}(B +$B$O!"$=$l<+BN$N4m81$b$O$i$s$G$$$^$9!#Nc$($P!"@5Ev$JAw?.o$=$NJ,@O$O!"$*$=$i$/C18l$NBP$+;0$D(B +$B$NC18l$NAH9g$;$N9g@.$K$h$k!"C18l$N=P8=IQEY$NC1=c$J7W?t$G$9!#(BSpam $B$NE}7W(B +$BJ,@O$O$[$H$s$I$N>l9g$K$H$F$b$h$/F/$/$N$G$9$,!";~$H$7$F@5Ev$JEE;R%a!<%k(B +$B$r(B spam $B$H$7$FJ,N`$7$F$7$^$&$3$H$,$"$j$^$9!#J,@O$K$O;~4V$,$+$+$j$^$9!#$9(B +$B$Y$F$N%a%C%;!<%8$rJ,@O$7$J$1$l$P$J$j$^$;$s!#$=$7$F%f!<%6!<$O(B spam $B$rJ,@O(B +$B$9$k$?$a$N%G!<%?%Y!<%9$rMQ0U$7$J$1$l$P$J$j$^$;$s!#(B @node Anti-Spam Basics @subsection Spam $BB`<#$N4pAC(B @@ -22493,7 +22491,7 @@ Washing})$B!#(B @end iftex @item -Gnus $B$O%9%Q%`$r:,@d$d$7$K$9$k$?$a$K(B NoCeM $B%U%!%$%k$r;H$&;v$,$G$-$k$h$&$K(B +Gnus $B$O(B spam $B$r:,@d$d$7$K$9$k$?$a$K(B NoCeM $B%U%!%$%k$r;H$&;v$,$G$-$k$h$&$K(B $B$J$j$^$7$?(B (@pxref{NoCeM})$B!#(B @lisp -- 1.7.10.4