Hi Earl, *, Earl Hood schrieb: > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Friedrich Strohmaier wrote:
>>> You could also add the prefix to the method, as alternative to the >>> already existing cid case. >>> ((?:cid:)?|(?:(?:http://(?:www\.)?)?mail-archive\.com/)?)($AddrExp) >>> This one should work in any case (but I didn't test it) >> This also is my favorite - simply because the only one having >> understood entirely ;o)). >> remains the question whether it makes sense to restrict on >> mail-archive.com because I think any (http:|ftp:|rsync:) URL >> containing an emailadress part should stay untouched. Might be >> interesting whether/how many of these occur in the whole archive. > Doing this will allow others to post email addresses of people to > be targeted by address harvesters. I intended talking from mail adresses as part of an URL. Mailadresses hit by the mhonarc regex will continued to be obfuscated. But I apparently didn't succeed. > Once can avoid the munging on the authoring side be URL escaping > the @ character with %40 shure harvesters don't know the trick? :o)) > As for modify mhonarc source code, not sure if the M-A folks > want to deal with maintaining a custom version of mhonarc to > address this issue. Is there any module handling this issue? I don't think they have to deal with, if they don't want. We are on our own then. > They could disable modifybodyaddresses resource and have > their own pre-filter to protect mail-archive URLs in messages. That's what's happening, if the patch is accepted. Don't get the point of this. Gruß/regards -- Friedrich Libreoffice-Box http://libreofficebox.org/ LibreOffice and more on CD/DVD images (german version already started) -- To unsubscribe, send mail to gossip-unsubscr...@jab.org.
