|
|
Posted by John Dunlop on 10/12/06 08:28
dorayme:
[re overcoming e-mail address obfuscation]
> If it is so little effort, what is your theory about why it is so
> effective (if it is as recent indications suggest)? Perhaps I can
> help you:
No help needed, dorayme, thank you. Someone in this thread has already
advanced a plausible theory: laziness. Even the slightest extra
effort is too much because unobfuscated e-mail addresses are plentiful,
easy pickings even. No need to stretch.
> The point is this though: robbers tend to go for the low lying
> fruit first and there is plenty enough of that to go around. Do
> you understand what I am saying? No need to crash through even
> slightly heavier security.
Yes, but I am merely pointing out that obfuscating e-mail addresses is
inferior to real security; I am not claiming to know what harvesters
actually do!
Mind that old axiom 'security by obscurity gives a false sense of
security'?
And, as I've explained, the techniques to obfuscate e-mail addresses
proposed in this thread run contrary to the spirit of Internet
specifications. That a construct is included in a specification is
hardly license to exploit it.
Deal with spam at your end; don't pass the buck.
--
Jock
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|