on 14/06/02 12:45 PM, Manuel Lemos ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:

> Javascript-less represent less then 0.5% of the users in the World.

I'd be interested in seeing this data proven.  I'm not being sarcastic --
I'm genuinely interested.

> You are guessing. I am sure your address leaked from some other way.

Well, we can debate this forever, but I'm certain.  The only other option is
if a real person scanned the page and grabbed email address', in the same
way a bot did.

It wouldn't take long to write a script that recognised emails in the
following formats

justin at indent dot com dot au
etc etc...

Therefor, it's conceivable that there are spam bots out there which pick up
these new "tricks".  As soon as something becomes a standard work-around,
they'll attempt to find a work-around of their own.

> No, the only way to absolutely avoid the problem is to have your site
> send the message without revealing the address even to the poster.
> I don't want to do this because the poster may abuse from your site to
> send hate mail or some other kind of inconvinient mail and your site
> will be blamed for that.
> I prefer to leave the less-than-0-dot-5-percent-non-Javascript-browser
> users fixing the address that had @ replaced.

I agree.  And in the case of a user site like yours, and email form isn't
really an option.

But on a site with 100,000 users, isn't that 500 pissed off users -- and
worse still, users with javascript turned off, or archaic browsers, or text
to speech user agents, or whatever non-JS reason, they may not be entirely
clued-up as to what went wrong.

Then again, it would depend on the target market.

I would expect the users of a web dev site would be clued up, but maybe not
the visitors to a craft and sewing store.

Justin French

PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to