Email address on mail archive

This type of request is becoming more and more common.

Although mod_mbox obscures the basic to and from address,
there are
still two problems:

1. It doesn't obscure email addresses in the body of the
message
(which could be from forwarded/quoted messages).

2. The "raw" link still gives access to the
unobscured addresses.

I know there are people who still hold the idealistic view
that we
shouldn't be obscuring email addresses at all.  Although I
agree in
principle, I think the world has passed that view by.

I don't know if anyone is interested in fixing this stuff,
but I
thought I would at least point out the recurring issue to
the mod_mbox
developers.

Joshua.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: jmjmason.org <jmjmason.org>
Date: Apr 27, 2006 7:49 AM
Subject: Email address on mail archive (fwd)
To: infrastructureapache.org



Sorry -- I can't recall -- what's the policy on this kind
of
request?

--j.

------- Forwarded Message

Date:    Tue, 25 Apr 2006 08:21:17 +0100
From:    Jens Finke <jens bluegecko.org>
To:      dev-ownerspamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Email address on mail archive

Hi,

I posted a bug report to spamassassin.dev in November 2004.
Rather ironically,
I notice that my email address has been visible on the
mail-archives.apache.org
 website ever since. Much as I appreciate Spam Assassin,
having my primary addr
ess accessible to any web trawling spambot rather defeats
the whole point.

So, could you please delete the address (jens bluegecko.org)
from the following
 four pages:


http://mail-archives.apache.org/m
od_mbox/spamassassin-dev/200411.mbox/%3C200411
24161053.45A72838B4bugzilla.spamassassin.org%3E

http://mail-archives.apache.org/m
od_mbox/spamassassin-dev/200411.mbox/raw/%3c20
041124161053.45A72838B4bugzilla.spamassassin.org%3e

http://mail-archives.apache.org/m
od_mbox/spamassassin-dev/200411.mbox/%3C200411
24183553.DCF25838B4bugzilla.spamassassin.org%3E

http://mail-archives.apache.org/m
od_mbox/spamassassin-dev/200411.mbox/raw/%3c20
041124183553.DCF25838B4bugzilla.spamassassin.org%3e

Many thanks,

Jens Finke
--
http://www.bluegecko.org
-  Traditional Music and Cultures of Kenya
-  Chasing the Lizard's Tail: across the Sahara by bicycle

Mjinga akierevuka mwerevu yupo mashakani
When a fool becomes enlightened, the wise man is in trouble




------- End of Forwarded Message

On 4/27/06, Joshua Slive <joshuaslive.ca> wrote:
> I know there are people who still hold the idealistic
view that we
> shouldn't be obscuring email addresses at all. 
Although I agree in
> principle, I think the world has passed that view by.

I think that obfuscation is completely pointless.  You're
posting to a
*public* mailing list.  If you can't understand that, well,
I just
don't care about people who whine.  The *only* solution
that is valid
is to use anti-spam tools on your end.  I have no desire to
get into a
never-ending arms race with spammers.  We can't win that
battle on
those terms.  -- justin

On 4/28/06, Justin Erenkrantz <justinerenkrantz.com> wrote:
> On 4/27/06, Joshua Slive <joshuaslive.ca> wrote:
> > I know there are people who still hold the
idealistic view that we
> > shouldn't be obscuring email addresses at all. 
Although I agree in
> > principle, I think the world has passed that view
by.
>
> I think that obfuscation is completely pointless. 
You're posting to a
> *public* mailing list.  If you can't understand that,
well, I just
> don't care about people who whine.  The *only*
solution that is valid
> is to use anti-spam tools on your end.  I have no
desire to get into a
> never-ending arms race with spammers.  We can't win
that battle on
> those terms.  -- justin

As I said, I'd love to agree with you.  But why don't you
try asking
100 random subscribers to our users lists or 100 random bug
submitters
whether they think it is obvious that their email address
will be made
public.  A couple years ago, they might have agreed.  Now,
I'd guess
the majority wouldn't think that is obvious at all.

Joshua.