[MUD-Dev] META: Making the list public?

[clawrenc at cup.hp.com]

In <33CFD425.167EB0E7 at iname.com>, on 07/18/97 
   at 01:45 PM, Shawn Halpenny <malachai at iname.com> said:

>clawrenc at cup.hp.com wrote:

>> Without the last rule "bubba at site.dom" would become "bubba&site,com".
>> With the last rule it would become, "site,dom&bubba".  The reason for
>> this approach as versus BrandonG's approach of nuking the entire
>> UserID section of the email address is that it remains fully human
>> readable and human usable as is, and no sematic content is lost.  Only
>> machine processing abilities are lost.  <<The choice of replacement
>> characters is not cast in stone.  I could also see doing a
>> "bubba(at)site,dom".>>
>> 
>> The address munging pattern would be posted on the web site.
>> 
>>   <<Yes, it is still machine parsable.  I suspect the odds however of
>> a web-scanner unmunging and parsing the above forms and extracting
>> valid email addresses is proximate to zero.>>

>If the details of the munging are publicly available (and the pretty
>much have to be), a determined idiot could conjure something up
>easily. I suppose a determined idiot could work around almost any
>scheme, though.

That's pretty well true of any pattern I devise short of obliterating
the entire email address.  Given dedication and a half-functioning
neurone, it can be reversed.  My bet is that the (comparitively)
paltry membership of the list will not be a tempting enough target for
a web scanner.  Who is going to special case for merely a few score
addresses?

> ...Side note:  would spelling out the '@' and the '.'
>make it any less parsable?  

Possibly, but doubt its effectiveness.  

--
J C Lawrence                           Internet: claw at null.net
(Contractor)                           Internet: coder at ibm.net
---------------(*)               Internet: clawrenc at cup.hp.com
...Honorary Member Clan McFUD -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...