Search this site


Metadata

Articles

Projects

Presentations

One anti-spam effort too easily defeated.

I see lots of times where people put their mailing addresses as "foo at bar dot org" in a hopeful effort to keep spammers from scraping your mailing address. Heck, mail archive systems often have (and are deployed with) options to obfuscate email addresses systematically, using the same pattern: foo at bar dot com.

All it does is hurt usability.

Googlng for "* at * dot *" clearly shows lots of matches. It also matches all of the following variants, due to google searches ignoring brackets and such in words:

  • foo at bar dot com
  • foo [at] bar [dot] com
  • foo (at) bar (dot) com
  • ... etc ...
Query, scrape, replace 'at' and 'dot' as desired. I now have 54 million email addresses. What now?

Seems like this effort only serves to have people fool themselves as well as to impede usability. It certainly won't protect you from spam. Why is this method used?


2 responses to 'One anti-spam effort too easily defeated.'

Showing last 2 comments... (Click here to view all comments)

logadmin wrote at Mon Jan 29 07:46:32 2007...
Good point.
The following question is:
In a near future, will be the e-mail icons (pictures) susceptible too?

Regards.

Jordan Sissel wrote at Mon Jan 29 09:36:20 2007...
Pictures will break usability even further.

Not that it affects me, but pictures can't be read by screen-reading software (for blind folk).

I also can't copy the text and paste it into my favorite mail client. Annoying and not nice for accessibility.


Leave a reply

You need javascript enabled to use this form. Anti-spam efforts ongoing. Also, if the comment doesn't show up, it's because the form expired. Go back and copy your comment, reload the form, and resubmit. Apologies if this is a hassle, I'm just playing with antispam methods right now. If this insists on not working, please email me about it.

Name (required)
E-mail (optional, if you want me to be able to email you back)
URL (also optional)
Comment: