Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Protecting your email with 'AT domain DOT com' is making it easier to find

varenhor.st

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 42 posts

Re: Protecting your email with 'AT domain DOT com' is making it easier to find

#11

Post by tome »

varenc wrote: post #8
est wrote: post #6

cache: http://74.125.153.132/search?hl=en&q=cache:http://varenh... tl;dr: you can search 'AT gmail DOT com' on google I think this technique has been doing by spammers for decades. The best way to prevent email harvest bots is to use DOM+JS, something like elec tr document.write(document.getElementById("my_script").parentNode.firstChild.getAttribute('my_chars')+String.fromCharCode(0x74, 0141, 115-1)) @gmail.com

The trouble with these and some other solutions (like use of imgs), is that they aren't an option on something like linkedin.com or a forum where users can only post text!

Post a link to your own webpage where you can obfuscate the address?

Re: Protecting your email with 'AT domain DOT com' is making it easier to find

#12

Post by endtwist »

tome wrote: post #9
olalonde wrote: post #2

Whatever, I never get spam with Gmail.

How do you know Gmail doesn't misclassify valid mail as spam? This is what terrifies me about the thought of using a spam filter: false positives.

GMail's filter is actually incredibly accurate, and if you periodically scan your spam for anything that shouldn't be in there, you've really got nothing to worry about.

I've only found three or four false positives in the five and a half years I've been with GMail.

Re: Protecting your email with 'AT domain DOT com' is making it easier to find

#13

Post by mattyb »

tome wrote: post #9
olalonde wrote: post #2

Whatever, I never get spam with Gmail.

How do you know Gmail doesn't misclassify valid mail as spam? This is what terrifies me about the thought of using a spam filter: false positives.

I've seen one false positive since I started using Gmail in 2005. It was an important email, but I'm far from terrified.

Re: Protecting your email with 'AT domain DOT com' is making it easier to find

#14

Post by tome »

endtwist wrote: post #12
tome wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know Gmail doesn't misclassify valid mail as spam? This is what terrifies me about the thought of using a spam filter: false positives.

GMail's filter is actually incredibly accurate, and if you periodically scan your spam for anything that shouldn't be in there, you've really got nothing to worry about. I've only found three or four false positives in the five and a half years I've been with GMail.

When I used spam filtering I was receiving perhaps ten spams for every valid mail. This made it very difficult to scan my filtered mail. There was just so much of it.

Re: Protecting your email with 'AT domain DOT com' is making it easier to find

#16

Post by bonsaitree »

Why is this news?!

Follow Postel's law and simply apply (ever cheaper) horsepower to filtering on the back-end + gray-listing & white-listing. This IS NOT rocket science people.

If one can write a regular expression to parse the "obfuscated" content, it's just one more rule in a markov validation chain in a data mining script.

"...Same as it ever was..."--The Talking Heads

Re: Protecting your email with 'AT domain DOT com' is making it easier to find

#18

Post by sjs382 »

tome wrote: post #9
olalonde wrote: post #2

Whatever, I never get spam with Gmail.

How do you know Gmail doesn't misclassify valid mail as spam? This is what terrifies me about the thought of using a spam filter: false positives.

I don't know, but I don't sweat it either. Anyone who is sending me super-important email has other ways of contacting me if they don't get a response. And in the case that they dont, a missed email still isn't the end of the world.

Re: Protecting your email with 'AT domain DOT com' is making it easier to find

#19

Post by aarongough »

tome wrote: post #14
endtwist wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GMail's filter is actually incredibly accurate, and if you periodically scan your spam for anything that shouldn't be in there, you've really got nothing to worry about. I've only found three or four false positives in the five and a half years I've been with GMail.

When I used spam filtering I was receiving perhaps ten spams for every valid mail. This made it very difficult to scan my filtered mail. There was just so much of it.

When using Gmail I have a bunch of filters that make it easier to read through my spam mail.

For instance: IF X email is in the spam folder AND contains any of the words (Cialis, Viagra, Rolex, etc...) -> Move it immediately to the trash.

This cuts down the number of emails that stay in my spam folder by a huge margin, and makes it much easier to check for false positives.

That being said, I no longer even bother checking. I've been with Gmail for 5 years and I've never had a false positive.

Post reply on HN