At 07:44 PM 12/29/2001 -0800, Dr. Brian Leverich wrote: > > >Judging by the response to my earlier note, it might serve some >purpose to let folks know what K & I are up to these days. > >We climb mountains. Karen's summitted on 180+ peaks this year, and >I've been up 120+. WOW! Glad to hear you had the time and the energy! Enjoy the change of focus, guys, you've earned it. Cheryl *_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_* Cheryl Singhal (Singhals@erols.com) http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cpafug/ http://www.rootsweb.com/~wvhampsh/ http://www.capaccess.org/com/troop763/ http://www.fortunecity.com/millennium/blyton/772/ (Bottony Cross DAR) http://www.rootsweb.com/~cresap/ http://members.fortunecity.com/csinghal1/ (Joanna Waddill UDC)

As they say -- Half of the world wakes up to figure out how to screw the other half. It is a never ending battle! We try to do good and someone always has to do evil against us so we have to work twice as hard to figure out how to combat it. <sigh> I hope we all have a safe and happier 2002. Michelle

Everyone has been so helpful I am again asking for your help. I got the Dreamweaver program as several of you suggested and I think I have a simple Webpage set up ready to go. The question is how? I have the original Webpage out there that I made on Picture It! already. How do I substitute this one? And - What do I do later when I wnat to make changes? As soon as I get your messages on what to do I'll load the page. I hope some of you will check it out and make sure it's coming up now with the new software. I'll let you know my URL as soon as I load it. Thakns again, Sharen

Your new hobby sounds very interesting and quite a change -- Best wishes Regards Patricia

In a message dated 12/29/01 3:47:43 PM Central Standard Time, sburow@swbell.net writes: > Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 2:40 PM > Subject: Re: [RW-Help] address-harvesting? > > > > singhals wrote: > > > > > > It is now apparently possible to harvest e-dresses off our webpages. > > > > > > I assume they're well-behaved little 'bots, so I could just slap a > > > "no-bots" in the META tags, but then the pages don't get indexed > either. > > > > > > Is there some way to keep it easy for my GenWeb visitors to reach me > > > (without my having to set up and visit yet another e-mail acct) while > > > keeping the harvesters at bay? > Here is a solution to reduce harvesting from a site. Need a Javascript programmer to set this up though... 1. Set up Variables to contain: a. Var1 = '<.A HREF=mailto:" ' b. Var2 = 'youremailname@' c. Var3 = 'yourhostname.com">' d. Var4 = 'Email Me<./A>' 2. Then a javascript command to "write" the variables to the webpage dynamically at load time: a. Print Var1 + Var2 + Var3 + Var4 3. Voila! No text for the Bot to scan and recognize as a valid email. 4. Note... a javascript programmer must build the correct code! Jim Downing ------------------------------------------------------------ <A HREF="http://www.gladads.com/appliance.htm">Appliance Parts Online & Free Appliance Repair Help</A> <A HREF="http://www.gladads.com/index.php3">GladAds.com ~ Webpage Development and Hosting</A> ------------------------------------------------------------

At 10:16 AM 12/29/2001 -0800, Dr. Brian Leverich wrote: > > >-- Your message was: (from "singhals") > >> It is now apparently possible to harvest e-dresses off our webpages. >> >> I assume they're well-behaved little 'bots, so I could just slap a >> "no-bots" in the META tags, but then the pages don't get indexed either. >> >> Is there some way to keep it easy for my GenWeb visitors to reach me >> (without my having to set up and visit yet another e-mail acct) while >> keeping the harvesters at bay? > > ------------------ > > >I know of no effective way for an individual to keep spam harvesters >off their web pages. Spam harvesters in general ignore all the >controls that tell polite robots to stay out. > >A *server* can install robot traps and various counter-robots. Once >upon a time Tim Pierce had a reasonable single-layer defense >installed on RootsWeb's servers, but I have no idea if that defense >has been maintained. > >State-of-the-art servers now use multiple layers of defense. > >What an individual webmaster *can* do is "GIFize" their address. >That means use a graphics package to convert the text of your email >address into a graphic, and then have *no* text of your address >anywhere (including on "hidden" mailto tags or comment lines) on >your pages. > >This is slightly more inconvenient for your visitors -- they have to >retype your address into their mail program -- but it defeats every >spam harvester than I know of. > >Cheers, B. > Now why aren't I surprised? (g) Sigh. Thanks, Brian, and Happy New Year to you and Karen! May it be less "interesting" than the last few? (g) Cheryl (who had one of those interesting years herself in 2001) *_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_* Cheryl Singhal (Singhals@erols.com) http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~cpafug/ http://www.rootsweb.com/~wvhampsh/ http://www.capaccess.org/com/troop763/ http://www.fortunecity.com/millennium/blyton/772/ (Bottony Cross DAR) http://www.rootsweb.com/~cresap/ http://members.fortunecity.com/csinghal1/ (Joanna Waddill UDC)

Judging by the response to my earlier note, it might serve some purpose to let folks know what K & I are up to these days. We climb mountains. Karen's summitted on 180+ peaks this year, and I've been up 120+. You can see photos and read climbing logs at: http://www.mtpinos.com/ We're learning rock and ice climbing these days (got a new ice axe for Christmas!), and we're in training for leading climbs. Just yesterday, I got the opportunity to improve my ice and snow driving skills while Jeeping along an obscure 10-mile stretch of single-lane dirt (under the snow) road hanging precariously off a ridge running out to Monument Peak. We didn't make the peak but nobody died, so I guess it was a good trip. Karen's the new Chairman (takes office next month) of the Sierra Club's Hundred Peaks Section, which is about 400 of us who are doing fairly low-altitude (5,000-12,000) nontechnical climbs: http://www.angeleschapter.org/hps/ ### Needless to say, I haven't given up hacking or The Net. I've kinda gone back to my roots and am mostly doing low-level and technically hairy hacks that wouldn't be of much interest to anyone here, but at some point I'll probably start growing another community-oriented site. ### And that's the news from here. We've just had a wonderful Christmas with family and are looking to a great new year, and we hope everyone else has the opportunity to enjoy such wonderful times! Cheers, B.

In a message dated 12/29/01 7:03:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, pieroth@ix.netcom.com writes: > Since the mouseover alternate text for the graphic might be harvested as > the email address it is, how about converting it to words that the > program would read as we read an address? > > Susan@Pieroth.org would be put in as > Susan at Pieroth dot org > > If the bots can use that I really do give up. Bots can use whatever they are programmed to use. Drew Smith FSGS Webmaster

Since the mouseover alternate text for the graphic might be harvested as the email address it is, how about converting it to words that the program would read as we read an address? Susan@Pieroth.org would be put in as Susan at Pieroth dot org If the bots can use that I really do give up. Happy New Year all, Susan JYoung6180@aol.com wrote: > Susan- > > I think the point Drew is making is that the character recognition software > used by the visually impaired can't translate grapics at all--so the size of > the graphics doesn't much matter to the blind. :( > > Joan

In a message dated 12/29/01 6:11:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, JYoung6180@aol.com writes: > I think the point Drew is making is that the character recognition software > used by the visually impaired can't translate grapics at all--so the size > of > the graphics doesn't much matter to the blind. :( Joan, Exactly! Last month I attended a local librarians' meeting at which two blind presenters demonstrated browser software that read web pages out loud, but which did a poor job of conveying information if the web page wasn't written with them in mind to begin with. Using graphics that conveys critical information, without a text equivalent, is an example of bad web page design. Drew Smith FSGS Webmaster

In a message dated 12/29/01 5:59:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, pieroth@ix.netcom.com writes: > Good point. The subject has come up before - all of this - but I get > more and more and was considering trying the graphic alternative for > some cases. It would be very easy to make the lettering on the graphic > something like 16 point. Susan- I think the point Drew is making is that the character recognition software used by the visually impaired can't translate grapics at all--so the size of the graphics doesn't much matter to the blind. :( Joan

Good point. The subject has come up before - all of this - but I get more and more and was considering trying the graphic alternative for some cases. It would be very easy to make the lettering on the graphic something like 16 point. DrewSmithFSGS@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 12/29/01 4:57:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, > leverich@mtpinos.com writes: > > What an individual webmaster *can* do is "GIFize" their address. > > That means use a graphics package to convert the text of your email > > address into a graphic, and then have *no* text of your address > > anywhere (including on "hidden" mailto tags or comment lines) on > > your pages. > > > > This is slightly more inconvenient for your visitors > > For visually impaired visitors, it is probably other than "slightly more > inconvenient". > > Drew Smith > FSGS Webmaster

At 05:53 PM 12/29/2001 -0500, Susan W Pieroth wrote: >Good point. The subject has come up before - all of this - but I get >more and more and was considering trying the graphic alternative for >some cases. It would be very easy to make the lettering on the graphic >something like 16 point. You miss the point. Regardless of how large you make the image, some folks won't be able to 'see' it as an image. If your computer speaks to you, reading the text, then a picture of text just won't work. And, if you add the 'alt' text attribute to the image, then you've got the same problem as before -- the spiders can see it if it's there as text at all. You can resort to gimmicks if you want: elsi@nospam.augustmail.com elsi@augustmail.dot.com But there's no getting around the fact that it you choose to spend time on the Internet doing anything more than READING, then you *are* going to receive spam e-mail. I resent the message I got today since it is designed to stir up fear in the uneducated, but I'd still rather get it than the ones inviting me to view photos of teens in pornographic poses. Regards, Elsi

In a message dated 12/29/01 4:57:19 PM Eastern Standard Time, leverich@mtpinos.com writes: > What an individual webmaster *can* do is "GIFize" their address. > That means use a graphics package to convert the text of your email > address into a graphic, and then have *no* text of your address > anywhere (including on "hidden" mailto tags or comment lines) on > your pages. > > This is slightly more inconvenient for your visitors For visually impaired visitors, it is probably other than "slightly more inconvenient". Drew Smith FSGS Webmaster

In a message dated 12/29/01 4:55:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, jpatter@epix.net writes: > just never had any spammer tell me from where they got my address and since > this one was > idiotic enough to do that, I think RootsWeb most definitely should know that > they are being > used to harvest addresses for spam. Joe- Just out of morbid curiosity, <g> where did the spammer tell you he harvested your address--what was the URL? Joan

From someone in PA who also got the notice...... interesting observation.... "apparently. I also realized that the sender is: - Spamming me - The one whose robot harvested our addresses The sender is the spammer -- using spam to send anti-spam spam - got that? :) I just never had any spammer tell me from where they got my address and since this one was idiotic enough to do that, I think RootsWeb most definitely should know that they are being used to harvest addresses for spam. -- joe

At 11:08 AM 12/29/2001 -0500, singhals wrote: >It is now apparently possible to harvest e-dresses off our webpages. It has *always* been possible to harvest addresses off webpages. By the way, I got several copies of the e-mail -- two indicated the address had been scraped from pages at RootsWeb and one from a page at GeoCities. C'est la vie! Elsi

What I have done recently is place all the e-mail address (my own and contributors to any of my sites) onto an e-mail/contributor page, with a link to and from the page(s) were they would actually be on. A sample of this is found on --- (click on e-mail contact) http://www.rootsweb.com/~nbyork/ I did this as I was always "loosing addresses" and when people wanted them changed I had to hunt all over several sites. Soon each site will have just one page to look on. This method could have just that page as as "no bot", and the rest of the site would be free to be searched. Cleadie B. singhals wrote: > > It is now apparently possible to harvest e-dresses off our webpages. >

-- Your message was: (from "singhals") > It is now apparently possible to harvest e-dresses off our webpages. > > I assume they're well-behaved little 'bots, so I could just slap a > "no-bots" in the META tags, but then the pages don't get indexed either. > > Is there some way to keep it easy for my GenWeb visitors to reach me > (without my having to set up and visit yet another e-mail acct) while > keeping the harvesters at bay? ------------------ I know of no effective way for an individual to keep spam harvesters off their web pages. Spam harvesters in general ignore all the controls that tell polite robots to stay out. A *server* can install robot traps and various counter-robots. Once upon a time Tim Pierce had a reasonable single-layer defense installed on RootsWeb's servers, but I have no idea if that defense has been maintained. State-of-the-art servers now use multiple layers of defense. What an individual webmaster *can* do is "GIFize" their address. That means use a graphics package to convert the text of your email address into a graphic, and then have *no* text of your address anywhere (including on "hidden" mailto tags or comment lines) on your pages. This is slightly more inconvenient for your visitors -- they have to retype your address into their mail program -- but it defeats every spam harvester than I know of. Cheers, B.

A curious question ..... for all my pages and all email entries, I've gotten little spam over the years that I can't attribute to things other than rootsweb pages. It sounds to me that the only spider that has harvested my email address off of a webpage was the one that sent the warning this morning .... think about it before you go and change too much. Have you received a lot of extra email that was spam? Did you notice that there was a little thing on the bottom about preferring not to receive additional notices of this type? Click on that and you confirm the email address to the person mailing it out in the first place. I strongly suspect that the original message was, itself, spam! If you confirm the address, you'll most likely start receiving more of the same. Delete the original, ignore it, and I bet there will be less headaches all the way around. Scott Richland County IL CC Marion County MO CC Northern and Eastern IL Regional Coordinator sburow@swbell.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Valorie Zimmerman" <valoriez@zimres.net> To: <RootsWeb-Help-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 2:40 PM Subject: Re: [RW-Help] address-harvesting? > singhals wrote: > > > > It is now apparently possible to harvest e-dresses off our webpages. > > > > I assume they're well-behaved little 'bots, so I could just slap a > > "no-bots" in the META tags, but then the pages don't get indexed either. > > > > Is there some way to keep it easy for my GenWeb visitors to reach me > > (without my having to set up and visit yet another e-mail acct) while > > keeping the harvesters at bay? >