|
|
Posted by Brian Cryer on 10/11/06 09:24
"Nikita the Spider" <NikitaTheSpider@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:NikitaTheSpider-D7E84C.23275410102006@news-rdr-02-ge0-1.southeast.rr.com...
> In article
> <doraymeRidThis-BBFC72.08183911102006@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>,
> dorayme <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
>> Anyone here using methods to make it more difficult for spammers
>> to garner email addresses from web pages. Mostly interested to
>> hear from anyone using specific methods (rather than anything
>> else like further reviews, analyses of the ultimate effectiveness
>> etc, having things like "removeThis" inside the email address
>> that is in the "mailto:").
>
> I've set up several spamtrap addresses to study this. Eventually I'll
> write a short article about my findings, but in the meantime I'll
> summarize here. I have three email addresses all on the same page. One
> is naked (i.e. just foo@example.com), one is entity encoded (i.e.
> foo etc.) and one is added to the page by Javascript.
> The number of spams each has gotten to date is as follows:
>
> naked - 715
> entities - 2
> javascript - 1
Given how easy it is to translate I'm amazed that the encoded version is so
effective. Just goes to show that spammers are stupid as well as sad.
--
Brian Cryer
www.cryer.co.uk/brian
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|