 | | Re: Has MOCPages been harvested for spam?
|
|
(...) The address shown for me is : <lar(at@at)miltontra...t.dot)com> (that is, it's been mangled, if you "view raw message" for THIS post you'll see what I mean) Todd put in a way for you to force-mangle your addresses. Not perfect since the coding (...) (20 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Has MOCPages been harvested for spam?
|
|
(...) There's the same problem here on Lugnet: if you're reading this from the Lugnet web site, just look over the "reply" icon, there's a "View raw message" link. Try it... Before I shut down this address, I received a lot of spam: mechanical (...) (20 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Has MOCPages been harvested for spam?
|
|
(...) Thanks Larry, I wanted to understand method by which my email address was harvested before address it to MOCPages. Clearly it's a design flaw, and not something more sinister which was one of my original concerns. Derek (20 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: OT - anyone own a robot vacum?
|
|
(...) I wouldn't take that statement too seriously -- it's a lawyer spouting turf-talk, not a product review. Steve (20 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
| |
| | Re: Has MOCPages been harvested for spam?
|
|
(...) It would take a little more development effort to do a hash, but ya. Ouch. I agree. Ouch. Not only that but it seems to vary across time, some of my creations have older email addresses embedded, presumably matching when I changed my emails as (...) (20 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
