Re: HTML email "bug", of sorts.

From: Sean Straw / PSE (PSE-Lat_private)
Date: Mon Aug 20 2001 - 21:20:55 PDT

  • Next message: Sean Straw / PSE: "Re: HTML email "bug", of sorts."

    At 06:17 2001-08-18 -0400, Alex Prestin wrote:
    
    >You may have heard of "web-bugs" before.
    
    Never by that term, but what you're describing has been around for no less 
    than FIVE YEARS - almost as long as HTML-enabled email.  The tracking 
    technique is certainly not new.  I used to hear of them as 
    "dot-trackers".  A search just now on "web bug" reveals that some people 
    are now calling them by that name, and the following document may be of 
    interest:
    
             <http://www.bugnosis.org/faq.html>
    
    
    If you had a decent email client (oh, let's say Eudora Pro), there are 
    features to disable the automatic fetching of linked HTML components (i.e. 
    view the mail as just the HTML you already have, as well as graphics 
    embedded within the message as attachments, but not go online to fetch 
    anything).
    
    Ironically, there's a valid use for them -- listservs and opt-in marketing 
    propaganda could send a welcome message using a dot-tracker, and if the 
    corresponding identifier is hit on the server, you know the user has a 
    fully HTML-enabled email client, and can then update their profile to use 
    HTML.  If you don't get hit, you send plaintext.  Not that I've heard of 
    anyone actually using it for this, but it would be nice if companies did 
    instead of automatically dumping HTML mail on you.
    
    >"Web bugs" are small, 1x1 (or similar-sized) transparent GIF images
    
    aka "transpixel GIF".
    
    >About 1 in 10 sites use them.
    
    I suspect more _real_ (non personal homepage oriented ones) sites use 
    transpixel gifs -- they're frequently used for image alignment.  Other 
    sites that track users simply have adbanners all over the place - same 
    thing, and most users are oblivious to the fact that those adbanners ARE 
    tracking you.  One of the various reasons I run a (homebrew) proxy script 
    to eliminate adbanners (others are that printouts are cleaner, the page is 
    less cluttered, less needless animation, and more efficient use of 
    bandwidth and client browser cacheing).
    
    >So, anyone have any idea of how to deal with this latest little spammer
    >toy?
    
    Disable downloading of images in HTML email or disable HTML rendering entirely.
    
    Another time-proven method is to filter SPAM from your mailbox, using the 
    so many other characteristics which identify most of the spam out 
    there.  You should also aggressively protect your email address.
    
    Methinks with a decent email client, it would be easy enough to search 
    message bodies for your email address within links (note that listservs 
    that afford an uns*bscribe link would make this difficult, and of course 
    coded URLs wouldn't be matched), or for 'width="1"', 'height="1"' type 
    elements and flag these messages as _suspicious_ (procmail, which runs on 
    unix boxes is an excellent mail filtering utility, but such an option isn't 
    available to everyone).  Doing such filtering AFTER "known clean" sources 
    would significantly reduce misidentified messages - even my own spam 
    filtering has a "green list" of senders and mailing lists which are not as 
    aggressively filtered as those of unknown origin -- virtually anything left 
    in my inbox (not specifically dropped into a folder) is spam these days, 
    and that number is very small with RBL and spam filtering heuristics 
    running on the server.
    
    
    ---
      Please DO NOT carbon me on list replies.  I'll get my copy from the list.
    
      Sean B. Straw / Professional Software Engineering
      Post Box 2395 / San Rafael, CA  94912-2395
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Aug 21 2001 - 09:16:56 PDT