Re: Email Obfuscation Techniques

2011-04-12 Thread Fletcher T. Penney 
The obfuscated address will be in the input file, not embedded in the
stylesheet.  So it's de-obfuscated before it even gets to the
stylesheet


F-

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Lou Quillio  wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Fletcher T. Penney
>  wrote:
>> On a related topic ---  does anyone know how to pass an obfuscated
>> email address through XSLT?
>
> CDATA wrapper?
>
> LQ
> ___
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
>



-- 
Fletcher T. Penney
fletc...@fletcherpenney.net
___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

Re: Email Obfuscation Techniques

2011-04-12 Thread Lou Quillio 
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Fletcher T. Penney
 wrote:
> On a related topic ---  does anyone know how to pass an obfuscated
> email address through XSLT?

CDATA wrapper?

LQ
___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

Re: Email Obfuscation Techniques

2011-04-12 Thread Fletcher T. Penney 
On a related topic ---  does anyone know how to pass an obfuscated
email address through XSLT?

I've tried googling various solutions and am coming to the conclusion
that it basically would require manually re-encoding to the output?

Discovered that applying XSLT to a Markdown generated HTML doc with
obfuscated email results in output HTML that has been "de-obfuscated."


Fletcher


On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Lou Quillio  wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Wander Nauta  wrote:
>> I agree, entity-encoded mailto: links work quite well. They may not work
>> forever, though, and some Drew McLellan made a good point here:
>>>
>>> In some ways, obfuscated addresses are even more valuable
>>> to spammers, as the very act of obfuscation could suggest
>>> that the address is important to someone.
>
> Certainly true, but the obfuscating user (or system) also signals that
> he's spam-resistant:  he filters aggressively, blocks ads, isn't
> gullible, etc.  Spam is a numbers game, I understand, but cracking my
> obfuscation gets you access to a hardboiled skeptic who's already,
> umm, large enough, thank you.  Wouldn't want to scare the ladies.  ;)
>
> Seriously, I think we're still in an age of leet stratification.  A
> comparatively small group signals that it's generally insusceptible to
> spam, and then there's everybody else.  If I were a spammer, I don't
> know how hard I'd work to get access to the first group -- since my
> emails probably still won't get through, and they won't click anyway.
> Obfuscation is one of the ways we signal our low-value to spammers.
> It could be they're glad to know it and go where the fishing is
> better, which is everywhere else.  And everywhere else is growing.
>
> None of this helps my mom, of course.  But it helps me.
>
> LQ
> ___
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
>



-- 
Fletcher T. Penney
fletc...@fletcherpenney.net
___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

Re: Email Obfuscation Techniques

2011-04-12 Thread Lou Quillio 
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Wander Nauta  wrote:
> I agree, entity-encoded mailto: links work quite well. They may not work
> forever, though, and some Drew McLellan made a good point here:
>>
>> In some ways, obfuscated addresses are even more valuable
>> to spammers, as the very act of obfuscation could suggest
>> that the address is important to someone.

Certainly true, but the obfuscating user (or system) also signals that
he's spam-resistant:  he filters aggressively, blocks ads, isn't
gullible, etc.  Spam is a numbers game, I understand, but cracking my
obfuscation gets you access to a hardboiled skeptic who's already,
umm, large enough, thank you.  Wouldn't want to scare the ladies.  ;)

Seriously, I think we're still in an age of leet stratification.  A
comparatively small group signals that it's generally insusceptible to
spam, and then there's everybody else.  If I were a spammer, I don't
know how hard I'd work to get access to the first group -- since my
emails probably still won't get through, and they won't click anyway.
Obfuscation is one of the ways we signal our low-value to spammers.
It could be they're glad to know it and go where the fishing is
better, which is everywhere else.  And everywhere else is growing.

None of this helps my mom, of course.  But it helps me.

LQ
___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

Re: Email Obfuscation Techniques

2011-04-12 Thread Arno Hautala 
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 02:47, Wander Nauta  wrote:
> I agree, entity-encoded mailto: links work quite well. They may not work
> forever, though, and some Drew McLellan made a good point here:

A while back, around the time I sent the original message to this
list, I hadn't realized that the source for Enkoder was available, so
I I set out to reverse engineer the algorithm and implement my own
filter. When I realized that it was selecting multiple layers from
many obfuscation techniques, I gave up and wrote my own.

https://gist.github.com/830730

It's a filter for nanoc [1] that converts all mailto links to AT / DOT
obfuscated links and also inserts ROT 13 obfuscation that is unwrapped
using JavaScript. The unwrapped ROT 13 content also replaces the AT /
DOT link, so the user either sees an AT / DOT email address (JS turned
off), or a fully functional address (JS turned on). Both are
clickable.

It's quite similar to what Enkoder does, but also provides the AT /
DOT fallback.

Enkoder also uses several randomized layers of JS obfuscation, which I
don't think are any more effective than a single layer. With tools
like "jrunscript", a scraper can evaluate the JS obfuscation just as
easily as the browser does. Adding more and more layers just marginaly
increases complexity and resource consumption.

It's also surprising just how effective the AT / DOT method is [2] and
quite a bit more so than entities. This would seem to indicate that
harvesters aren't yet searching for "* at * dot com". Here we are
almost 5 years later and 7 times as many results for that search.

Sometimes I wonder if it's even worth the obfuscation effort.

[1]: http://nanoc.stoneship.org/
[2]: 
http://techblog.tilllate.com/2008/07/20/ten-methods-to-obfuscate-e-mail-addresses-compared/

-- 
arno  s  hautala    /-|   a...@alum.wpi.edu

pgp b2c9d448
___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

Re: CodeDown = Markdown as the universal language for program documentation

2011-04-12 Thread bucephalus org 
Hi Bob, hi Waylan,

There seems to be no end in good news  I definitely need to study all
that. Thank you very much!

What I like in Markdown, compare to other lightweight-markups and in this
context of program documentation, is the two little, but very useful
features: backticks around a phrase turn it into code (i.e. `f(n)` turns
into f(n)) and the indentation of tabs or four spaces turns a
code block  into  This is probably the most
convenient markup for inline and block code, one can imagine. Even more
natural than the LaTeX $...$ for inline and $$...$$ for block code.


On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Waylan Limberg  wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Rob McBroom 
> wrote:
> > On Apr 11, 2011, at 5:46 PM, David Chambers wrote:
> >
> > Check out Jeremy Ashkenas's docco. Truly beautiful.
> >
> > People might also be interested in appledoc, which uses Discount to parse
> > comments.
>
> There is also Apydia [1], which uses Python-Markdown (or textile or
> reStructuredText) on Python code.
>
> However, the really powerful documentation library in Python (also
> supports C/C++ with other language promised to be coming) is Sphinx
> [2]. Unfortunately, is uses reStructuredText, not Markdown. Now, if
> someone created a similar tool that used Markdown, that would be
> something.
>
> The great thing about Sphinx is that while is can extract comments
> from the source, it is primarily meant to write documentation separate
> from the source - which should almost always be a projects primary
> documentation. The automatically-generated-from-source reference
> should usually be in addition to the primary documentation. At least,
> that is if you want a well documented project.
>
> [1]: http://apydia.ematia.de/index.html
> [2]: http://sphinx.pocoo.org/
>
> --
> 
> \X/ /-\ `/ |_ /-\ |\|
> Waylan Limberg
> ___
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
>
___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

Re: CodeDown = Markdown as the universal language for program documentation

2011-04-12 Thread Waylan Limberg 
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:04 AM, Rob McBroom  wrote:
> On Apr 11, 2011, at 5:46 PM, David Chambers wrote:
>
> Check out Jeremy Ashkenas's docco. Truly beautiful.
>
> People might also be interested in appledoc, which uses Discount to parse
> comments.

There is also Apydia [1], which uses Python-Markdown (or textile or
reStructuredText) on Python code.

However, the really powerful documentation library in Python (also
supports C/C++ with other language promised to be coming) is Sphinx
[2]. Unfortunately, is uses reStructuredText, not Markdown. Now, if
someone created a similar tool that used Markdown, that would be
something.

The great thing about Sphinx is that while is can extract comments
from the source, it is primarily meant to write documentation separate
from the source - which should almost always be a projects primary
documentation. The automatically-generated-from-source reference
should usually be in addition to the primary documentation. At least,
that is if you want a well documented project.

[1]: http://apydia.ematia.de/index.html
[2]: http://sphinx.pocoo.org/

-- 

\X/ /-\ `/ |_ /-\ |\|
Waylan Limberg
___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

Re: CodeDown = Markdown as the universal language for program documentation

2011-04-12 Thread Rob McBroom 
On Apr 11, 2011, at 5:46 PM, David Chambers wrote:

> Check out Jeremy Ashkenas's docco. Truly beautiful.

People might also be interested in appledoc, which uses Discount to parse 
comments.

-- 
Rob McBroom


___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

Re: CodeDown = Markdown as the universal language for program documentation

2011-04-12 Thread bucephalus org 
Hi Tommy!


> I just must say that I have tried Fletcher Penneys version of multi
> markdown recently.

The 3.x version seems to me to be very suitable for the task of converting
> to LaTeX,
> which is slightly more complicated than converting to HTML.
>

Wow! I didn't know MultiMarkdown, but that is a great hint. Looks very
promising and capable. Thank you!

The Markdown entry on Wikipedia
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markdown
doesn't point to
  http://fletcherpenney.net/multimarkdown/
yet. But it probably should.


> I have tried pandoc, but I find it far more easier to work with
> multimarkdown.
>
> You should consider trying it.
>

 I use Pandoc for my HaskellDown, because it is a Haskell library. It also
is very powerful and impressive, and in my limited experience, I found it
very stable and more reliable than e.g. PHP Markdown. Actually, I don't
apply any of its nice features (like automatic toc generation) at all in the
default markdownToHaskell converter, I just use all the Pandoc default
settings, for the sake of simplicity. But I agree, Tommy, I, too, didn't
find Pandoc itself easily accessible.

Thank you, again.
Thomas
___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

Re: CodeDown = Markdown as the universal language for program documentation

2011-04-12 Thread Tommy Bollman 
Hello.

I just must say that I have tried Fletcher Penneys version of multi markdown 
recently.
The 3.x version seems to me to be very suitable for the task of converting to 
LaTeX, 
which is slightly more complicated than converting to HTML. 
I have tried pandoc, but I find it far more easier to work with multimarkdown.

You should consider trying it.

Tommy

Den 11. apr. 2011 kl. 18.17 skrev bucephalus org:

> Dear Markdown enthusiasts out there!
> 
> 
> Sure, I don't need to tell you how great an versatile Markdown is for
> writing standard documents.
> I think, that it would make a really great universal standard as a
> programming documentation language, too, and maybe "CodeDown" would be a
> good title for this approach.
> 
> 
> The idea started when I was trying to document some PHP scripts. I need to
> use different programming languages for different purposes, but I am not a
> full time programmer. The problem is, that for most of these languages, the
> standard documentation tools are yet another language on their own, and I
> already have difficulties remembering the idioms of the programming
> languages. When I was working on the PHP scripts, I was looking for a
> standard tool to write some docs, but I was overwhelmed by phpDocumentor.
> 
> In the past, I often used Perl's POD to write tutorials for some of my
> programs, and that always did a good job. But a while ago I discovered
> Markdown, and I found that even more convenient and intuitive. I thought, it
> would be very easy to use that as the format for literal programming in PHP:
> by a simple modification of the usual comment delimiters /* ... */ and // in
> PHP, these comments would become designated blocks for Markdown comments or
> delimiters for source code parts, that would appear in the documentation.
> The possibility these literal code blocks is an essential part of Donald
> Knuth's literal programming concept, and most standard documentation tools
> are not even capable of realizing that.
> 
> In a first conversion step, these blocks would turn into Markdown, and in a
> second conversion step, the Markdown is converted to HTML.
> 
>  phpToMarkdown
> markdownToHtml
>PHP source code  --> Markdown
> --> HTML
> 
> 
> For the markdownToHtml function, I used Michel Fortin's PHP Markdown, so my
> actual converter is a pretty small script. I called it ElephantMark (see
> http://www-bucephalus-org.blogspot.com/2011/01/elephantmark.html) and the
> according script is its own documentation.
> 
> 
> This approach can be used for any mainstream programming language. My
> current favorite is Haskell, and I wrote a HaskellDown module, that does
> similar things for Haskell. The main converter is just a composition of two
> functions
> 
>haskellToMarkdown
> markdownToHtml
>Haskell source code -> Markdown
> > HTML
> 
> 
> For the markdownToHtml part I used the very powerful Pandoc module, written
> by John MacFarlane.
> This week, I'll give a talk about it on a meeting of the Dutch Haskell User
> Group, and I intend to publish it, as soon as possible.
> 
> 
> During the preparations for the talk, I thought I should call the whole idea
> "CodeDown", including "Php(Code)Down" as the CodeDown for PHP,
> "PythonCodeDown" as the CodeDown for Python, etc. There could even be a
> general CodeDown tool, that does the conversion for all these particular
> languages alltogether.
> 
> 
> 
> But before I put any more work into this project, I would like to find out,
> if there is really a general interest or support for this idea. Please,
> don't spare on your comments, answers or questions.
> 
> 
> Greetings, Thomas
> (bucephalus.org)
> ___
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss

Best regards



Tommy Bollman
--
Mollison's Bureaucracy Hypothesis:
If an idea can survive a bureaucratic review
and be implemented it wasn't worth doing.

___
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss