I agree, entity-encoded mailto: links work quite well. They may not work
forever, though, and some Drew McLellan made a good point
here<http://typewriting.org/2006/06/19/Email_Obfuscation_Helps_Spammers/>
:

In some ways, obfuscated addresses are even more valuable

to spammers, as the very act of obfuscation could suggest

that the address is important to someone.


Once you put something out on the Web, it's availible for everyone to
read - and that includes spambots. If only people stopped buying
things from these spammers...

Cheers,
Wander

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 02:49, Lou Quillio <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Arno Hautala <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The other thread brought to my attention that only the <email> syntax
> > obfuscates mailto links. Plus, while the entity encoding technique
> > probably fools some scrapers, I doubt it's all that effective.
>
> Incredibly, it's still very effective.  Back when I kept a personal
> site with actual content, I kept an entity-encoded mailto: link to
> [email protected] on all pages.  For maybe eight years (up until
> about four years ago), that alias never received a message.  I still
> use entity-encoding mailtos on public sites and don't have the
> impression that they're scraped.
>
> I think the harvesters are all about low-hanging fruit, and decoding
> is still more expensive than it's worth.  Might change some day, but
> doesn't seem to have -- yet.
>
> LQ
>
>
> --
> Lou Quillio
> http://quillio.com/
> [email protected]
> +1 518.285.0003 (gVoice)
> _______________________________________________
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
>
_______________________________________________
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

Reply via email to