• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Username on this forum instead of email in PR

Status
Not open for further replies.

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#1
Hi, Everybody

I want address one important problem: here in the FreeBSD there is a rule that comes from ages - to supply email address when one wants to submit PR or new port.
Well, few decades ago it wasn't a problem, but not now when automatic spam bots are constantly searching the whole internet for new victims, which is a problem. Because of this, if contributors want to submit PR or new port, they end up getting flooded with spam. This causes them to either spend their time to clean up their inbox, or make a temporary email, just for the submission, and then forget about it which will lead
in losing the whole point in communicating with the contributor.

I have a proposal to fix this problem:
What about to allowing users to put their username on the forum, instead of email(unless they prefer submitting their email) when submitting a PR or new port.
- For an example: USER@freebsd.forum
Usernames are protected with forum's captcha, forum's software vBulletin is very flexible and limits accessibility to user profile where email is kept.
So, even if spam robot or spammer himself bypasses the captcha protection of the forum - anyway he will be pin pointed very quickly if he decide to spam.
As a result, those who want to communicate with port maintainer or PR submitter can register on this forum and communicate via "Private message".
Members of this forum may also allow for their email address to be visible on their profile to other registered users.
I believe it would be a good protection for contributors and stimulate more people to contribute.

So, imho it's a good reason to change outdated rules and allow to supply protected method of communication. People wouldn't be afraid to submit PR's because they wouldn't have to worry about sharing their email with whole world over GNAT, CVS, SVN, maillist systems that clearly show emails without any protection from spam bots.
New port creators would have more stimulus to submit their work to community and will spend their own time to improve software instead of filtering stupid emails everyday.
Of course someone can trust the spam filter, but as practice shows that very often legitimate mails comes into the spam folder too.
Personally I don't think that people such as http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/contributors/staff-committers.html should be punished with spam in their email for contributing for a better community. They spend their own time for the FreeBSD community and are punished by spammers for their work.
IMHO all of them - current and future contributors don't deserve that.

What do you thing about it?
 

dandelion

Member

Thanks: 19
Messages: 55

#2
AlexJ said:
...make a temporary email, just for the submission, and then forget about it which will lead
in losing the whole point in communicating with the contributor.
What are you talking about? GNATS logs communication sent as follow-up. Private mails can be safely ignored on OSS forums, they're not worth attention unless the sender knows you personally. Besides, it's pretty easy to submit a PR with invalid or empty email field, e.g. PR conf/136336.
AlexJ said:
As a result, those who want to communicate with port maintainer or PR submitter can register on this forum and communicate via "Private message".
I disagree, communication with a port maintainer should be open and accessible in archives. Any decision made behind closed doors may hurt (open) community.
AlexJ said:
New port creators would have more stimulus to submit their work to community and will spend their own time to improve software instead of filtering stupid emails everyday.
There should be a way to anonymously maintain a port without being tied to an identity via mail or forum user. I think many committers reject ports maintained by ports@freebsd.org, not sure about disposable email addresses.

OTOH, if don't want to disclose your real email address for whatever reasons (spam, privacy, etc) then do not use it. Make another one with freebsd stuff in mind (gnats, maintainer, cvs access, etc).
 

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#3
dandelion said:
What are you talking about?
I'm talking about a problem when you share on internet email address without any protection from spammers.
I'm talking about a problem which cause people to avoid submit a PR just because they don't want to be flooded with spam.
It's not a problem for me or somebody else to share email with people who is interested in subject but in fact 99% of emails after submission comes from spammers.
Why? Because there is no any kind email address protection.

dandelion said:
GNATS logs communication sent as follow-up.
Good for GNAT, but not for people who want to be involved in developing of new feature, new ports, PR submissions.
What wrong to follow-up just by username@freebsd.forum? Is User@freebsd.forum make a big difference between real email and understandable User@freebsd.forum for humans if one decide to communicate privately?
User@freebsd.forum is unique as email address and perfectly identify person in the same way as by an email.

dandelion said:
I disagree, communication with a port maintainer should be open and accessible in archives.
I guess you didn't get my point.
Everybody can communicate with port maintainer or PR submitter after they prove that they are a human by passing registration on the freebsd forum.

dandelion said:
Any decision made behind closed doors may hurt (open) community.
What kind of closed doors are talking about?
If someone want to communicate then he/she can do that without any kind of problem, again - if they prove they are the human and isn't a spammer.
Is it too hard to decode USER@(at)FreeBSD.forum to be able to communicate with particular person ?
Try to publish your email here in this tread and in few days your email will be filled with offers to increase your penis or get free millions from unknown billionaires.
Do you really think it stimulate people to submit PR or create and maintain new ports?

dandelion said:
There should be a way to anonymously maintain a port without being tied to an identity via mail or forum user.
But how then will be possible communication?
I simply propose a solution to protect people who is involved in developing and improving open source products - FreeBSD itself and its ports.

dandelion said:
OTOH, if don't want to disclose your real email address for whatever reasons (spam, privacy, etc) then do not use it. Make another one with freebsd stuff in mind (gnats, maintainer, cvs access, etc).
Is it protect from spam AND allow people to communicate without possibility when their emails will be passed to spam folder where is a really big chance be skipped because of enormous quantity of junk emails? Unfortunately spam filters isn't perfect as we all know.
 

simoncpu

New Member


Messages: 2

#4
Simple Solution

Solution: set up another public e-mail account. Gmail is a good choice because it has good anti-spam technology.

Problem solved.
 

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#6
simoncpu said:
Solution: set up another public e-mail account. Gmail is a good choice because it has good anti-spam technology.
Solution???
Do you guys reading the first post by diagonal? :)
I'm talking about GNATS, CVS, SVN that is in charge for FreeBSD right now and doesn't have email address protection from spam abuse and you're trying to propose solution that attempt to resolve this problem with third party service.
GNATS, CVS, SVN without email address protection - it is parts of FreeBSD project and problem should be resolved by FreeBSD project but not gmail or something else.
Don't you see difference?
Trust me, I know about gmail, yahoo, hotmail... and bunch of other email systems with "good anti-spam technology".
Your attempt to open my eyes is fail :)
Your solution is wrong and you will be learned it in a hard way when you get hundreds junk emails per day that will mixed up with legitimate mails then you'll change your mind about "good anti-spam technology".
It is wrong if you think that it is 100% perfect good anti-spam technology because it easily can forward legitimate mails to spam folder too.

I can't understand you guys. Are you professional spammers and that's why you reject simple email address protection from spam abuse? :)
Could you explain me - what is a problem for you to communicate here in the forum that is open to the whole world or via private messages or even via email if you bypass registration on this forum and can see someones email in their profile?
We are here not for the reason to setup dating via private communication but OPEN source project.
Why do you need someones email address that usually need only for private communication? Give us a reason, please.
Do you really need a port maintainers who does not read emails because of their emails is flooded with spam ?
Or you prefer to get quick response to you problem?
Your choice?

simoncpu said:
Problem solved.
No, it does not !
You propose a trick but isn't adult solution.
Your solution doesn't change nothing in described problem above.
It sounds like - "Do you have problem that we will share your email address with spammers and rest of the world? It's your problem - try gmail. They have good anti-spam technology, but without warranty that one day you will be abused."
The problem is in GNATS, CVS, SVN and in old rules that require provide email address without any steps to protect that email from spam.

When sysadmins report me many times about some bugs in some systems, I asked them too - "Why do you guys don't report it by yourself?" and the anwer is: "Nobody want to hold and manage multiple email accounts just because somebody doesn't have email address protection."
It's the point of trust. If someone can not protect email addresses from spam abuse then there shouldn't be hard rules to require it.
If we want to populate FreeBSD we must resolve problems that force people to stay away just because of absence of simple email address protection which is used practically on any decent web sites in this days.

Actually I feel myself really uncomfortable that I need to explain obvious things.
Spam abuse problem still exist if you going to post your email address on open for everybody resources, doesn't matter what kind of email service provider you use.
Gmail, yahoo and other unfortunately isn't a panacea. Our problem must be and can be resolved by us, but not third parties.
 

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#7
aragon said:
IMHO, there are more important issues with the PR system that need addressing.
Agree, but at least mine solution doesn't required to do or change nothing.
I asked just for simple acceptance to be able to use protected method of person's recognition and communication.
It is not necessary to change - nothing.

IMHO, GNATS is a kinda outdated bug tracking system and has other problems.
Personally I had a good experience with track(http://trac.edgewall.org/) it is an enhanced wiki and issue tracking system for software development projects. It works really well and support most of major repositories, but switching to it will require somebody to take care of it that isn't an easy task.

My proposal was just an attempt to resolve at least one problem without any additional acts. Those who really want to communicate with particular person can do it without brain damage since a record like user@freebsd.forum is self explained.

Well, just for example - a couple months ago was submitted addition to termcap to support rxvt-256color terminal(http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=147726&cat=conf).
Good step since terminfo already have it a long time ago, but addition was incorrect because of bypassing a few termcap entries and as result basic colors support was broken.
No color when one run "ls -G" and sysinstall is black/white.
I made a patch to fix it and in addition to it add there support for screen-256color that allow comfort under tmux and GNU screen terminal multiplexers.
Well, usually patches like that one will get quick response, but since that time I submit it with email address as AlexJ@freebsd.forum it stay already a few days without attention.
May be I'm wrong and gavin just didn't have time to look on it, but if it's a problem because of mine unofficial email it wouldn't be good for everybody, especially since FreeBSD 8.2-release already stay in freezed stage and will come with broken termcap entries.
Who is won ? Spammers and nobody else.

So, may somebody officially confirm - is it acceptable to provide call back as user@freebsd.forum instead of real email in PR, new port submission or not?
 

dennylin93

Aspiring Daemon

Thanks: 106
Messages: 784

#8
There's no denying that spam is annoying... However, I don't think there will be any effort to hide or obfuscate emails. It seems like a standard way of doing things in the OSS community (look at mailing lists, Git commits, etc.).
 

wblock@

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Developer

Thanks: 3,558
Messages: 13,856

#9
AlexJ said:
So, may somebody officially confirm - is it acceptable to provide call back as user@freebsd.forum instead of real email in PR, new port submission or not?
Since the automated system sends email to the address provided, using a special-case address is going to cause problems. If you're going to do that, it might be better to not make it look like an email address. forums:myforumname, for example. (And if you make that an email-to-forum PM gateway... you've just provided spammers a new crop of victims.)

It's not likely that all the automated systems that expect an email address could be fixed by a single change. Having some type of address obfuscator would add load to the FreeBSD servers, and broken email addresses wouldn't be obvious.

The current situation isn't great. If you can come up with a scheme that addresses the problems, and particularly provide code, that would be the way to convince people.
 

Carpetsmoker

Daemon

Thanks: 180
Messages: 1,010

#11
http://www.mailinator.com/

Not quite what it is intended for, but it'll work just fine.

A gmail adress or something to that effect will also do.

Frankly, I don't see the problem.
 

fronclynne

Daemon

Thanks: 175
Messages: 1,297

#12
I don't think we should donate to the FreeBSD project in flooz, either.
 

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#13
dennylin93 said:
It seems like a standard way of doing things in the OSS community
Of course it is because it comes from previous century when in 80's and even in 90's were wasn't spam problems and only one way for communication was - fido net and email.
Almost every open source projects on start used GNU mailman that doesn't have any anti-spam protection by default.
But we are living in 21 century, a lot of things changed.
I believe it's just matter of tradition in OSS community and nothing else.
Unfortunately new conditions always require us to change our mind, methods and adopt to new conditions.
Old nature's law - those why can adopt those will survive.
I already mention that some people whom I new personally know don't want to use current PR system just because the don't want to do stupid moves by creating public emails in attempt to avoid spam.
That's looks kind of tricky, not serious for project like FreeBSD to force people to do that stuff.
The whole point and idea of GNATS to have contributor's email - it is providing convenient service for them over automated notification, but bunch of people don't want that kind of service that in addition to notification disclose there emails and as result contributors are punished by spammers.
I don't like this type of "amenity" and other people don't like this too, that's why I opened this thread in hope that we can invent something better.

dennylin93 said:
look at mailing lists, Git commits, etc.
Take a look at mailing lists of gentoo project, - users emails are hidden there.
Take a look at sourceforge.net they are protect mailing lists archives - hide domain part of an email.
Take a look at github that provide all in one services - repositories, issue tracking system and simple wiki without disclosing users emails.
Take a look at google's code and google's groups discussion lists - they hide username before a domain part.

And actually bunch of projects migrate to those systems.

Git commits - it just personal decision what kind of information will be placed in ~/.gitconfig in the field "email".
Personally, I keep in that field web site's address.
It isn't obligatory to provide legitimate email there too.
It's just a tradition when people trust each other without any confirmation. Email could be easily forged and this requirement to provide email became pointless in this case.
 

graudeejs

Son of Beastie

Thanks: 666
Messages: 4,616

#14
And what do you you expect ordinary forums users to do about it?
Yup, that's what we are, ordinary forum users..., not FreeBSD developers (well 99.9% of us)
 

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#15
wblock said:
Since the automated system sends email to the address provided, using a special-case address is going to cause problems.
As far as I know freebsd.org use postfix as MTA. I prefer it too.
I just did :
Code:
mail -s "sending to non existent email address" test@freebsd.forum
MTA return : Mail Delivery System <MAILER-DAEMON@...
with error code :
Code:
<test@freebsd.forum>: Host or domain name not found. 
Name service error for name=freebsd.forum type=A: Host not found
No any problem for MTA - just usual standard operation.

wblock said:
If you're going to do that, it might be better to not make it look like an email address. forums:myforumname, for example.
Code:
mail -s "sending to non existent email address" forums:myforumname
return:
Code:
<"forums:myforumname"@domain.com> (expanded from <"forums:myforumname">): unknown user: "forums:myforumname@domain.com"
Well, in this case we can avoid query to DNS since MTA assume that recipient is a local user for that domain.
So, we can construct fake for spammer and MTA email as User_at_freebsd_forum but understandable for human.
MTA wouldn't be abused in this case since there is less job for MTA to compare with sending to normal email address.

wblock said:
And if you make that an email-to-forum PM gateway... you've just provided spammers a new crop of victims.
No, I didn't mention that.
I don't want to change nothing in working systems !
Those who is brave enough can still provide to the GNATS real email, but those who don't want to do useless job by managing spam can be still recognizable as a forum's member.
Simple logic: Those who is going to contribute PR or new port is already interested in it.
Notification system for those persons is just a helpful service that notificate them in case of changing and nothing else.
But look - if I already interesting in a submission and don't want to be flooded with spams I can check changes over web.
If someone don't care at all about his submission then it really doesn't matter if he will be notified or not.
If person who manage PR's or somebody else has a question about submitted PR - they may communicate on this board ether over "private messages" or publicly over forum's thread if track of conversation is needed.
The main point of submission is submission itself but not conversation - so it rarely needed at all.
As you can see - nothing should be changed except public acceptance that it's acceptable way to contribute - that's all.
Nobody loose nothing except spammers and nothing should be done with software or hardware to accept this method of submission.

wblock said:
It's not likely that all the automated systems that expect an email address could be fixed by a single change.
No changes at all required, just acceptance of new method of submission and nothing else.
Email is useless right now, because automated service of GNATS make more trouble for contributors than convenience.
Email address itself doesn't care any useful information too, because it could be changed, forged or simply dropped.
In this case old school requirement force people to create temporary or special public email accounts as it was already twice suggested.
To keep that email in a good shape we should have a spare time and enjoyment in clearing up inbox from spam and take care about spam folder before deleting everything from it, because there could be legitimate mails too.
Well, the whole point of automated services is a convenience, but I can't call it as a convenience because we need to get the whole service package that's include - not only automated notification but annoying spammers too.
So, let everybody decide by them self what is better for them - a few automated notification plus bunch of spam or check web for changes by them self but without spam.
wblock said:
Having some type of address obfuscator would add load to the FreeBSD servers
It's kinda off-topic, I'm sorry, but I don't agree with you on that. Stripping part of email address string which is obfuscation can't add measurable load to compare with vBulletin php engine itself.
So, let drop this question, it isn't point of topic and must important things - that no any obfuscation methods is required to be able to use proposed method of submission.
I already out of words, I can't explain better so you can understand this - NO any changes to any software required to be able to use proposed method of submission!
 

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#16
DutchDaemon said:
There is virtually zero integration between http://www.freebsd.org, forums.freebsd.org and the GNATS system.
I already figure out it by myself by checking source code of htmls.

DutchDaemon said:
It's likely to stay that way.
Well, I know that my English is far far away from plain English that is exactly why I repeat already many times:
"Nothing should be changed in the software and hardware ! Just allow to use meaningful form like "user_at_freebsd_forum" instead of real email.
That's it. Any person who decide to use this method of communication can be contacted trough the forum if needed and wouldn't be abused by spam in the same time.
The point is - no fake or temporarily email needed which is useless. Those who don't see a problem with spam and believe in gmail's anti spam protection - they may still continue to use their email in submissions because nothing going to be changed in current systems.
If you get my idea right but still continue want to require email address instead then explain me reason please - why?
I'm not a Mr.Perfect and may be I don't understand something - why is my method is wrong and unprotected email method is right.
 

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#17
Carpetsmoker said:
http://www.mailinator.com/
Not quite what it is intended for, but it'll work just fine.
There you go. :)

http://www.mailinator.com/faq.jsp :
You cannot send email from Mailinator. After several hours, all email is auto-deleted.
Who is vote here for email instead of mine proposal? :)
Do you really want to see this temporary email addresses in GNATS, CVS, SVN which is never will be responsive?.
Assume your are a port maintainer - Are you going to put this kind of email in a Makefile as a value for the key MAINTAINER?
How do you planning to respond to people who use your product with this kind of email?
That is exactly why I try to propose another method of protection from spam and exact recognition of person who use user_at_freebsd_forum form.
vBulletin forum software already include anti-spam technology - it's captcha and confirmation to activate account.
What you can get with new method:
1. You are protected from spam abuse.
2. You can be contacted.
3. You are recognizable.
4. All three features doesn't require to change nothing in a current software(GNATS, CVS, SVN) or hardware.

I still can't get it - what is wrong with user_at_freebsd_forum to compare with an email?
It's just another, additional protected from spammers way of communication and nothing else.

Carpetsmoker said:
A gmail adress or something to that effect will also do.
Unfortunately not, it doesn't. Gmail works quite well, but it wouldn't recognize spam that come from well established other free email provider until someone start blame to spammer's account.
It wouldn't reject spam that come from mobile networks.
It wouldn't reject spam from huge ISP's such as comcast.
More important thing is that legitimate email on gmail can be forwarded automatically to a spam folder where can be accumulated bunch of junk and as result legitimate email would disappear there.

Carpetsmoker said:
Frankly, I don't see the problem.
Well, if you never loose important emails because it was mistakenly forwarded by automatic spam filter and never was flooded with spam (yes, on gmail and yahoo) then I afraid we can't understand each other.

[offtopic]
I did a lot of experiments by analyzing spammers behavior, feed them in a different ways and conclude that they aren't a kids or noobs, but are professional programmers who knows very well regular expressions and how to use them, even simple captchas in form of images and sounds isn't a problem for them.
BTW, funny thing that the longest time for them to decrypt email address was a form like this: :)
Code:
                            {l}.c_o_m
                         [i]
a       e             {a}
  b   d   f        (m)
    c       g @ [g]
but after staying for 8 month on open resource this kind of email addresses start receiving spam.
[/offtopic]

I'm quite surprised that a lot of people here can't see a problem with spam.
May be just me and my customers out of luck... yehh and the whole world too - that's why any decent internet resource is trying to protect email addresses.
May be spammers afraid our Beastie and we don't need that stupid protection stuff which almost everybody have in use to protect emails from spam ? :)

Ok, I wrote a lot in attempt to show positive reason of using user_at_freebsd_forum form in a submission but...
I afraid, I'm a bad in explanation or nobody just don't care if they can miss important emails in their public email accounts inside a spam folder.
I couldn't check tread as "Solved" because anti-spam protection on the FreeBSD resource isn't resolved.
Solution as "use gmail because they have good anti-spam technology" in my opinion isn't acceptable, it isn't serious to force people to use a "special" email accounts because of spam.
I think our problem should be resolved by us, but not with help of third party services.
The FreeBSD resource disclose users and contributors email addresses, doesn't take any steps to protect their emails and in the same time require them to provide their email in PR's, source codes and new port submissions.
Nobody gives at least one positive reason - why unprotected emails is better than protected method of person recognition via forum's credentials.
Everybody seems against mine idea that doesn't cost nothing because nothing should be changed in current systems to adopt this protected method of submission.
Well, lets wait for better ideas because problem still exist since we can't protect own users and contributors from spam abuse.

I'm sorry in advance if I hurt someone in mine explanations and I appreciate all of you who take your time to read my posts.
 

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#18
killasmurf86 said:
And what do you you expect ordinary forums users to do about it?
Yup, that's what we are, ordinary forum users..., not FreeBSD developers (well 99.9% of us)
I just haven't any clue where I should head up this problem, that's why I put it here on the forum.
I don't think that this problem is developers problem but is common for all of us - developers, contributors and users.
 

wblock@

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Developer

Thanks: 3,558
Messages: 13,856

#20
AlexJ said:
No any problem for MTA - just usual standard operation.
That misses the point. It's not just people that send email to those addresses, it's the automatic system. Bug followups, for example, send an email to everyone who has commented on the bug. Fake email addresses break that, because the automated systems don't know they're fake. Those scripts and programs would have to be changed in order to keep working. They'd have to have a special-case handling of forum addresses.

If someone don't care at all about his submission then it really doesn't matter if he will be notified or not.
If you don't care, why bother submitting it? But you could use nobody@noemail.invalid.

The main point of submission is submission itself but not conversation - so it rarely needed at all.
Feedback is important, it's how a developer can get specific followup information from the submitter, and how the submitter knows something has happened. Useful PRs are frequently a conversation, not send-and-forget.

Finally, by email obfuscation, I was talking about having a generated forwarder address like pr-1234567@freebsd.org. The FreeBSD servers would have to handle those. And of course it doesn't help much, since the first reply reveals the hidden address.
 

lme@

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Developer

Thanks: 293
Messages: 775

#21
We need your email address in GNATS for feedback and follow-ups.
 

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#22
killasmurf86 said:
I have no problems
Thanks to various anti-spam software
:)
I will tell you short but sad story: we loose recently pretty good contract, because responsible person (btw, she hold email account on gmail, that actually violate company's rules) didn't check spam folder where was very important message from our potential client.
Excuse that spam folder was flooded with spam and client's email disappear there - doesn't work for her, that's why she have a lot of free time now and unemployment benefits.
She also trusted in "various anti-spam software and technology".
 

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#23
wblock said:
Bug followups, for example, send an email to everyone who has commented on the bug. Fake email addresses break that, because the automated systems don't know they're fake.
I afraid I don't understand what do you mean under this sentence: "Fake email addresses break that".
As far as I know GNATS itself doesn't try to resolve domain names of email addresses, it's simply indexed database.
Did you work with GNATS by yourself? What is exact problem that will break something.
I never saw any problem when someone submit to the GNATS fake or incorrect email address.
And I'd like proves: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=conf/152699
As you can see I submit PR with fake email address, later I create another one that will extend this PR and will fix another issue in one step, then I submit follow-up message from disposable email account to inform people ignore first submitted PR since it overrides by new one.

Or do you mean MTA will stop sending emails because of one email address is fake?
It will not, because MTA send emails in turn one by one, if one of email from field "To:" is stuck it means only this notification can't be sent, but not other.

wblock said:
If you don't care, why bother submitting it? But you could use nobody@noemail.invalid.
Correction: Not me but someone :)

wblock said:
Feedback is important, it's how a developer can get specific followup information from the submitter
If submitter will see on a web page some request or questions he/she can easily setup then temporary email and reply as I already show you in the link above.

wblock said:
and how the submitter knows something has happened.
If I hate spam I can visit periodically web page with submitted PR in the same way and periodicity as I check my email.
It really isn't problem for me to compare with spam abuse.

wblock said:
Finally, by email obfuscation, I was talking about having a generated forwarder address like pr-1234567@freebsd.org.
I don't think it is a good idea since it will require mbox/maildrop or list of aliases for every PR. GNATS recognize PR by numbers in subject field.

wblock said:
And of course it doesn't help much, since the first reply reveals the hidden address.
A simple script can hide part of email address before displaying, but it also useless since a web interface must provide follow-up link then by clicking on it all recipients will be disclosed again.
The whole GNATS based on email addresses. It will be useless effort to try change there something in attempt to embed anti-spam protection because email address there is the main attribute of that system.
As a prove - last update of GNATS was done almost 6 years ago because bunch of projects just move from it to new, web based solutions which is looks much better, more functional, with protection from automatic spam robots, allow submit not only patches as attachment, but any type of files and of course provide safety way for email notifications on changes.
 

AlexJ

Active Member

Thanks: 37
Messages: 127

#24
lme@ said:
We need your email address in GNATS for feedback and follow-ups.
With method that I described here, both requirements - feedback and follow-ups is feasible. I already show this in action above, in the last reply to wblock.
If you need my real email address I(and actually other people) have a modest wish - to see email address protected from spam otherwise it could be very very inconvenient.
 

OJ

Daemon

Thanks: 243
Messages: 1,024

#25
Alex, I think you have a different problem with spam than many other people. Like killasmurf86 I don't have a problem. My e-mail address is deliberately posted on public sites so that people can communicate with me, and I still only get one spam per month. Sometimes none. No, I am not exaggerating. I don't even bother having a spam "folder".

I also deliberately set my spam filters very low (a numbering system) so as to not miss anything. Perhaps the mail server that I use is particularly well managed - I don't know. The name is Superb if you are interested. Being a hosting company they obviously cannot afford to have spam originating from their servers or they would get black listed and out of business in no time. Perhaps those same skills are applied to their mail filtering. At any rate it is transparent to me.

My point is that many people don't have a problem with spam even though a few people do. I think you are assuming that everyone does, and that is far from the case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.