WARNING! Fodors.com exposes your e-mail address to spammers.
Jan 12th, 2005, 01:36 PM
#42
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hey guys and gals, from the day you got your first credit card you've been on someones list. Likewise as soon as you went on line, you were no longer a secret. Give it up. Someone is always watching and has been for many years.
What does bother me though is that when you do a Google for something or other, many of the threads and posts from Fodors appear. Not nice.
And one day someone contacted me saying that AOL had chosen a segment of a comment I had made on one of their travel boards. Well, surprise surprise, I had no idea what it was even about, nor to what I was responding... but I got to AOL lickety-split and they removed it.
...my phone numbers are listed under my very long deceased first pet!!! Only "needs to know" have it.
It's a no-win situation even if you're hiding under a rock..... welcome to the "brave new world." We asked for it and got it!
What does bother me though is that when you do a Google for something or other, many of the threads and posts from Fodors appear. Not nice.
And one day someone contacted me saying that AOL had chosen a segment of a comment I had made on one of their travel boards. Well, surprise surprise, I had no idea what it was even about, nor to what I was responding... but I got to AOL lickety-split and they removed it.
...my phone numbers are listed under my very long deceased first pet!!! Only "needs to know" have it.
It's a no-win situation even if you're hiding under a rock..... welcome to the "brave new world." We asked for it and got it!
Jan 12th, 2005, 01:40 PM
#43
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WOWEEE!!!!I just googled my post name and posts that I did last year came up in google.
That is amazing, and these posts are not from here but from a ski board I was writing to. I had no idea. I do not get any spam from these posts but I do not use my e-mail address. I did want to get some info from Steve James a frequent poster on Fodors and was going to leave my e-mail but decided against that. Spamming is just part of the territory. Wait till telemarketers get your cell phone number. That will be a party!!!
That is amazing, and these posts are not from here but from a ski board I was writing to. I had no idea. I do not get any spam from these posts but I do not use my e-mail address. I did want to get some info from Steve James a frequent poster on Fodors and was going to leave my e-mail but decided against that. Spamming is just part of the territory. Wait till telemarketers get your cell phone number. That will be a party!!!
Jan 12th, 2005, 01:45 PM
#44
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okaaaay, I see what's happened here...
Someone's just read a WEB DESIGN book or attended training and learned about the different ways web designers can code email addresses to appear on web pages.
They have, quite rightly, learned that the standard way of displaying an email address as a clickable link that opens up an email application is the Mailto function. This is, incidentally, still used on the majority of web sites in existence, according to articles I've read on the subject over recent years. (Can't find such article on quick googling but am sure someone could track such article down if they try).
In this day and age where spamming is so prevalent companies pay big money for lists of valid and active email addresses. So other companies have developed insidious web crawling programs to "mine" websites for email addresses.
Sites such as this with lots of users and lots of activity are just the kind of thing they like.
Some programmers have found ways to display email links without using the standard mailto function and this is usually sufficient to elude the webcrawlers since most are fairly crude and simply search for the mailto function itself.
It's not something that's widely understood and I hardly think it's a shock that a site such as Fodors, providing a FREE service such as this one, has not implemented non harvestable email addresses.
Instead they have gone the route of providing the option to hide email addresses which I think is perfectly sufficient.
Part of using the net is accepting the responsibility for learning the advantages and pitfalls. One of the pitfalls is spam mail.
A commonly known way to deal with that is to have a number of free email accounts that can be used when posting on sites like this and, when spam gets too much, dumped and replaced with a fresh one.
I really don't think a raving attack on Fodors is called for here.
Someone's just read a WEB DESIGN book or attended training and learned about the different ways web designers can code email addresses to appear on web pages.
They have, quite rightly, learned that the standard way of displaying an email address as a clickable link that opens up an email application is the Mailto function. This is, incidentally, still used on the majority of web sites in existence, according to articles I've read on the subject over recent years. (Can't find such article on quick googling but am sure someone could track such article down if they try).
In this day and age where spamming is so prevalent companies pay big money for lists of valid and active email addresses. So other companies have developed insidious web crawling programs to "mine" websites for email addresses.
Sites such as this with lots of users and lots of activity are just the kind of thing they like.
Some programmers have found ways to display email links without using the standard mailto function and this is usually sufficient to elude the webcrawlers since most are fairly crude and simply search for the mailto function itself.
It's not something that's widely understood and I hardly think it's a shock that a site such as Fodors, providing a FREE service such as this one, has not implemented non harvestable email addresses.
Instead they have gone the route of providing the option to hide email addresses which I think is perfectly sufficient.
Part of using the net is accepting the responsibility for learning the advantages and pitfalls. One of the pitfalls is spam mail.
A commonly known way to deal with that is to have a number of free email accounts that can be used when posting on sites like this and, when spam gets too much, dumped and replaced with a fresh one.
I really don't think a raving attack on Fodors is called for here.
Jan 12th, 2005, 02:10 PM
#45
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just did a Yahoo search of my Email
address and got 2 hits from a Fodors
travel thread. I haven't been spammed
because I have turned off my bulk mail folder and thats where the spam goes to,
so no big deal.
address and got 2 hits from a Fodors
travel thread. I haven't been spammed
because I have turned off my bulk mail folder and thats where the spam goes to,
so no big deal.
Jan 12th, 2005, 04:05 PM
#49
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 34,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I knew there was some way that made it easier or not for automatic harvesting of email addresses, but think anyone who posts an email address in public on the internet is sort of aware it is public.
As for some getting upset that FOdors threads can turn up in a Google search (as can threads from other boards), I don't understand why someone would get upset about that. This is a public board with public information and there are probably many Sandi's in the US (I think Sandi thought it was "not nice" that results show up in a search) and your personal info isn't on here anyway unless you voluntarily give it. I don't understand why it's not nice. I think it's great for Fodors that some info on here shows up in a search, it might lead more people to the forum. I know I've found some other forums that way. I don't understand what the AOL reference was about, but I don't post things on the internet with my real email and/or name and address that I want to keep private.
If I do have my name and address etc on anything on the internet (and I do on one professional board I participate on, as it gives my credentials, professional position and consulting area, etc.) I don't object to anyone quoting me as long as they do it correctly.
I have had some post I wrote about film music read on Canadian TV on a talk show where they were interviewing the composer I had critiqued (and praised) in the post. This was on a public forum like this on indie films and film music and the composer actually wrote me an email to thank me. I was shocked when I saw her name in my inbox, thinking it was a joke, but it was real. Obviously, the researchers for that show had done a Google search also to see what they could find out about this composer's music and they found my post and used it on air.
As for some getting upset that FOdors threads can turn up in a Google search (as can threads from other boards), I don't understand why someone would get upset about that. This is a public board with public information and there are probably many Sandi's in the US (I think Sandi thought it was "not nice" that results show up in a search) and your personal info isn't on here anyway unless you voluntarily give it. I don't understand why it's not nice. I think it's great for Fodors that some info on here shows up in a search, it might lead more people to the forum. I know I've found some other forums that way. I don't understand what the AOL reference was about, but I don't post things on the internet with my real email and/or name and address that I want to keep private.
If I do have my name and address etc on anything on the internet (and I do on one professional board I participate on, as it gives my credentials, professional position and consulting area, etc.) I don't object to anyone quoting me as long as they do it correctly.
I have had some post I wrote about film music read on Canadian TV on a talk show where they were interviewing the composer I had critiqued (and praised) in the post. This was on a public forum like this on indie films and film music and the composer actually wrote me an email to thank me. I was shocked when I saw her name in my inbox, thinking it was a joke, but it was real. Obviously, the researchers for that show had done a Google search also to see what they could find out about this composer's music and they found my post and used it on air.
Jan 12th, 2005, 04:12 PM
#50
I think you might be over-exagerating some responses. Some like I, were, (as a not bright Pc user in my age with no youngsters to teach me), to know our comments and critiques are on line. First of all, you should never say what you don't want in print.
Jan 12th, 2005, 07:03 PM
#52
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C'mon Robespierre. You've posting here with that name for 8 months now. And you say you've been "cloaking" your web address for years.
(BTW, I LOVE the "cloaking" term. It drags me back to my Star Trek years. The real Star Trek. Not those silly follow-ons.
)
Yet suddenly today January 12th, 2005 we need a warning about e-mail addresses that users have chosen to show? Shouldn't you have been raising the alarm from day one?
What's up with that?
(BTW, I LOVE the "cloaking" term. It drags me back to my Star Trek years. The real Star Trek. Not those silly follow-ons.
)Yet suddenly today January 12th, 2005 we need a warning about e-mail addresses that users have chosen to show? Shouldn't you have been raising the alarm from day one?
What's up with that?
Jan 12th, 2005, 07:45 PM
#53
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Robespierre... I really have no opinion either way on spam harvesting from fodors... My spam filter ( http://www.tmda.net/ ) Is pretty damned good, and doesn't have the problem that you mention later (of having false positives, characterizing non-spam as spam)...
But, I wanted to respond to this one:
> I don't care. You shouldn't have to
> screen your mail. For one thing,
> someone may have been trying to reach
> you but the filters eliminated their
> message without even telling you.
This is asinine. This is like saying "You shouldn't have to have police. Noone should commit crime."
Um. OK. That's great in the next universe you construct. In this universe, people engage in crime. You might get mugged. You might get spammed, and I'm sorry, therefore, you will need police, martial arts and spam filters.
How do you shop from amazon? How do you really know someone may not break into some commercial site (or this one) and steal all the e-mails and sell them to some spammer? Even if fodors were to encode all the mailto's in some manner: maybe as javascript, or maybe as & sequences, whatever.
Not to mention the threat from this venue. What if you tell your trusted buddy your e-mail, and he goes to his e-mail provider, and someone targets his outgoing e-mails as spam recipients?
Even if you're mister security and secured the hell out of your box, how do you know a worm isn't going around collecting e-mail addresses from the contact lists of people, some of whom might be trusted people you communicate with?
I'm sorry but saying "You shouldn't have to filter" strikes me as absurdly idealistic.
But, I wanted to respond to this one:
> I don't care. You shouldn't have to
> screen your mail. For one thing,
> someone may have been trying to reach
> you but the filters eliminated their
> message without even telling you.
This is asinine. This is like saying "You shouldn't have to have police. Noone should commit crime."
Um. OK. That's great in the next universe you construct. In this universe, people engage in crime. You might get mugged. You might get spammed, and I'm sorry, therefore, you will need police, martial arts and spam filters.
How do you shop from amazon? How do you really know someone may not break into some commercial site (or this one) and steal all the e-mails and sell them to some spammer? Even if fodors were to encode all the mailto's in some manner: maybe as javascript, or maybe as & sequences, whatever.
Not to mention the threat from this venue. What if you tell your trusted buddy your e-mail, and he goes to his e-mail provider, and someone targets his outgoing e-mails as spam recipients?
Even if you're mister security and secured the hell out of your box, how do you know a worm isn't going around collecting e-mail addresses from the contact lists of people, some of whom might be trusted people you communicate with?
I'm sorry but saying "You shouldn't have to filter" strikes me as absurdly idealistic.
Jan 12th, 2005, 08:10 PM
#54
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,067
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First, note that I don't display an email address. Yes, I am concerned about spam and decided to hide it for that reason. It seemed obvious to me from the first day of registration that these were simply generated html pages, so it wasn't much of a decision to make. But it has always been my decision whether to allow it to display or not.
Second, when you sign up for Fodors, they make it quite clear that the content you type in becomes part of the website. A commercial website. Every page that creates a "hit" on Google, is a connection for someone to find their way to this site, the sole purpose of which is to drive the name recognition of Fodors. So I wouldn't count on them eliminating all those extra hits, when it's the one way that this forum helps pay for itself. Could they do something like set up a link for the email that popped up a form, then referenced the user database for the real address, and restrict that form submit to only originate from the server? Well, yeah they could, but if I had to make a resource spending decision and I already had an opt-out built into the system, I wouldn't throw money at it.
Given the number of people who have stated they have been displaying their emails and aren't getting spammed, I'd say it's an issue in the "potential" stage right now. If one person is getting them, from among everyone having their say, I'd guess it's much more likely they p*ssed off a fellow poster and said poster went and signed them up for a few things. Lousy behavior, but possible.
Jan 12th, 2005, 08:40 PM
#55
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 19,000
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, both you Bozos -
I only turned on my "display e-mail address" option a few days ago. You can go through my posts and see for yourself (if you have time on your hands, which it appears you do). For the first time since I started using this e-mail address about 5 years ago, I started getting spam. So I googled my address and found ONLY references to Fodor's threads. I turned off the option. I initiated this thread.
OF THE DOZENS OF PLACES ON THE WEB WHERE I USE MY E-MAIL ADDRESS, THIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT MAKES IT VISIBLE TO ROBOTS.
Whether you get spam or I get spam or whether anyone will ever get spam is irrelevant. Spam will not stop (probably not even if it's outlawed), but there are things that responsible site administrators can do to minimize it. If a webmaster isn't part of the solution, s/he is part of the problem.
Call me "absurdly idealistic," but I still think it's sloppy website management.
I only turned on my "display e-mail address" option a few days ago. You can go through my posts and see for yourself (if you have time on your hands, which it appears you do). For the first time since I started using this e-mail address about 5 years ago, I started getting spam. So I googled my address and found ONLY references to Fodor's threads. I turned off the option. I initiated this thread.
OF THE DOZENS OF PLACES ON THE WEB WHERE I USE MY E-MAIL ADDRESS, THIS IS THE ONLY ONE THAT MAKES IT VISIBLE TO ROBOTS.
Whether you get spam or I get spam or whether anyone will ever get spam is irrelevant. Spam will not stop (probably not even if it's outlawed), but there are things that responsible site administrators can do to minimize it. If a webmaster isn't part of the solution, s/he is part of the problem.
Call me "absurdly idealistic," but I still think it's sloppy website management.
Jan 12th, 2005, 08:52 PM
#56
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 19,000
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, Clifton -
How about a notice that says "posting of your e-mail address on this site will be construed as your agreement to make it available to address-harvesting robots."
?
How about a notice that says "posting of your e-mail address on this site will be construed as your agreement to make it available to address-harvesting robots."
?
Jan 12th, 2005, 09:08 PM
#57
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,067
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair enough. I mean, I know what you're saying and I honestly wish this didn't need to be a concern. Spammers are incredibly intrusive and rank no higher than telemarketers and direct marketers, as far as I'm concerned.
Unfortunately, the mailto tag isn't the only construct crawlers can search out. There are some that will even dig into the flat content itself and find the [email protected] format, such as those finding my addy from the whois directories (grrrr!). I wish spam could be outlawed, but I can't think that it's realistically possible on an international medium like this one. So I fall somewhere between placing responsibility with site owners and with the owner of the email address as to it's proper handling (as with all valuables). I guess, in the long run, my libertarian streak tells me that we all make our own decisions, use or not use whatever services we feel are up to our standards, and that nothing ever works exactly the way we wish it would.
Jan 12th, 2005, 09:14 PM
#58
Original Poster
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 19,000
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with everything you just said, but...
spammers can't see addresses that aren't indexed. At all. Not even with extremely sophisticated scanning techniques. On one of my commercial sites, I even publish my home address on a page that none of the other pages link to.
In short: if you don't want e-mail addresses harvested, don't put them on a page that's accessible through the site's front door.
spammers can't see addresses that aren't indexed. At all. Not even with extremely sophisticated scanning techniques. On one of my commercial sites, I even publish my home address on a page that none of the other pages link to.
In short: if you don't want e-mail addresses harvested, don't put them on a page that's accessible through the site's front door.
Jan 12th, 2005, 09:17 PM
#59
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 7,321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Until the dust settles, I changed my Fodors profile today to hide my e-mail address. I noticed that it removed it from previous posts also, in case anyone else is interested in doing the same thing.
Jan 12th, 2005, 09:26 PM
#60
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 16,067
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed. One of the first things I did when they did the registration deal was right click on a page and check for the meta tags for noindex and nofollow. While that's not the only way, or even the best way, to restrict that of course, I was suspicious enough to leave it turned off. Good advice overall, from a sort of universal practice perspective.
The good news is that when you turned off the option, it disappeared from all your past posts as well. Fortunately, their jsp stuff is building these pages on the fly. At least until it doesn't work right. I noticed your mention of going back to look at other posts, so didn't know if you were aware.
