From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9014 invoked by alias); 19 Feb 2003 06:55:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact overseers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: overseers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 9007 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2003 06:55:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO molenda.com) (192.220.74.81) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 19 Feb 2003 06:55:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 14469 invoked by uid 19025); 19 Feb 2003 06:55:19 -0000 Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 06:55:00 -0000 From: Jason Molenda To: overseers@sources.redhat.com Subject: New version of mhonarc installed Message-ID: <20030218225518.A13897@molenda.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-q1/txt/msg00293.txt.bz2 FYI, I upgraded mhonarc to 2.6.0. It has one new feature that may be of interest -- it can be configured to munge e-mail addresses in the body of messages. Until now, mhonarc would only munge e-mail addresses in the headers. I'm uninterested in enabling the body-email-message-munging because it seems too likely to fail, but I figured I'd mention it. There was also a discussion on the mhonarc mailing list over the past couple weeks about address munging schemes. Most involve protecting the archives with well-known passwords that humans can trivially figure out, but that would hose the search engines so that's not so cool. One person had an interesting suggestion: http://www.mhonarc.org/archive/html/mhonarc-users/2003-02/msg00040.html Which uses some clever HTTP trickery that the spam harvesters probably can't get right now. But they could eventually figure it out.. (Incidentally, the date index at that web archive is pretty nice looking.) J