Email Filter Segmentation for Spam Blocking

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current email filtering systems cannot simultaneously allow messages from human senders and desired automated senders while blocking unwanted automated senders, as they either rely solely on recipient address categorization or challenge responses, but not both.

Innovation Solution

An automated incoming email delivery filter system that uses multiple user-configurable recipient email addresses and corresponding challenge questions to differentiate between human and automated senders, allowing email from wanted automated senders while blocking unwanted ones, even if the sender uses multiple 'From' addresses or changes them unexpectedly.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If a single recipient address is used to receive all emails, then all senders can communicate freely, but unwanted automated senders (spam) cannot be blocked

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveemail reception capabilityVSAvoidspam reception
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments a single recipient address into multiple virtual recipient addresses, each with independent delivery settings. This allows different senders to be routed to different virtual addresses based on their characteristics, enabling selective filtering while maintaining a unified user experience.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces an intermediary layer (the email service provider's filtering system) that sits between the sender and the final recipient inbox. This intermediary analyzes sender characteristics and applies appropriate delivery settings without requiring the end user to manually configure each sender.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Object-affected harmful factors

If challenge responses are implemented for all senders, then automated spam can be blocked, but desired automated senders may be incorrectly filtered

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvespam blockingVSAvoiddesired sender delivery
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies different delivery settings (local qualities) to different virtual recipient addresses based on their specific needs. Some addresses use strict challenge-response filtering, while others allow automated senders by default, enabling nuanced control over sender filtering.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the filtering parameter (delivery setting) based on the virtual recipient address and sender characteristics. By dynamically adjusting the strictness of filtering parameters, the system can accommodate both strict spam blocking and permissive automated sender delivery where appropriate.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Object-affected harmful factors

If multiple virtual recipient addresses are created for different senders, then selective email filtering is enabled, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesender-specific filteringVSAvoidaddress management complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables senders to self-identify their type through challenge-response interactions, eliminating the need for manual sender categorization. The filtering system automatically learns and adapts to sender patterns, reducing the complexity of managing multiple virtual addresses.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system provides a universal filtering mechanism that works across all virtual recipient addresses through a common challenge-response framework. This multi-functional approach allows the same underlying technology to serve multiple filtering needs, reducing overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

4Productivity

If automated filtering rules are applied, then spam can be blocked efficiently, but flexibility in handling edge cases is reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveemail filtering efficiencyVSAvoidedge case handling flexibility
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system employs dynamic delivery settings that can adapt to different senders and situations. Rather than static rules, the filtering behavior can change based on sender characteristics, challenge responses, and patterns, enabling efficient automated filtering while maintaining flexibility for edge cases.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The challenge-response mechanism provides feedback loops that allow the system to learn from sender interactions. This feedback enables the system to refine its filtering decisions over time, improving efficiency while maintaining adaptability to new sender types and edge cases.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS12095717B1Automated incoming email delivery filter system and process
Publication Date: 2024.09.17 PERRIN HUNTER KENT
  • US12095717B1 patent drawing
  • US12095717B1 patent drawing
  • US12095717B1 patent drawing

AI summary

A system and process for receiving email that blocks messages from unwanted automated senders are disclosed. The system is configured to filter automated email from automated senders by way of multiple user-configurable recipient email addresses and corresponding challenge questions to block messages from unwanted automated senders and allow email to be received from wanted automated senders. In this way, the system allows for different recipient addresses to either receive email from automated senders or screen senders with a challenge response, thereby allowing an email user to use the same account to receive both messages from wanted automated senders and messages from human senders. Even if a desired automated sender uses multiple “From” addresses or changes their “From” address unexpectedly, their messages will still be accepted by the system.