On Thu, Nov 28, 2002 at 12:59:44PM +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: | I don't suggest that. Instead, they should munge email addresses.
Sure. Put sed in place before the file is written :
s/@/ AT /g
s/\./ DOT /g
Ok, so now the addresses are munged. They're also a royal pain for
honest people like you and me to deal with when we need to email
someone we found in the archives. Not to mention, the spammer's bots
will reverse it soon enough anyways :
s/ AT /@/g
s/ DOT /./g
If the munging is predictable , it is worthless. If it isn't
predictable, then how is a human supposed to determine which
characters are noise and which are part of the real address? Thus
it's also worthless.
| Nobody in their right mind uses a working email address on Usenet for a
| topic such as this. Gating a mailing-list to usenet without mangling (or
| better, removing them) is plain irresponsible.
Hah. For a couple years (or maybe not quite that long) I participated
in a list that had a bidirectional mail<->news gateway. The reason I
am not subscribed anymore is I don't have time to read its high volume
of mail.
# apt-get install spamassassin
$ RTFM
The problem isn't the fact that someone knows (or could know) your
email address. The problem is their abuse of it. People abuse it
because it is (currently) profitable. The solution, then, is to make
email abuse not profitable. List poisoning and teergrubing (google
for tools and instructions to help do this) help decrease the
profitability of address havesting for spamming. Spamassassin also
helps because it reduces the amount of spam you actually see (and, if
it's deployed on a larger site, it can reduce the potential for
someone to react to the spam in a manner profitable to the spammer).
-D
--
"Piracy is not a technological issue. It's a behavior issue."
--Steve Jobs
http://dman.ddts.net/~dman/
msg16119/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
