Advertisement

Soft Computing

, Volume 11, Issue 8, pp 729–740 | Cite as

Artificial immune system inspired behavior-based anti-spam filter

  • Xun Yue
  • Ajith Abraham
  • Zhong-Xian Chi
  • Yan-You Hao
  • Hongwei Mo
Focus

Abstract

This paper proposes a novel behavior-based anti-spam technology for email service based on an artificial immune-inspired clustering algorithm. The suggested method is capable of continuously delivering the most relevant spam emails from the collection of all spam emails that are reported by the members of the network. Mail servers could implement the anti-spam technology by using the “black lists” that have been already recognized. Two main concepts are introduced, which defines the behavior-based characteristics of spam and to continuously identify the similar groups of spam when processing the spam streams. Experiment results using real-world datasets reveal that the proposed technology is reliable, efficient and scalable. Since no single technology can achieve one hundred percent spam detection with zero false positives, the proposed method may be used in conjunction with other filtering systems to minimize errors.

Keywords

Spam Clustering algorithm Artificial immune system Artificial immune network 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Androutsopoulos I, Koutsias J, Chandrinos KV, Paliouras G, Spyropoulos CD (2000) An evaluation of naive Bayesian anti-spam filtering. In: Proceedings of the workshop on machine learning in the new information ageGoogle Scholar
  2. Carreras X, Marquez L (2004) Boosting trees for anti-spam email filtering. In: Proceedings of RANLP-01, 4th international conference on recent advances in natural language processingGoogle Scholar
  3. Dasgupta D (1999) Artificial immune systems and their applications. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Drucker H, Wu D, Vapnik VN (1999) Support vector for spam categorization. IEEE Trans Neural Netw 10(5):1048– 1054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. De Castro LN, Timmis JI (2003) Artificial immune systems as a novel soft computing paradigm. Softcomputing 7:526– 544Google Scholar
  6. De Castro LN, Von Zuben FJ (2000) An evolutionary immune network for data clustering. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Brazilian symposium on neural networks, pp 84–89Google Scholar
  7. De Castro LN, Von Zuben FJ (2001) aiNet: an artificial immune network for data analysis. In: Chapter XII, Abbass HA, Saker RA, Newton CS (eds). Data mining: a heuristic approach. Idea Group Publishing, USA, pp 231-259Google Scholar
  8. De Castro LN, Von Zuben FJ (2002) Artificial immune system: a new computational intelligence approach. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Gyongyi Z., Garcia-Molina H (2005) Spam: it’s not just for inboxes anymore. IEEE Comput 38(10):28–34Google Scholar
  10. Harris E (2003) The next step in the spam control war. Greylisting. White paper, August 2003Google Scholar
  11. Hinde S (2003) Spam: the evolution of a nuisance. Comput Secur 22(6): 474–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Katirai H (1999) Filtering junk E-mail: a performance comparison between genetic programming and Naïve Bayes. MSc Thesis, University of WaterlooGoogle Scholar
  13. Lan M, Zhou W (2005) Spam filtering based on preference ranking. In: The fifth international conference on computer and information technology, pp 223–227Google Scholar
  14. Mason J (2004) The SpamAssassin homepage. http://www. Spamassassin.org/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
  15. Oda T, White T (2003) In: Proceedings of the congress on evolutionary computation (CEC 2003), Canberra, 1, pp 390–396Google Scholar
  16. Oda T, White T (2003) Developing an immunity to spam. Genetic and evolutionary computation—GECCO 2003. In: Genetic and evolutionary computation conference, Chicago, July 12–16, 2003, Proceedings, Part I Series: Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2723. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 231-242Google Scholar
  17. Özgür L, Güngör T, Gürgen F (2004) Adaptive anti-spam filtering for agglutinative languages: a special case for Turkish. Pattern Recognit Lett 25(16): 1819–1831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Roman R, Zhou J, Lopez J (2006) An anti-spam scheme using pre-challenges. Comput Commun (in press) (http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2005.10.037)Google Scholar
  19. Sakkis G, Androutsopoulos I, Olaiouras G, Karkaletsis V, Spyropoulos CD, and Stamatopoulos P (2001) Stacking classifiers for anti-spam filtering of e-mail. In: Proceedings of conference on empirical methods in natural language processing, Carnegie Mellon University, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  20. Sakkis G, Androutsopoulos I, Paliouras G, Karkaletsis V, Spyropoulos C, Stamatopoulos P (2003) A memory-based approach to anti-Spam filtering for mailing lists. Inf Retrieval 6:49–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sasaki M, Shinnou H (2005) Spam detection using text clustering. In: 2005 international conference on cyberworlds, pp 316–319Google Scholar
  22. Schryen G (2006) A formal approach towards the effectiveness of anti-spam procedures. In: Proceedings of the 39th annual Hawaii international conference on systems sciences, vol 6, pp 129–138Google Scholar
  23. Secker A, Freitas AA, Timmis J (2003). AISEC: an artificial immune system for E-mail classification. In: Sarker R, Reynolds R, Abbass H, Kay-Chen T, McKay R, Essam D, Gedeon T (eds) Proceedings of the congress on evolutionary computation, Canberra, pp 131–139Google Scholar
  24. Sophos Inc. (2004) Field guide to spam http://www.sophos.com/ Spaminfo/explained/fieldguide.html. Continuously updated. Accessed March 2, 2004Google Scholar
  25. Spam Whacking Working in US (2006) Comput Fraud Secur, 2006(1):2–3Google Scholar
  26. Timmis J (2000) Artificial immune systems: a novel data analysis technique inspired by the immune network theory. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University of WalesGoogle Scholar
  27. Wu C-T, Cheng K-T, Zhu Q, Wu Y-L (2005) Using visual features for anti-spam filtering. IEEE Int Conf Image Process 3: 509–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhao W, Zhang Z (2005) An email classification model based on rough set theory. In: Proceedings of the 2005 international conference on active media technology (AMT 2005), pp 403–408Google Scholar
  29. Zorkadis V, Karras DA, Panayotou M (2005) Efficient information theoretic strategies for classifier combination, feature extraction and performance evaluation in improving false positives and false negatives for spam e-mail filtering. Neural Netw 18(5–6):799–807CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xun Yue
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ajith Abraham
    • 3
  • Zhong-Xian Chi
    • 1
  • Yan-You Hao
    • 1
  • Hongwei Mo
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringDalian University of TechnologyDalianChina
  2. 2.College of Information Sciences and EngineeringShandong Agricultural UniversityTaianChina
  3. 3.IITA Professorship Program, School of Computer Science and EngineeringChung-Ang UniversityDongjak-gu SeoulRepublic of Korea
  4. 4.Automation CollegeHarbin Engineering UniversityHarbinChina

Personalised recommendations