John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
James G. Sack (jim) wrote:
Hmmm, maybe it's already implemented? I think I'll add to the subject
line of this email -- as a test message.
http://www.kernel-panic.org/pipermail/kplug-steer/2007-April/003223.html
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE> Helge has a gripe AND a point [added [EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
</TITLE>
The @ is not even entity encoded.
I say we don't touch it and instead promise not to put e-mail addresses
in subject lines. I can see where if we munge the subject line there
won't be enough context to recreate the intent of the sender, searches
break down, and some thread will pop up about "why did the list mangle
my message?" that will go on for days. If I write about "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
which is a legitimate name for a project, how will that get mangled?
Since the original e-mail address was followed by a colon, does that
disrupt the harvesters, and is that sufficient mangling? And can't
modern harvesters undo the [AT] mangling? If spammers have automated
solutions to get past captchas then I think they can probably still
extract e-mail addresses.
Gus
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-steer
