On 30 April 2012 19:41, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 2:27 PM, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 30 April 2012 19:10, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: >>> https://blogs.apache.org/preview/OOo/?previewEntry=draft_avoiding_openoffice_download_scams >>> >>> I know Louis and others have dealt with these things for longer. >>> Anything else I should mention? >>> >>> I considered adding a discussion of the importance of MD5 hashes, >>> etc., but that is not really the skill level of the end user who >>> downloads OpenOffice. >>> >>> I'm also cc'ing trademarks@ since it may be of interest to them and/or >>> they might have feedback. >> >> A few suggestions: >> >> The first paragraph should be quoted and / or in italic. >> >> s/the open source license/its open source license/ - there are several >> instances of this. >> > > Yes. > >> If the end-user is likely to find the concept of MD5 difficult, won't >> they also find it difficult to use the provided e-mail link? >> > > It is a hyperlink so in most cases it will just launch their email.
Sorry, was not clear - I meant that they might have difficulty de-mangling the anti-spam measure. Maybe it would be better to direct them to a web-page that can give more information on reporting such problems. That page could be updated as necessary (e.g. when the e-mail address changes on graduation). Or the page could use plain-text mail links to temporary mail aliases that are rotated (would need to involve infra on that). Having a separate reporting page would be much more flexible; just make sure that its URL does not change (or a redirect is used). >> i.e. mailto:ooo-private-AT-incubator.apache-DOT-org >> >> Also, do such reports need to go to the private mailing list? >> > > It is for the user's safety. Otherwise I can be sure we'll get their > home phone numbers and credit card numbers posted to the public list. > Remember, we're talking about the very end users who have already been > scammed once. So we already know that they are not the most careful > web users. OK, understood. > Of course, we don't need to collect their reports if we don't want to. > But they send them already. This particular one was sent to our > security list. > > -Rob >>> -Rob
