At the same time, it seems IOTTMCO that the administrator's E-Mail address should be a
field in the RRP (RFC-2832) and not part of a protocol where the response is by
definition free-form.
-- Lynn
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 19:49:53 +0100, Csongor Fagyal wrote:
>Lynn W. Taylor wrote:
>
>>Oh, please!
>>
>>I get enough spam without making it easier for the bastards to parse WHOIS.
>>
>A spammer will get your e-mail address simply grepping for, say,
>\s+(\S+\@\S+\.\w{2,4})\s+ or something like that. On the other hand,
>when I display my Hungarian users a whois output full of English text,
>it reminds me of the middle ages. Spam should be fought another way, not
>creating mixed-up WHOIS data (which will not stop spammers anyway).
>
>- Cs.
>
>>
>>On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 11:42:55 +0100, Csongor Fagyal wrote:
>>
>>
>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>�I've sucessfully written a Whois Parser which I maintain to this day
>>>>�.... Thanks to all the idiot spammers who mine Whois for email
>>>>�addresses I have found the following,
>>>>
>>>>�1) To make Whois Parsing very difficult Several registrars dynamically
>>>>�change,
>>>>
>>>>�a) the Whois field prefixes b) the order that Whois sections appear
>>>>�(tech first one time then reg the next time)
>>>>�c) the actual formating of a fields contents (!)
>>>>
>>>>�2) Several registrars will temporarily block your IP after just a very
>>>>�few Whois accesses.
>>>>�So, from experiance, I can say writing a Whois parser these days is
>>>>�*VERY* difficult!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I say it's the 21st century, and you cannot get XML WHOIS output. That's
>>>just nonsense.
>>>
>>>- Cs.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
