-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 05:02:57PM +0200, Kjetil Kjernsmo wrote: > On Friday 17 October 2003 15:42, Jeff Elkins wrote: > > I'm told that's a dead horse. Beats me as to why, at a minimum, the > > web archives can't obfuscated. That would close off one avenue for > > address harvesting anyway. > > Yup, and it is easy enough to figure out what level of obfuscation would > be sufficient. Just make a web page with a few differently obfuscated > addresses, and see what gets spam. Use them as spamtraps afterwards. It > has been done, and I heard just a little obfuscation works, but one > might want to figure it out for oneself.
If a human can read it, so can the spammers. They will write new filters to unmunge your munge. Spammers are ingenious malicious idiots, keep that in mind. http://www.interhack.net/pubs/munging-harmful/ - -- .''`. Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : `. `'` proud Debian admin and user `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fix a system -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE/kA2xUzgNqloQMwcRAtPAAKC7yZiQUssoy9GJKVwGSI4qePpgAwCfWdOt 2v9kan1YCb5Nm8GoYJ4EH5I= =JczY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
