Re: Show text without converting to html
| From: | Andrew Ballard | Date: | Thu, 09 Sep 2010 18:21:33 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Show text without converting to html | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-general+get-307909@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Jack <JackListMail@gmail.com> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Ballard [mailto:aballard@gmail.com]
>
>
> The only people for whom the value will be obscure will be the humans who actually try to read
> the HTML source code itself. Neither web browsers nor harvesting scripts won't have any trouble
> reading it.
>
> Andrew
>
>
> Andrew,
>
> One other note, if the link doesn't say mailto: a
> harvester will have to decode the entire page in order to find the mailto, do you think that’s
> happening. This could be one of those things where you help against a percentage of harvesters,
> and not others.
>
> J
It will protect against a (possibly large?) percentage of those that
are looking for the lowest hanging fruit. I have a few reasons that
feed my doubts about its effectiveness:
- The most common answer you find when you search for e-mail
obfuscation is something similar to what you've shown, whether it uses
HTML character entities, numeric entities, or a combination of the
two.
- The overhead to convert frankly isn't that high. I realize that in
the case of a harvester you are multiplying that overhead by the sheer
volume of content being processed, but given the speed of processors I
don't think that matters much anymore.
- There are simple ways to minimize the overhead. For example, a
script does not have to decode an entire page; it only has to look for
anchor tags and decode the contents of the href attribute of each tag
found.
Combine these and I don't think this obfuscation technique adds enough
cost to be much of a barrier. Of course, this is just my opinion.
Those who write harvesters might be lazier than I give them credit.
Andrew