[ale] Webcrawlers can harvest ALE Archive E-mail Addresses

[Fletch]

>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Hirsch <mdhirsch at gmail.com> writes:

[...]

    Michael> My understanding is that email addresses are so easy to
    Michael> harvest right now, that few harvesters bother trying to
    Michael> unobfuscate the email addresses.  I suspect that even
    Michael> something as stupid as replacing all '@' symbols with '
    Michael> AT ' in the archives would significantly reduce my spam.
    Michael> Doing funky stuff with hex codes might work even better.
    Michael> Spammers know that using strange spellings and characters
    Michael> can fool many filters.  Similarly, I bet the same tricks
    Michael> would fool many spammers.

Easy enough to empirically test (and would be interesting to know):

1. Steal underpants, 2. ?, 3. Profit


Wait, sorry.  Wrong plan.


* Set up a dummy mail account on a gibberish domain or subdomain; the
  account name and domain should be something random enough that it's
  not likely to get hit by a 'try this dictionary list @ example.com'
  scheme (i.e. embed some numerals in strange places, 't1es1t')

* Sign said account up to the ale list, and post.

* See how long it takes to receive spam at that address.

* Repeat with a different address but post only to a list which tries
  to obfuscate whatever public archive.


Be interesting to find out if both get harvested, only the
unobfuscated one gets harvested, or neither; as well as finding out
what the "time to be spammed" is.

-- 
Fletch                | "If you find my answers frightening,       __`'/|
fletch at phydeaux.org|  Vincent, you should cease askin'          \ o.O'
                      |  scary questions." -- Jules                =(___)=
                      |                                               U