JP2008538267A - System, method, and apparatus for capturing a large volume of distributed electronic messages - Google Patents

Abstract

Systems and methods for substantially preventing mass delivery and / or unsolicited electronic messages from reaching an end user's electronic message address. The filter is used to pass or not pass the message, recognizes the passphrase, and if the passphrase is identified or if the message passes the filter criteria, the electronic message is sent to the end user's primary mail. Deliver to a box and send the message to an alternate mailbox if the passphrase is not identified and the message does not pass the filter criteria. The alternate mailbox has a different mailbox name than the first mailbox name and has a response address set to a different electronic message address. The alternate mailbox is configured to receive the electronic message delivered through the filter and send a response including the person's instructions to the electronic message address of the received electronic message. The person's instructions represent a passphrase.

Description

  The present invention relates to a new method for mass delivery and / or preventing unsolicited electronic messages (“spam” or “junk mail”)) from reaching an end user's electronic message (“email”) address. This technology is a hybrid approach with both server-side and user-side filtering technologies in addition to the new concept of "spam trap" that correctly distinguishes between computer-generated email and email from human senders including. This technology guarantees that legitimate email will pass while being a reliable way to eliminate the need to review Jackmail's repository for false positives (legitimate email identified as spam) I will provide a. The method does not require the user to download an email in order to filter it, so that it applies all of the user's email search points without adding software or structure. The system uses a humanistic way to avoid false positives. The filtered message is confirmed by a human comprehensible command that bypasses the filter, such as “resend your message using the third word of this sentence in your subject”. Although easily understandable by humans, it is essentially impossible for a computer to decipher such a description using current technology.

  A mail exchange (MX) record is an input in a domain name database that identifies the mail server responsible for handling email for the domain name. There are two basic ways to handle spam (server side or user side filtering) when received by the MX host. Server-side filtering is done when the MX host provides a built-in spam filter that processes spam before it reaches the user's inbox. MX Logic, Denver, Colorado, is a company that provides this service to users who authorize their MX records to be routed through our servers. This technique identifies spam and simultaneously adapts to all search points. However, since it is not a fail-safe way to guarantee against false positives, the user must always monitor the “junk mail” folder to make sure that he does not miss legitimate email. The Atlanta, Georgia, Earth link provides three levels of protection: none, medium ("well-known spam block") and best ("suspicious and well-known spam email"). The intermediate level blocks well-known spam and the highest level blocks all senders except those on the user's white list. The best level is that on Earthlink's web, Earthlink says, "(Best Protection) Suspicious Email Block-Want 100% virtual protection? From senders not in your personal address book? Filter all emails. You can read messages in the suspicious email folder at any time and Earthlink can send you a daily summary of suspicious messages. " Yes. Earth Link provides a challenge message system using an “accepted sender request form”. While such positive response techniques are effective, they are not fail-safe because they rely on the user to work through a specific sender. That is, because all unknown senders are treated in the same way, the user is required to monitor for false positives and manage legitimate senders. The “accepted sender request form” is particularly troublesome for business users who receive emails from senders who do not know well and do not want to spend time responding to requests for monitoring or approving junk mail folders.

  User-side systems available from Qurb in San Mateo, Calif. Or from Symantec in Cuepartino, Calif., When receiving an e-mail, usually place the e-mail in a folder for the user to check later. Use a resident program to move it. The user's system may use a “positive response” technique to quarantine suspicious messages until the sender responds to the challenge message. When the sender responds, the email is removed from quarantine and becomes visible to the user. Qurb uses a challenge method, but does not rely on human interference to bypass the filter, it just needs to respond. The user's system has the disadvantage that the email needs to be downloaded to the user for processing. If a positive response method is used, it also requires upload time for a challenge message to be sent. This is expensive for low bandwidth and mobile users. In addition, these types of systems must be applied at each point of the search. For example, a user who receives email from a laptop at work, at home and while traveling must install and configure software (including whitelist and blacklist) on all three machines. I must. Users are not fully protected when using other search points, such as Internet cafe public terminals, or when searching for emails from different platforms such as PDAs and mobile phones on hand.

  Both types of systems use a heuristic, statistically based, reputation-based approach that applies criteria and rules that determine the validity (pass or fail) of email. A user adjustable setting is often provided that allows the user to set the filter sensitivity to low, medium and high. The normal user can generate a “white list” and a “black list” (always accept or always reject). Some systems can even provide “education” methods that improve the accuracy of the filter over time.

  Many systems are used to communicate human readable messages for security purposes. For example, American Online in Dulles, Virginia uses a stylized image of the passphrase that the user interprets to reset the user registration password if the logon attempt fails twice. However, this concept has not been applied to electronic messages in the form of an email processing system that helps filter spam. Such an application was developed by Anti-Spam Technology Alliance Policy Proposal Prepared By the Anti-Spam Alliance on the 6th day of the month of April 6th, 200th. As is not obvious. This group of experts from leading internet service providers, software companies, and electronic communication companies (Microsoft, AOL, Yahoo, Comcast, etc.) has identified the approach of the present invention as a way to challenge the spam problem. Absent.

  The Canadian Ontario Solid Blue Software method uses a positive response ground link approach, but offers it through its own website linked to the MX host. The sender receives a challenge message with a web link. After following the link, the sender reads the stylized key and puts it in the website along with his email address. At that time, the sender's mail is delivered to the user. It is an accurate system, but it requires the user to route MX records through the company server. This requirement is self-limiting for a wide range of deployments because it is not appropriate to expect all email users who want to prevent spam to use a proprietary MX host.

  Like the Earth Link system, solid blue users can't do anything about the keys. Thus, there is no opportunity to take advantage of passphrase systems, i.e. multi-level, multi-level, temporary, child protection, etc. Moreover, having to enter your email address into the website is what most users who are conscientious about spam do not want to do. In fact, spammers may use this type of fake challenge message that directs an unsuspecting e-mailer to validate their address against the increased target. This is not a problem with the passphrase approach. There are no external links, and ultimately it is the user who decides whether to use the passphrase of the previously sent email.

Anti-Spam Technical Alliance Technology Proposal Prepared By the Anti-Spam Alliance (June 22nd, 2004) Anti-Spam Technical Alliance Technology and Policy Proposed Prepared By the Anti-Spam Alliance

  All positive responses share a common fault. The interaction between them is unpredictable. If an Earthlink user sending a message to Solid Blue is blocked as spam if there is no reliable compatibility, then the challenge message coming back from Solid Blue will be identified as spam by the Earth Link system as well. It may be. A feedback loop will occur and the original message will never pass.

  I have unexpectedly found a very effective way to trap spam that ensures that users are not required to monitor "junk files" and that legitimate senders are not unduly filtered. In addition, the new system is remotely operable and does not need to consume user bandwidth and is applied to all readout points and platforms simultaneously. The method uses human language and understanding as a means to filter email. The user sets rules for incoming electronic messages, such as e-mail, so that messages containing a certain passphrase (preferably within the subject) can be accepted at any time. An automatic response to a blocked sender will give instructions on how to bypass the trap with a passphrase. The user can change the passphrase as many times as necessary, and can set a white list and a black list. Changes to the email route or MX record are not required.

  Any of a number of sufficient server-side processing systems can reject filtered emails, forward them to another address, and automatically send emails with a specified passphrase preferred in the subject line As long as rules that pass automatically are accepted, they can be used in the present invention. Further, when the system of the present invention is deployed for public use, the mail server requires a means of detecting that a given message is an automatic response originating from another user of the system. Otherwise, the instruction message containing passphrase information will be misidentified as spam, thereby creating a new challenge message in the email feedback loop. One simple way to avoid this is to have the sender's outgoing mail server keep a record of the subject in the database for a period of time. The user's automatic response template keeps the original subject line when sending the instruction message. Here, the sender's mail server compares the subject of the incoming e-mail with the outgoing database-thus performing a pass-through match. Programming to accomplish this is simple and can be easily integrated into any email-enabled system. On the other hand, other methods of setting a unique identifier (“UIE”) or other metric based on transmitted messages can be utilized as a “fingerprint” for filtering purposes.

  XO Communications in Reston, Virginia, provides sufficient server-side filtering capabilities as part of an email host service. Many types of user-side systems such as MS Outlook that provide the ability to process incoming email and set rules to respond to it can be employed. The present invention utilizes a designated computer to continuously receive and respond to filtered emails. If the “zombie” is a computer that spits spam, the new system is an “anti-zombie” designed to destroy spam. This anti-zombie accepts filtered email and responds with an automatic message. The message explains the filtering process and instructs the original sender how to break the filter.

  What happens next depends on whether the original sender is a person or a silicon chip. The sender said, “Your email has been filtered as spam by my computer, so please resend your message using the fourth word of this sentence in your subject.” I get the message. If the email was sent by a person, the other party would understand and insert the “filtered” word into the subject, and the other party's email would be rerouted and automatically routed to the user. If the original message is spam, nothing will happen or a non-delivery notice will be returned, such as a 55xSMTP error code (anti-zombie uses an independent return address for this purpose). A specific word or phrase may be prepended to the filtered subject of the email, thereby allowing further control over email processing. For example, the user may add a passphrase to the message so as to encourage legitimate senders of the white list that will certainly pass. Of course, other methods of further filtering and processing will be apparent to those skilled in the art. Similarly, various logics are possible, such as instructing the original sender to send an instruction e-mail to the user, rather than resending the original message of the original sender. Thus, the response rule automatically prepends the passphrase to the subject and simplifies the bypass process for the sender.

  The present invention presents ideal spam and wrap, and users are not required to download emails to filter spam, but apply to all read points and platforms at once to bypass traps It is not required to set up a reliable mechanism that avoids false positives using human-dependent instructions and to change the MX record to another route, and may reside anywhere on the Internet. The present invention is fail-safe in that the user is not required to monitor the junk mail folder for false positives or to accept email from unknown senders that are delivered. It is most important that is unattended and operates without any obligation to the user. Since filtered senders are ultimately distinguished by whether they are people or not, this system allows unknown senders to reach users without any user intervention. On the other hand, it blocks computer generated mass emails. This is particularly important for business users who frequently receive emails from unknown individuals.

  The present invention may be set up as a stand-alone “black box” that the user attaches to the network, or may be a service configured for the user via the Internet. The present invention may be integrated into hardware such as a circuit board or microprocessor chip in a personal computer. The present invention may be incorporated directly into an email reading software application that provides a simple interface for configuration and management. It is also envisioned that the software interface for the system provides features such that the user contact database is imported into a white list on the server-side filter.

  In addition to traditional POP3, IMAP or MS Exchange email, instant messaging (“IM”), short message service (“SMS”), hypertext transport protocol (“HTTP”), wireless local area network (“LAN”) It can be envisaged that the invention also applies to other types of communication, such as connections, ad hoc computer networks, or other electronic communication protocols (generally “electronic messages”), or analog signals such as radio. In this case, the challenge or instruction message may be any human understandable signal for removing false positives, and the message may be delivered by the communication network whether it is internet based or not. The present invention can also be applied to mobile phone security to prevent mobile phone hacking by automatic or unauthorized interceptors.

  The present invention presents a uniform way for a compliant system to generate a unique identifier ("UIE"). The UIE is generated by an outgoing mail application, recorded in a server-side filter, and used as a part of an acceptance list for a predetermined period. A compliant system may also return UIEs from other senders unchanged, so that the same method can be used in any other compliant system. This technique avoids the feedback mechanism and makes any compliant method of actively blocking spam effective, even if it interacts with virtually everything else.

  One embodiment is to have the outgoing mail server keep a record of the sender's subject for a predetermined period of time. An active and compliant spam response system autoresponder template leaves the original subject line intact when sending a challenge message. Here, the sender's mail server compares the subject of the incoming email with the outgoing database—thus making a pass-through match and passing the challenge message. Programming to accomplish this is simple and can be easily integrated into any email-enabled system. On the other hand, other methods of setting other metrics based on UIE or outgoing messages can be used as “fingerprints” for filtering purposes.

  One form of UIE is a checksum. Professor Ronald El Rivest of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has a high reputation for the MD5 method of checksum calculation. The MD5 algorithm takes a message of arbitrary length as input and generates a 128-bit “fingerprint” or “message digest” of the input as output. Generating two messages with the same message digest or generating a message with a pre-specified target message digest is inferred to be computationally infeasible. Open source for MS Windows® and other OS-based MD5 checksum applications can be found at www. fastsum. com and http: // www. turkprogrammer. com / 2005/01 / md5-hash-algorithm — 23. You can find it on html. These systems are typically used for digital signature applications. For the present invention, a simple utility can generate a checksum from the body of the outgoing email. A checksum can be included in the subject and matched against a temporary whitelist. On the other hand, the chuck sum may be communicated as an independent meta-element of the message, such as a specific field in the header. The compliant system includes the same item UIE as received, with no change, along with the generated challenge message. It is assumed that the UIE or checksum is encrypted for increased security and truncated for efficiency.

  Spammers make financially valuable efforts by relying on responses from a very small percentage of a vast number of messages. However, if only a very small percentage of messages arrives, the number of responses is small. Thus, if no one receives it in principle, the financial motive for sending spam will vanish rapidly, and the widespread use of the present invention will someday completely eliminate the presence of spam. The present invention will be the magic bullet needed to end spam forever.

  In addition to electronic mail, the present invention further includes, for example, instant messaging (“IM”), short message service (“SMS”), hypertext transport protocol (“HTTP”), wireless local area network (“LAN”) connections. , Ad hoc computer networks, or other types of communications such as other electronic communication protocols (collectively “electronic messages”).

  Referring to the drawings, FIG. 1 shows a flowchart of a “spam trap” system utilized or configured as an electronic message processing server. The electronic message processing server may include a computer, for example. As an example, an incoming electronic message (eg, an email in a mailbox such as med@silon.com) used in the flowchart diagram is received by an MX record host (eg, XO communication) and is predetermined and / or Filtered by adjustable criteria. In this case, the electronic message processing server includes an electronic mail server, and electronic mail that passes the server-side test is delivered to the user. Emails that do not pass the test are (optionally) appended with the word “junk mail” in the subject and then forwarded to an alternate mailbox such as med@silon.com|JunkMail. The anti-zombie is configured to read email from med@silon.com|JunkMail and responds with a template message (eg, frequent filter of << Attachment 2 >>). The response address of the outgoing message is set to another e-mail address such as junk1@silon.com. The same anti-zombie reads and deletes any response to the challenge message using a different email account (eg, junk1@silon.com). When a non-delivery notification is received in response to a challenge message, the non-delivery notification is sent to a trap (eg, junk1@silon.com). Therefore, the user is protected from a non-delivery notification returned from the sender without a valid reply address. Rejected emails never loop or send large amounts of information to your bandwidth.

  The filtered electronic message (eg, e-mail in this case) is sent back to the sender who understands the instructions for modifying the subject of the original e-mail with the passphrase and re-sending it. The rule is set on the server and accepts all emails that have a passphrase somewhere in the subject (in this case, the position of the word on the subject is not an issue, so use a wildcard (*) such as * filtered * And “filtered”.) After resubmission, the subject is appended with the word “trapped” when the modified message bypasses the filter. In this way, the user is automatically alerted that the sender has bypassed the trap, and additional processing such as whitelisting or blacklisting is facilitated.

  With reference to FIG. 2, a diagram illustrating the apparatus of the present invention is shown. In this preferred embodiment, a network interface card (NIC) can be used to connect to the Internet and the user's computer, where the central processing unit (CPU) of the user's computer does the computing work and non-volatile storage (e.g. The drive preferably stores e-mail reading software and an operating system. Optionally, a video processor for graphic output and a human interface device such as a keyboard or mouse can be used for user interaction. User access is also provided via a standard web browser for remote configuration and maintenance.

  Referring to FIG. 3, there is shown a flowchart of a system (user) of the present invention that generates a UIE and interacts with a second system (sender) configured to include it in a message. The sender's mail host keeps a record of the UIE such as the subject, other unique identifiers, and metrics for a period of time. The UIE arrives via the user system and is returned with an automatic response that includes human instructions. The filter on the sender's mail server is set to pass any message containing UIE. Thereby, it is possible to avoid and / or minimize the possibility of a counter response between two or more users of the present invention, which could otherwise form an email feedback loop.

  Since these designs and processes can be changed without departing from the broad inventive idea of the present invention, the following examples of the present invention are not intended to be limited. For example, although this is a preference, the anti-zombie does not necessarily have to be a separate or dedicated machine. It may be a background process on the user's system. Although this uses bandwidth and processing power, it may be set to occur out of time or between other functions. Moreover, you may set so that it may operate | move continuously. As a result, the workload can be extended all day. Further, the anti-zombie system may not actually be located on the user's network. Access anywhere on the Internet is sufficient. It is anticipated that anti-zombie banks can be used to provide filtering services to a large number of remote users.

  In addition, the instruction message instructs the recipient to pass the filter test to human language, visibly, or a combination of each (eg, with a cat image attached, animal genus in the subject line). It may be). In such cases, some automatic approval rules may be used to ensure passage, such as “cat”, “feline”, “felis catus”. Creative users have endless ways to use simple logical puzzles, jokes, rhymes, “write to blank” descriptions, etc. Additionally or alternatively, auditory instructions may be used by sending verbal instructions in the form of an audio file. Auditory instructions may optionally be used by themselves, or may be combined with one or more other instructions (eg, visual or language instructions). All these technologies are easy for humans to understand, but in principle are impossible for modern computers to decipher.

  In addition, multiple or dynamic passphrases, such as “Uncle Joe” always works for the family, can be used for different classes of senders. Further, the passphrase is set so that the expiration date is expired after a predetermined period, whereby communication security can be further enhanced. Temporary or disposable passphrases are particularly useful because they can enter their email address on the website without worrying about the user getting junk mail beyond a certain time frame. The passphrase may be controlled by an administrator who wants to manage corporate communications or a worried parent who exercises control over the child's email publishing. It can also be envisaged that there may be an interactive process of communicating the passphrase. The web internet instructs the sender to select “individual” or “business”. The former requests the first name of the grandmother Nini, and the latter requests the trademark of the user's company. There can be many human-dependent filter actions that can be realized by the present invention. The versatility and creativity of a person's thinking is limited only to the method of communicating a passphrase to a desired sender.

  The entire system is built using an interface that is accessed by the user with a standard web browser. Therefore, a computer system complete with a human interface is not necessary. Perhaps the most useful is a self-contained stand-alone device installed in the user's network as a simple “black box” without a keyboard or monitor. Such a device does not even need virus scanning software, since the traps do not actually open any email to process. Alternatively, it may be a card or processor in the PC. Alternatively, the present invention may be set as a “trap on a chip”. From a software perspective, the system may be provided as an integral part of an email reading application. Thereby, the white list, black list, passphrase, etc. can be easily changed.

  Because it depends on the setting sensitivity in the server-side filter, false negatives (spam is hardly identified) are possible in the present invention. Since there is never a false positive, the server-side filter can be set higher for the user of the present invention. However, it is still possible for a spammer to accidentally use the correct passphrase in the subject line. Spammers could use defenses to the present invention by inserting random words into their spam subject in the hope of reaching a small number of users. However, even if spammers use such a method, the size of the subject is limited (256 characters in MS Outlook) and will suffer from very low delivery rates.

  Changes to the electronic message infrastructure are believed to take advantage of the present invention, for example, by creating designated fields on the electronic message, particularly for passphrases and / or unique identifying elements. Such fields are separated from the subject and the body of the message. Sometimes the passphrase can be changed and / or by using complex passphrases (numbers, symbols and letters, case sensitive, etc.) It will greatly reduce the likelihood of spam reaching the user. Spammers make financially valuable efforts by relying on responses from a very small percentage of a vast number of messages. However, if only a very small percentage of messages arrives, the number of responses is small. Thus, if no one receives it in principle, the financial motive for sending spam will vanish rapidly, and the widespread use of the present invention will someday completely eliminate the presence of spam. The present invention will be the magic bullet needed to end spam forever.

  In addition to electronic mail, the present invention further includes, for example, instant messaging (“IM”), short message service (“SMS”), hypertext transport protocol (“HTTP”), wireless local area network (“LAN”) connections. , Ad hoc computer networks, or other electronic communication protocols (collectively “electronic messages”), or other types of communication such as analog signals. In this case, the challenge message can be any human-understood signal for removing false positives, and the message may be delivered by the communication network whether it is internet based or not. In this manner, the server can be any accumulator that includes message filtering means that can be rejected or accepted according to predetermined criteria. The accumulator forwards the accepted message to the final recipient station and forwards the rejected message to the confirmation station. The confirmation station responds to the rejected message by incorporating a false positive removal signal (eg, a passphrase) that is understandable by a person.

Example 1
The system on the server side is set as follows from XO communication.
User name: med@silon.com
Pop Three (POP3): ****. Silon.com
SMT (SMTP): ****. Silon.com
Filter settings: Medium-high (34-add rule whitelist)
Non-passing rules:
1) Add: Junk mail (optional)
2) Forwarding: med@silon.com|JunkMail
Passing rules:
1) If “* filtered *” is included in the subject, add “trapped”.
2) Deliver to users.

Anti-Zombies (Dell Dimension 8100 PC with Pentium 4 (P4) and operating on Windows® ME) (Dell Dimension 8100 PC):
Microsoft Outlook 2000
Check email every 5 minutes.
Accept email from med@silon.com|JunkMail.
Setting reply address: junk1@silon.com
Applicable rules: Automatic response with frequent filter SMS Outlook template file (see << Attachment 2 >>)
Applicable rule: Delete message.
Accept email from junk1@silon.com.
Applicable rule: Delete message.

  Since the delete rule is not set to “permanently delete”, the user can keep track of how many emails have been filtered and trapped. This is a defined user preference that allows the user to monitor trap activity.

  << Attachment 3 >> shows the response received by the filtered sender (markdillon@aol.com) and the modified message finally received by the user (med@silon.com).

  As soon as the spam trap was implemented, the inventor has experienced a rapid and dramatic reduction in the amount of spam received. << Attachment 4 >> shows a standard 24-hour email traffic log for a user. The following table [Table 1] summarizes the results.

[Table 1]
Spam trap results

  The table shows that 115 messages have been blocked (about 82 have invalid return addresses) and 6 legitimate emails have been delivered to the user. (Some incoming emails addressed to junk1@silon.com may be responses to challenges sent before the indicated 24 hours, so the number of invalid return addresses is approximate, however. Since the entire period represents a standard level of activity for the user and the system has been in operation for several days, such emails were sent shortly before the end of 24 hours but still replied Not offset by the same number of messages addressed to an invalid address.) Med@silon.com|The email received by JunkMail is ultimately required to be manually reviewed before being disposed of Equal to the sum of messages filtered by the filter (115). The email is delivered to the user (six messages) immediately or after corrections are collected at med@silon.com.

  A manual review of the anti-zombie Outlook Sent Items folder was modified by the sender and then showed no false positives other than one message that bypassed the trap. There was no false negative.

  Another preferred embodiment of the present invention is that the outgoing mail server for all compliant emails uses a common method. The method does not change the UIE from the challenge message received so that the step of attaching the UIE to the mail and the positive response, ie the active method of detecting spam, is compatible with all others. And replying with. The mail server allows responses including the UIE of recently sent emails to pass back through their confidence filters. After a few days, if the recipient is not found, the email is generally considered undeliverable, so the server can periodically delete records from the UIE database, thereby keeping the database small. Programming to achieve this is simple and does not cause a computer load.

  Since the UIE originates from outgoing email, there is little or no potential for abuse by spammers. Whether using a passphrase or other positive response technique, this method provides a general standard for active spam filters to prevent feedback loops from each other.

  Referring to FIG. 4, FIG. 4 shows a flowchart of a “spam trap” system of a co-pending application that can be utilized or configured as an electronic message processing server. The electronic message processing server includes, for example, a computer. The computer does the computational work, and the non-volatile storage device (eg, hard drive) preferably stores the email reading software and operating system. Optionally, a graphics output video processor and a human interface device such as a keyboard or mouse are used for user interaction. User access can also be provided via a standard web browser for remote configuration and maintenance.

  Referring to FIG. 5, there is shown a flowchart of one active spam response system (user) that exchanges information with a second system (sender) each configured to use a mutually compatible UIE system. The sender's mail host records the UIE, such as the subject, other unique identifiers, and metrics over a period of time. The UIE arrives through the user system and is sent back with an autoresponder challenge message. The filter on the sender's mail server is set to pass any message containing UIE. Thereby, the possibility of occurrence of a counter response between two or more users of the active spam response system can be avoided.

  Changes in the infrastructure of electronic messages are considered to take advantage of the present invention, for example, by creating designated fields on the electronic message, especially for the UIE. Such fields are separated from the subject and the body of the message. In addition, the data can be parsed, processed, and inserted into specified fields in the header or other metadata sectors of the message.

  Since these designs and processes can be changed without departing from the broad inventive idea of the present invention, the following examples of the present invention are not intended to be limited. Although the invention will be described with reference to specific embodiments, the description is illustrative and cannot be understood to limit the scope of the invention. Various modifications and changes may occur to those skilled in the art as defined by the appended claims without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as described herein.

Example 2
The server side mail support system is set as follows.
User name: mark@spamtrap-az.com
Pop Three (POP3): pop3.spamtrap-az.com
SMT (SMTP): smtp.spamtrap-az.com
Filter setting: Medium-high (add whitelist)
Non-passing rules:
1) Add: Junk mail (optional)
2) Forwarding: mark@spamtrap-az.com|JunkMail
Passing rules:
1) If “* filtered *” is included in the subject, add “trapped”.
2) Add a “challenge” when the subject matches the resident UIE database (below).
3) Deliver to users.
Resident database:
1) Record the subject of the outgoing mail.
2) Run the match and pass algorithm.
3) After 5 days, delete the record.

An active spam response system for my co-pending application:
Microsoft Outlook 2000
1) Check email every 5 minutes.
2) Accept email from mark@spamtrap-az.com|JunkMail.
3) Setting reply address: junk1@spamtrap-az.com
4) Applicable rules: Automatic response with frequent filter SMS Template (see << Attachment 5 >>, subject line remains unchanged, including original message as response)
5) Applicable rules: Delete messages.
6) Accept email from junk1@spamtrap-az.com.
7) Applicable rules: Delete messages.

Sender system:
1) Record the subject of outgoing mail in a temporary database.
2) The contents of the subject of the received mail are recognized and compared with the database, and if they match, passage is permitted.
3) Return the subject of the received message as at least part of the subject in the challenge message generated by the sender's active spam response system.

Example 3
The add-in application executes a subroutine in an email application such as Microsoft Outlook ("Subroutine A") using an electronic message host that uses an active spam-enabled system. When the send button is clicked, subroutine A generates a UIE such as an MD5 checksum and adds the UIE to the subject of the send message (otherwise inserts). Optionally, the UIE is encrypted or truncated for convenience. Otherwise, name the data so that it can be easily recognized for correctness (ie, add and add a specified code or series of codes).

  The outgoing mail server uses another subroutine ("Subroutine B") to recognize the UIE and enter the UIE with a time stamp in the database. The mail server filtering system uses a subroutine ("Subroutine C"), compares the input from the incoming mail with the outgoing database and operates accordingly for filtering. If there is a match, if it exists on the user's white list, subroutine C passes the message. The other subroutine ("Subroutine D") deletes the database record after a fixed period of about 5 days. Optionally, subroutine D or another subroutine enters the confirmed sender's email address in the permanent whitelist so that all future messages from that sender are automatically accepted. Also, subroutines B, C, and D can be combined in one software application and can operate separately or in subgroups.

  The add-in application that executes subroutine A also recognizes the UIEs included in any part of the received message and returns them without changing them to similar parts. Other users of the corresponding system can automatically accept the challenge message sent by the user operating subroutine A.

  While the invention will be described with reference to specific embodiments, this description is illustrative and is not to be construed as limiting the scope of the invention. Various modifications and changes will occur to those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as described in the specification and defined by the appended claims.

<< Attachment 2 >>
Frequent filter. Microsoft Outlook Template Subject: Your email for me was filtered.
Your recent e-mail to me was filtered by my computer as spam.
Do not respond to this message. However, please change the subject of your message to include the word “filtered” and resubmit.
You should not see this message again. If you still can't contact me, call 610-530-3193 or send a fax to 610-530-3194.
Sorry for the inconvenience. We thank you for your cooperation.
Mark Dillon
med (at) silon.com

<< Attachment 3 >>
Auto-response subject to filtered senders from anti-zombies: Your e-mails were filtered.
Date: February 13, 2005, 4:12:58 PM (Eastern Standard Time)
From: junk1@silon.com
To: MarkDillon@aol.com
Page 1/1 Sunday, February 13, 2005 US Online: Mark Dillon Your recent e-mail addressed to me was filtered by my computer as spam. Do not respond to this message. However, please change the subject of your message to include the word "filtered" and resubmit.
You should not see this message again. If you still can't contact me, call 610-530-3193 or send a fax to 610-530-3194.
Sorry for the inconvenience. We thank you for your cooperation.
Mark Dillon
med (at) silon.com

Modified message received by user Mark Dillon from MarkDillon@aol.com
Send date and time: Sunday, February 13, 2005 7:17 pm Address: med@silon.com
Subject: “Traped” Viagra Mortgage Canadian Pharmacy filtered.
1/1 page 2005 February 13th February 13th Sunday at 4:11 pm The spam test was resent on Sunday February 13th at 7:15 pm.

<< Attachment 4 >>
The following table (Table 2) is a POP3 log (Log) from XO communication during the period from 12:00 am on Saturday, February 12, 2005 to 12:00 am on Sunday, February 13, 2005. The data indicates both the number of emails received by the user and the anti-zombie account. The table shows time, mail server ID, user account, action, original IP address and number of messages on the server. The next line shows the logout and delete functions performed for that account. (Note: The user is reading the e-mail from a remote personal computer that is configured to leave a copy of the message on the server for re-downloading from the user's main computer terminal. To this end, med@silon.com E-mails to are not deleted after being read, and the total messages shown on the server have accumulated up to 6 messages received by 22:44:52 on February 12, 2005.

<< Attachment 5 >>
Frequent filter. Microsoft Outlook template subject with add-in application: (not changed from sender)
Your recent e-mail to me was filtered by my computer as spam.
Use a “spam trap fit” system. Please reply this message to me without changing the subject line.
You should not see this message again. If you still can't contact me, call 555-5555.
Sorry for the inconvenience. We thank you for your cooperation.
Mark Dillon
med (at) silon.com
(The original message is included below)

3 is a flowchart of a “spam trap” system according to the present invention. 1 is a schematic diagram of an apparatus of a preferred embodiment according to the present invention. FIG. 6 is a flow chart of a first system of users of a “spam trap” of the present invention interacting with a second system of senders. The outgoing mail server of the second system generates and records a unique identification element ("UIE"), and the automatic reply instruction message from the user of the present invention returns such a UIE. The second system filter recognizes the UIE and is set to pass the automatic reply message. 3 is a flowchart of a “spam trap” system according to the present invention. Instead of resending the original message, the sender instructs to forward the challenge message, thereby returning the UIE. The original communication is preferably included in the reply message. FIG. 5 is a first system flowchart of a user active spam handling system that interacts with a sender's second active system. FIG. The outgoing mail server of the second system generates and records the UIE, and the automatic reply instruction message from the first system returns such an unchanging UIE. The second system filter recognizes the UIE and is set to pass the automatic reply message.

Claims (25)

A system for substantially preventing mass delivery and / or unsolicited electronic messages from reaching an end user's electronic message address, comprising:
The system includes an electronic message processing server;
The system further includes a filter that passes or does not pass messages based on the set criteria,
The filter recognizes the passphrase and delivers the electronic message to the end user's primary mailbox if the passphrase is identified or if the message passes the filter criteria, and the passphrase is not identified. And if the message does not pass the filter criteria, it is set to send the message to an alternate mailbox,
The alternate mailbox has a different mailbox name than the first mailbox name and a response address set to a different electronic message address;
The alternative mailbox is configured to receive an electronic message delivered via a filter and send a response including a person's instruction to the electronic message address of the received electronic message, the person's instruction being passed A system characterized by representing phrases. The electronic message processing server has a unique identification element obtained from the transmitted electronic message,
The response including instructions understandable by a person includes the unique identifying element;
The system of claim 1, wherein the filter is configured to automatically accept an electronic message that includes the unique identification element. a. Includes a list of approved senders from owners of electronic message addresses that can pass the filter regardless of whether a passphrase is present in the message or even if the message does not pass the filter criteria Filter bypass,
b. Responding to the identifier identifying the message that passed the filter includes at least a portion of the approved sender list, the response adding the user's electronic message address to the approved sender list;
c. The person instructions include a written phrase instruction using a passphrase, a figure instruction or an auditory instruction, or a combination thereof, so that the electronic message passes through the filter and is sent to the user's first mailbox. That
d. The system includes a self-contained stand-alone unit with or without direct human interface elements, the unit being installed in electronic communication with a user's electronic message processing server; and
e. The system of claim 1, wherein the system includes one or more or all of the above-described features in a remote processing unit in electronic communication with a user's electronic message processing server over the Internet. A method for substantially preventing mass delivery and / or unsolicited electronic messages from reaching an end user's electronic message address, comprising:
a. An electronic message processing server computer,
b. Providing a first electronic message address to a first mailbox;
c. It has a filter for filtering the content of electronic messages based on the setting of judgment criteria,
d. Set up a filter to recognize the passphrase to allow electronic messages to pass through the filter,
e. Compare the electronic message with the passphrase to identify the passphrase,
f. If the passphrase is identified or if the electronic message passes the filter criteria, the electronic message is delivered to the end user's first mailbox, the passphrase is not identified, and the electronic message is the filter criteria If you do n’t pass through, send the message to an alternate mailbox,
The alternate mailbox has a mailbox name different from the first mailbox name, and has a response address set to an electronic message address different from the first mailbox;
g. Using the alternative mailbox to receive electronic messages delivered through a filter;
h. Send a response containing the person's instructions representing the passphrase to the electronic message address of the received electronic message using a different response address of the alternative mailbox;
i. Receiving an electronic message from the electronic message address to which the passphrase is sent, recognizing the passphrase using a filter, and delivering the electronic message to the first mailbox of the end user. Method. The electronic message processing server has a unique identification element from the outgoing electronic message;
The response including instructions understandable by a person also includes the unique identifying element;
The method of claim 4, wherein the filter is configured to automatically accept electronic messages that include the unique identification element. a. A list of authorized senders whose electronic message addresses pass through the filter and reach the first mailbox, regardless of whether a passphrase is present in the message, whether the address of the electronic message received by the filter In comparison with the step of bypassing the filter,
b. Indicates that the message received in the first mailbox did not pass the filter in advance, and whether the passphrase is present in the message or the message does not pass the filter criteria Generating a list of electronic message addresses of authorized senders of electronic message addresses that can pass the filter;
c. The person instructions include a written phrase instruction using a passphrase, a figure instruction or an auditory instruction, or a combination thereof, so that the electronic message passes through the filter and is sent to the user's first mailbox. ,
d. In response to a response containing human instructions, any non-delivery electronic message notification is received, a list of electronic message addresses is generated from the non-delivery electronic message notification, and all future electronic messages are automatically derived from that electronic message address 5. The method of claim 4, comprising one or more or all of the steps of: A method for reducing the bulk of electronic messages and / or useless electronic interconnections with terminal receiver stations delivered by a communication network comprising:
a. Providing the network with a first receiving station comprising message filtering means configured and operated to distinguish between messages rejected according to predetermined criteria and messages accepted;
b. Providing a confirmation station configured to receive and transmit electronic messages;
c. Providing a message confirmation signal to be rejected and using the filter means to distinguish between accepting or rejecting at least one received message;
d. Transferring the accepted message to the terminating receiver station;
e. Forwarding the rejected message to the terminating receiver station;
f. Using the confirmation station to transmit a response message to the rejected message,
g. When the response message is received, the response message is transmitted based on the recognition and implementation of the false positive removal signal understood by the person and the false positive removal understood by the person. A method involving a signal. The receiving station is configured to recognize a unique identifier derived from the transmitted electronic message, and further, the response message including instructions understood by a person also includes the unique identifier, and the filter is the unique identifier. 8. The method of claim 7, wherein the method is configured to automatically accept an electronic message that includes an identification element. A method of substantially preventing mass delivery and / or unsolicited electronic messages from reaching an end user's electronic message address, comprising:
The method
a. A server-side filter that forwards rejected electronic messages to an alternative address and provides at least one user-defined rule for automatic acceptance of electronic messages for delivery to the user's address; and
b. Receiving a server-filtered electronic message sent to the alternative address and responding with an instruction message that the person understands how to bypass the filter using the rules for automatic acceptance; Method. An electronic message processing server has a unique identification element from the transmitted electronic message, the response including instructions understood by a person also includes the unique identification element, and the filter automatically includes an electronic message including the unique identification element. The method of claim 9, wherein the method is set to accept. a. The receiving computer uses a reply address other than the user address in the instruction message so that the user does not receive a response;
b. The server-side filter can be adjusted to be perceived by the user,
c. The server-side filter can accept whitelists and blacklists,
d. That server-side filters can be trained by utilizing rules that are customized according to user implementation;
e. Any tag is used to mark the processed electronic message with an auto-accept rule, which allows the user to recognize that the electronic message was first trapped and to add the sender to the whitelist or blacklist Opportunities,
f. Adopting rules that the receiving computer deletes filtered electronic messages after processing,
g. The accepting computer also reads an electronic message from the reply address of the instruction message so that the user does not receive the electronic message generated as a response or as a non-delivery notice in response to the instruction message;
h. Server-side filters can be adjusted to be perceived by the user, server-side filters can accept whitelists and blacklists, and any tag can be used to mark processed electronic messages with auto-accept rules The user recognizes that the electronic message has been trapped, and the receiving computer also reads the electronic message from the return address of the instruction message, so that the user is not able to respond or respond to the instruction message. Not receive electronic messages generated as notifications,
i. Being remotely configured as a whole via the Internet, and
j. 10. The method of claim 9, comprising one or more or all of the above features provided as a stand-alone hardware system. A device comprising a computer system that receives and processes an electronic message as a result of filtering, wherein the computer automatically responds to the electronic message with a human-dependent instruction on how to bypass the filtering A device that is configured to do so. An electronic message processing server having a unique identification element from a transmitted electronic message,
13. The electronic message processing server, wherein the response including instructions understood by a person includes the unique identification element and the filter is configured to automatically accept electronic messages including the unique identification element. Device described in. a. Filtering and processing rules applied to the electronic message can be customized by the end user;
b. The computer system can be accessed remotely;
c. The computer uses a web-based interface for custom setting of processing rules by the user; and
d. 13. The device of claim 12, comprising one or more or all of the above features wherein transmitted and received electronic messages are deleted after processing. A business method for providing services to Internet users,
The service is
a. Reducing mass delivered electronic messages delivered by the Internet to the user's computer;
The method
b. Providing a first electronic message address in a first mailbox;
c. Providing a filter for filtering the content of the electronic message based on predetermined criteria;
d. Providing a user-defined passphrase;
e. Providing a user-defined challenge message that allows the user to set instructions that the person understands, including written instructions, graphical instructions, or auditory instructions when using a passphrase;
f. Sending the user-defined challenge message to the electronic message address of the received electronic message using a reply address other than the user address; and
g. Delivering the electronic message to the end user's first mailbox when the passphrase is identified, i.e., when the electronic message passes the filter criteria;   16. The business method of claim 15, comprising utilizing a unique identification element of an outgoing electronic message so that responses from other users are accepted by the filter. a. Includes a list of approved senders from owners of electronic message addresses that can pass the filter regardless of whether a passphrase is present in the message or even if the message does not pass the filter criteria Filter bypass,
b. Responding to the identifier identifying the message that passed the filter includes at least a portion of the approved sender list, the response adding the user's electronic message address to the approved sender list;
c. The person instructions include a written phrase instruction using a passphrase, a figure instruction or an auditory instruction, or a combination thereof, so that the electronic message passes through the filter and is sent to the user's first mailbox. That
d. The system includes a self-contained stand-alone unit with or without direct human interface elements, the unit being installed in electronic communication with a user's electronic message processing server; and
e. The system of claim 2, wherein the system includes one or more or all of the above-described processing units located in a remote location in electronic communication with a user's electronic message processing server over the Internet. a. A list of authorized senders whose electronic message addresses pass through the filter and reach the first mailbox, regardless of whether a passphrase is present in the message, whether the address of the electronic message received by the filter In comparison with the step of bypassing the filter,
b. Indicates that the message received in the first mailbox did not pass the filter in advance, and whether the passphrase is present in the message or the message does not pass the filter criteria Generating a list of electronic message addresses of authorized senders of electronic message addresses that can pass the filter;
c. The person instructions include a written phrase instruction using a passphrase, a figure instruction or an auditory instruction, or a combination thereof, so that the electronic message passes through the filter and is sent to the user's first mailbox. ,
d. In response to a response containing human instructions, any non-delivery electronic message notification is received, a list of electronic message addresses is generated from the non-delivery electronic message notification, and all future electronic messages are automatically derived from that electronic message address 6. The method of claim 5, comprising one or more or all of the steps of: a. The receiving computer uses a reply address other than the user address in the instruction message so that the user does not receive a response;
b. The server-side filter can be adjusted to be perceived by the user,
c. The server side filter can accept whitelist and blacklist,
d. That server-side filters can be trained by utilizing rules that are customized according to user implementation;
e. Any tag is used to mark the processed electronic message with an auto-accept rule, which allows the user to recognize that the electronic message was first trapped and to add the sender to the whitelist or blacklist Opportunities,
f. Adopting rules that the receiving computer deletes filtered electronic messages after processing,
g. The accepting computer also reads an electronic message from the reply address of the instruction message so that the user does not receive the electronic message generated as a response or as a non-delivery notice in response to the instruction message;
h. Server-side filters can be adjusted to be perceived by the user, server-side filters can accept whitelists and blacklists, and any tag can be used to mark processed electronic messages with auto-accept rules The user recognizes that the electronic message has been trapped, and the receiving computer also reads the electronic message from the return address of the instruction message, so that the user is not able to respond or respond to the instruction message. Not receive electronic messages generated as notifications,
i. Being remotely configured as a whole via the Internet, and
j. 11. The method of claim 10, comprising one or more or all of the above features provided as a stand-alone hardware system. a. Filtering and processing rules applied to the electronic message can be customized by the end user;
b. The computer system can be accessed remotely;
c. The computer uses a web-based interface for custom setting of processing rules by the user; and
d. 14. The device of claim 13, including one or more or all of the above features, wherein transmitted and received electronic messages are deleted after processing. 8. The method of claim 7, further comprising responding to the rejected message with a false positive removal signal understood by the person. A system for substantially preventing mass delivery and / or unsolicited electronic messages from reaching an end user's electronic message address, comprising:
The system includes an electronic message processing server;
The system further includes a filter that passes or does not pass messages based on the set criteria,
The filter recognizes a passphrase and delivers an electronic message to the end user's first destination if the passphrase is identified or if the message passes the filter criteria, and the passphrase is not identified; And configured to send the message to an alternative destination if the message does not pass the filter criteria,
The alternative destination has a name different from the first destination name and has a response address set to a different destination;
The alternative destination is configured to receive an electronic message delivered via a filter and send a response including a person instruction to the electronic message address of the received electronic message, the person instruction being a passphrase A system characterized by representing. A method for substantially preventing mass delivery and / or unsolicited electronic messages from reaching an end user's electronic message address, comprising:
The method comprises a system;
The system includes two or more active spam response systems,
The two or more active spam-capable systems generate one or more UIEs as part of the outgoing challenge message, and each individual system can also generate challenge messages generated from any other compliant active spam-capable system. Configured to recognize the UIE in a response message when returned from an obedient system so that it can recognize the response of
Method. A system for substantially preventing mass delivery and / or unsolicited electronic messages from reaching an end user's electronic message address, comprising:
The system
Generate at least one UIE as part of the outgoing challenge message, and also from the compliant system so that individual systems can recognize responses to challenge messages generated from any other compliant active spam-enabled system Recognizing the UIE in the response message when it is returned
system. A device for substantially preventing mass delivery and / or unsolicited electronic messages from reaching an end user's electronic message address, comprising:
Configured to generate at least one UIE as part of the send challenge message;
And a computer configured to recognize the UIE in the response message when returned from a compliant system that is also configured to generate one or more UIEs as part of the send challenge message;
The generating and receiving systems are configured to recognize responses to challenge messages generated from any other compliant active spam-enabled system.
apparatus.

Images