I wonder how effective the old [at] method was anyway. I mean it would only be a few different regex searches
Email obfuscation rendered almost ineffective against ChatGPT
61–70 of 204 posts
Re: Email obfuscation rendered almost ineffective against ChatGPT
#62My email is old, pre 2000, I got my own email server, and got about 50000 spam emails daily. About 500 goes beyond retry¹, IP ban and reverse DNS check, and rspamd let about 10 through daily.
I am not saying obfuscation is useless, just that email filtering works quite well.
¹: retry is to refuse emails from unknown servers by default and force them to retry later with 451 error.
Re: Email obfuscation rendered almost ineffective against ChatGPT
#63In my experience, ChatGPT struggles with accuracy when handling binary operations (maybe due to the way it processes tokens?) so maybe I should change my e-mail on the about page to some long form binary multiplication encoding ascii
Re: Email obfuscation rendered almost ineffective against ChatGPT
#64I used chatGPT to decode proprietary binary files of some industrial machinery. It was amazing how it can decipher shit and find patterns. It first looked for ascii characters, then byte sequences acting as delimiters, then it started looking at which bytes could be the length or what 4-bytes could be floating point numbers of coordinates and which endianness was more logic for coordinates, etc. etc. crazy stuff.
I don't buy this. LLMs are basically just fancy text completion based on training data. "Binary data from a proprietary industrial machine" sounds like the furthest possible thing that could have been in the training data. How can you possibly trust its output if it's not something it's ever seen before?
Re: Email obfuscation rendered almost ineffective against ChatGPT
#65Email scrapers are kind of an old thing when you can buy lists of real emails for dirt cheap. And thanks to all the data leaks you can even get them for free. No scraping required.
Re: Email obfuscation rendered almost ineffective against ChatGPT
#66I used chatGPT to decode proprietary binary files of some industrial machinery. It was amazing how it can decipher shit and find patterns. It first looked for ascii characters, then byte sequences acting as delimiters, then it started looking at which bytes could be the length or what 4-bytes could be floating point numbers of coordinates and which endianness was more logic for coordinates, etc. etc. crazy stuff.
I don't buy this. LLMs are basically just fancy text completion based on training data. "Binary data from a proprietary industrial machine" sounds like the furthest possible thing that could have been in the training data. How can you possibly trust its output if it's not something it's ever seen before?
you have the wrong conceptual model of how LLMs do the thing they do
Re: Email obfuscation rendered almost ineffective against ChatGPT
#67No large-scale email scraper has the budget necessary to run the content it scrapes through a LLM. So as far as real-world goes, nothing changes: the .2 cents it would cost to run ChatGPT on a page to extract potentially obfuscated emails would cost magnitudes more than it could ever bring in revenues. Regarding the examples provided, there is nothing there that a simple regex couldn't achieve, so I don't really see…
> No large-scale email scraper has the budget necessary to run the content it scrapes through a LLM.
That's why it's awesome to be able to locally run open-source LLaMA! Not to mention that by running it locally OpenAI is not aware of your shenanigans.
Re: Email obfuscation rendered almost ineffective against ChatGPT
#68My email is old, pre 2000, I got my own email server, and got about 50000 spam emails daily. About 500 goes beyond retry¹, IP ban and reverse DNS check, and rspamd let about 10 through daily. I am not saying obfuscation is useless, just that email filtering works quite well. ¹: retry is to refuse emails from unknown servers by default and force them to retry later with 451 error.
Similar experience here. I still use SpamAssassin, in addition to DNSBL, and spam is very manageable, more like five per day on average. Amazingly, SpamAssassin produces zero false positives for me.
Re: Email obfuscation rendered almost ineffective against ChatGPT
#69I used chatGPT to decode proprietary binary files of some industrial machinery. It was amazing how it can decipher shit and find patterns. It first looked for ascii characters, then byte sequences acting as delimiters, then it started looking at which bytes could be the length or what 4-bytes could be floating point numbers of coordinates and which endianness was more logic for coordinates, etc. etc. crazy stuff.
I don't buy this. LLMs are basically just fancy text completion based on training data. "Binary data from a proprietary industrial machine" sounds like the furthest possible thing that could have been in the training data. How can you possibly trust its output if it's not something it's ever seen before?
You could try this with a hex dump of an executable binary
Re: Email obfuscation rendered almost ineffective against ChatGPT
#70Can anyone explain what the ‘think step by step’ magic words referenced in the article are ?
Apologies for the article's lack of details. Allow me to provide a concrete example:
Me> extract contact email address from the following post: --- Parative | https://parative.com | Senior Backend Engineer | REMOTE (USA only) | Full Time Parative is in need of an experienced backend engineer to join its platform team with a focus on API and integration work. As a key member of an early-stage team, you’ll report directly to CTO Jason Zopf and join a growing team of US-based engineers and an established team of developers in Eastern Europe.
We are a remote company; however, we are only able to hire eligible candidates in the United States for this role. Given the size of our team and the nature of our work with customers, we also require candidates to have primary fluency/bilingual proficiency in English.
Apply here: https://parative.breezy.hr/p/235414743556-senior-backend-eng... and feel free to follow send drop me a note: paige@[parative domain] ---
GPT> The contact email address mentioned in the post is "paige@[parative domain]." The domain part of the email address seems to have been redacted or cut off. Typically, it would be something like "parative.com" or a similar domain related to the company's website. Unfortunately, in the provided text, the domain after the "@" symbol is not fully visible