Bart Schaefer wrote on Fri, 12 May 2006 15:53:43 -0700: > (1) Website maintainer uses technique X to obsure addresses on his site.
This has nothing to do with the topic. It's only that you think it is the same. It is not, it's completely unrelated. > (2) Spammer notices that his harvester failed to "decrypt" X. Again, this has nothing to do with the topic. > (3) Spammer copies technique X and uses it to obscure his spam. No, he doesn't "copy". Spammers use obfuscation techniques since long. > (4) SA programmer devises a way to decrypt X to block the spam. No. It just makes a testable URL from it. > (5) Spammer copies algorithm from SA into his address harvester. Hah? We are talking about completely different things here: http URIs and mail URIs. You are confusing two things. What someone does to not get his address harvested is a completely different matter from any URI obfuscation in spam. There is *nothing* to "copy". SA *is* all about removing and detecting obfuscation and it looks up URIs in SURBL. Kai -- Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
