Re: More on spam
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 05:02:57PM +0200, Kjetil Kjernsmo wrote:
> On Friday 17 October 2003 15:42, Jeff Elkins wrote:
> > I'm told that's a dead horse. Beats me as to why, at a minimum, the
> > web archives can't obfuscated. That would close off one avenue for
> > address harvesting anyway.
> Yup, and it is easy enough to figure out what level of obfuscation would
> be sufficient. Just make a web page with a few differently obfuscated
> addresses, and see what gets spam. Use them as spamtraps afterwards. It
> has been done, and I heard just a little obfuscation works, but one
> might want to figure it out for oneself.
If a human can read it, so can the spammers. They will write new
filters to unmunge your munge. Spammers are ingenious malicious
idiots, keep that in mind.
.''`. Paul Johnson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
: :' :
`. `'` proud Debian admin and user
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fix a system
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----