WTF is this?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by richard, Apr 1, 2013.

  1. richard

    richard Guest

    <a
    href="http://www.dealadvisorswizards.info/320/35/79/229/389.12tt365678AAF1.html">
    <!--
    SHSQGQGYVH--TKUAEFPQAF--TWSQRVTBLS--IGADWGUFHQ--PBDKBHRRBT--YWRRNJPJMD--CXJDBILVOT--PGUSSWDKQG--EPDXKSJAEW--
    EGUPLXYXUP--RMVOFQNKDE--QHWVIJQRLU--QRENIPMJPJ--YHVWYBNMOQ--TFAQEKCUDN--QVIUKSMYCD--IDMEALHPBV--IUEKNIVPFB--FXWPUJIIIK--
    NQPAUPOFHP--DRMHDARBRX--CYVYPTJXCT--LPLBRITGNB--XRVKBYMTAE--TEERFVLQTP--LHFWJAHFIV--IHPERSFHOF--LILRDRNOIK--HVROSDOBIX--
    YRHQXYJEIY--LUJXOMPDEA--PLWJCRNRUX--RVRYMQAYUJ--XIGJGUWXAD--BRQACSRPMP--PELIDBBEAV--PAEVLNSKNT--NOLEONAJFM--YVRMGUNHBP--
    FQRLOEYION--CFEPJTGJDN--WELQQRNHYP--WGIRSAXTIO--JMTOEGKKRN--YQTKHKFVRG--NRNXLIXJCG--XMUUDABNKS--DLKWYTHERC--KFVAGHIESN--
    -->

    Found this code in an email message source.
    Can anyone shed some light as to what the code is rerring to and how it
    works?
    richard, Apr 1, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. richard wrote:
    > <a
    > href="SPAM LINK REMOVE">
    > <!--
    > SHSQGQGYVH--TKUAEFPQAF--TWSQRVTBLS--IGADWGUFHQ--PBDKBHRRBT--YWRRNJPJMD--CXJDBILVOT--PGUSSWDKQG--EPDXKSJAEW--
    > EGUPLXYXUP--RMVOFQNKDE--QHWVIJQRLU--QRENIPMJPJ--YHVWYBNMOQ--TFAQEKCUDN--QVIUKSMYCD--IDMEALHPBV--IUEKNIVPFB--FXWPUJIIIK--
    > NQPAUPOFHP--DRMHDARBRX--CYVYPTJXCT--LPLBRITGNB--XRVKBYMTAE--TEERFVLQTP--LHFWJAHFIV--IHPERSFHOF--LILRDRNOIK--HVROSDOBIX--
    > YRHQXYJEIY--LUJXOMPDEA--PLWJCRNRUX--RVRYMQAYUJ--XIGJGUWXAD--BRQACSRPMP--PELIDBBEAV--PAEVLNSKNT--NOLEONAJFM--YVRMGUNHBP--
    > FQRLOEYION--CFEPJTGJDN--WELQQRNHYP--WGIRSAXTIO--JMTOEGKKRN--YQTKHKFVRG--NRNXLIXJCG--XMUUDABNKS--DLKWYTHERC--KFVAGHIESN--
    > -->
    >
    > Found this code in an email message source.
    > Can anyone shed some light as to what the code is rerring to and how it
    > works?
    >


    SPAM

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Apr 1, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. richard

    JJ Guest

    On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 16:42:20 -0400, richard wrote:
    > <a
    > href="crap">
    > <!--
    > SHSQGQGYVH--TKUAEFPQAF--TWSQRVTBLS--IGADWGUFHQ--PBDKBHRRBT--YWRRNJPJMD--CXJDBILVOT--PGUSSWDKQG--EPDXKSJAEW--
    > EGUPLXYXUP--RMVOFQNKDE--QHWVIJQRLU--QRENIPMJPJ--YHVWYBNMOQ--TFAQEKCUDN--QVIUKSMYCD--IDMEALHPBV--IUEKNIVPFB--FXWPUJIIIK--
    > NQPAUPOFHP--DRMHDARBRX--CYVYPTJXCT--LPLBRITGNB--XRVKBYMTAE--TEERFVLQTP--LHFWJAHFIV--IHPERSFHOF--LILRDRNOIK--HVROSDOBIX--
    > YRHQXYJEIY--LUJXOMPDEA--PLWJCRNRUX--RVRYMQAYUJ--XIGJGUWXAD--BRQACSRPMP--PELIDBBEAV--PAEVLNSKNT--NOLEONAJFM--YVRMGUNHBP--
    > FQRLOEYION--CFEPJTGJDN--WELQQRNHYP--WGIRSAXTIO--JMTOEGKKRN--YQTKHKFVRG--NRNXLIXJCG--XMUUDABNKS--DLKWYTHERC--KFVAGHIESN--
    > -->
    >
    > Found this code in an email message source.
    > Can anyone shed some light as to what the code is rerring to and how it
    > works?


    It's not in a form of common data encoding and it's too uniform. It's likely
    garbage since it's near a spam link. Even if it's custom encoded, spam data
    won't be any good for anything.
    JJ, Apr 2, 2013
    #3
  4. richard

    Lewis Guest

    In message <13iq5t69t1pzw$.13331ltu0429w$>
    richard <> wrote:
    > <!--
    > SHSQGQGYVH--TKUAEFPQAF--TWSQRVTBLS--IGADWGUFHQ--PBDKBHRRBT--YWRRNJPJMD--CXJDBILVOT--PGUSSWDKQG--EPDXKSJAEW--
    > EGUPLXYXUP--RMVOFQNKDE--QHWVIJQRLU--QRENIPMJPJ--YHVWYBNMOQ--TFAQEKCUDN--QVIUKSMYCD--IDMEALHPBV--IUEKNIVPFB--FXWPUJIIIK--
    > NQPAUPOFHP--DRMHDARBRX--CYVYPTJXCT--LPLBRITGNB--XRVKBYMTAE--TEERFVLQTP--LHFWJAHFIV--IHPERSFHOF--LILRDRNOIK--HVROSDOBIX--
    > YRHQXYJEIY--LUJXOMPDEA--PLWJCRNRUX--RVRYMQAYUJ--XIGJGUWXAD--BRQACSRPMP--PELIDBBEAV--PAEVLNSKNT--NOLEONAJFM--YVRMGUNHBP--
    > FQRLOEYION--CFEPJTGJDN--WELQQRNHYP--WGIRSAXTIO--JMTOEGKKRN--YQTKHKFVRG--NRNXLIXJCG--XMUUDABNKS--DLKWYTHERC--KFVAGHIESN--
    > -->


    >Found this code in an email message source. Can anyone shed some light
    >as to what the code is rerring to


    That is a comment block.

    >and how it works?


    It doesn't 'work'. It's just a comment block.


    --
    #27794 <Vellius> ... I wonder if the really nerdy Klingons learn how to
    speak english
    Lewis, Apr 2, 2013
    #4
  5. 2013-04-02 12:56, Lewis wrote:

    >> <!--
    >> SHSQGQGYVH--TKUAEFPQAF--TWSQRVTBLS--IGADWGUFHQ--PBDKBHRRBT--YWRRNJPJMD--CXJDBILVOT--PGUSSWDKQG--EPDXKSJAEW--
    >> EGUPLXYXUP--RMVOFQNKDE--QHWVIJQRLU--QRENIPMJPJ--YHVWYBNMOQ--TFAQEKCUDN--QVIUKSMYCD--IDMEALHPBV--IUEKNIVPFB--FXWPUJIIIK--
    >> NQPAUPOFHP--DRMHDARBRX--CYVYPTJXCT--LPLBRITGNB--XRVKBYMTAE--TEERFVLQTP--LHFWJAHFIV--IHPERSFHOF--LILRDRNOIK--HVROSDOBIX--
    >> YRHQXYJEIY--LUJXOMPDEA--PLWJCRNRUX--RVRYMQAYUJ--XIGJGUWXAD--BRQACSRPMP--PELIDBBEAV--PAEVLNSKNT--NOLEONAJFM--YVRMGUNHBP--
    >> FQRLOEYION--CFEPJTGJDN--WELQQRNHYP--WGIRSAXTIO--JMTOEGKKRN--YQTKHKFVRG--NRNXLIXJCG--XMUUDABNKS--DLKWYTHERC--KFVAGHIESN--
    >> -->

    [...]
    > That is a comment block.


    It looks like a comment declaration ("comment block"), but it isn't.
    Trying to validate a document with that foolishness causes an error
    message like

    invalid comment declaration: found name start character outside comment
    but inside comment declaration.

    > It doesn't 'work'. It's just a comment block.


    There are no requirements on what browsers should do with a document
    containing such a malformed construct. In practice, they may use broken
    comment declaration parsing and really treat it as a comment declaration.

    The question was nonsensical, but there's a lesson to be learned from
    the answer: don't use a pair of hyphens "--" inside a comment declaration.

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Jukka K. Korpela, Apr 2, 2013
    #5
  6. richard

    Tim Streater Guest

    In article <>,
    Evan Platt <> wrote:

    > On Mon, 1 Apr 2013 16:42:20 -0400, richard <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > ><a
    > >href="http://www.dealadvisorswizards.info/320/35/79/229/389.12tt365678AAF1.ht
    > >ml">
    > > <!--
    > >SHSQGQGYVH--TKUAEFPQAF--TWSQRVTBLS--IGADWGUFHQ--PBDKBHRRBT--YWRRNJPJMD--CXJDB
    > >ILVOT--PGUSSWDKQG--EPDXKSJAEW--
    > >EGUPLXYXUP--RMVOFQNKDE--QHWVIJQRLU--QRENIPMJPJ--YHVWYBNMOQ--TFAQEKCUDN--QVIUK
    > >SMYCD--IDMEALHPBV--IUEKNIVPFB--FXWPUJIIIK--
    > >NQPAUPOFHP--DRMHDARBRX--CYVYPTJXCT--LPLBRITGNB--XRVKBYMTAE--TEERFVLQTP--LHFWJ
    > >AHFIV--IHPERSFHOF--LILRDRNOIK--HVROSDOBIX--
    > >YRHQXYJEIY--LUJXOMPDEA--PLWJCRNRUX--RVRYMQAYUJ--XIGJGUWXAD--BRQACSRPMP--PELID
    > >BBEAV--PAEVLNSKNT--NOLEONAJFM--YVRMGUNHBP--
    > >FQRLOEYION--CFEPJTGJDN--WELQQRNHYP--WGIRSAXTIO--JMTOEGKKRN--YQTKHKFVRG--NRNXL
    > >IXJCG--XMUUDABNKS--DLKWYTHERC--KFVAGHIESN--
    > >-->
    > >
    > >Found this code in an email message source.
    > >Can anyone shed some light as to what the code is rerring to and how it
    > >works?

    >
    > Spam right? It's an attempt to get around Bayesian filters.


    You can't get round bayesian filters this way. The above (assuming you
    tokenise on the '--') will give a series of tokens with a count of 1 in
    the tokens database. They won't be used when assessing the spamminess of
    the mail.

    --
    Tim

    "That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
    nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" -- Bill of Rights 1689
    Tim Streater, Apr 2, 2013
    #6
  7. richard

    Lewis Guest

    In message <kjeb4u$cf5$>
    Jukka K. Korpela <> wrote:
    > 2013-04-02 12:56, Lewis wrote:


    >>> <!--
    >>> SHSQGQGYVH--TKUAEFPQAF--TWSQRVTBLS--IGADWGUFHQ--PBDKBHRRBT--YWRRNJPJMD--CXJDBILVOT--PGUSSWDKQG--EPDXKSJAEW--
    >>> EGUPLXYXUP--RMVOFQNKDE--QHWVIJQRLU--QRENIPMJPJ--YHVWYBNMOQ--TFAQEKCUDN--QVIUKSMYCD--IDMEALHPBV--IUEKNIVPFB--FXWPUJIIIK--
    >>> NQPAUPOFHP--DRMHDARBRX--CYVYPTJXCT--LPLBRITGNB--XRVKBYMTAE--TEERFVLQTP--LHFWJAHFIV--IHPERSFHOF--LILRDRNOIK--HVROSDOBIX--
    >>> YRHQXYJEIY--LUJXOMPDEA--PLWJCRNRUX--RVRYMQAYUJ--XIGJGUWXAD--BRQACSRPMP--PELIDBBEAV--PAEVLNSKNT--NOLEONAJFM--YVRMGUNHBP--
    >>> FQRLOEYION--CFEPJTGJDN--WELQQRNHYP--WGIRSAXTIO--JMTOEGKKRN--YQTKHKFVRG--NRNXLIXJCG--XMUUDABNKS--DLKWYTHERC--KFVAGHIESN--
    >>> -->

    > [...]
    >> That is a comment block.


    > It looks like a comment declaration ("comment block"), but it isn't.
    > Trying to validate a document with that foolishness causes an error
    > message like


    This is because there are double dashes '--' in the block. If you
    eliminate a single - from it, it will validate, sort of. At least BBEdit
    then sees it as a comment (though it will give an error).

    I admit, I have no idea why this is. Removing anyother -- doesn't fix
    it, but removing any group of characters AN the following/preceding --
    fixes it also.

    Very odd.

    > The question was nonsensical, but there's a lesson to be learned from
    > the answer: don't use a pair of hyphens "--" inside a comment declaration.


    At least in HTML4/HTML5, the string "--" in comments is completely
    forbidden.

    --
    Say, give it up, give it up, television's taking its toll That's enough,
    that's enough, gimme the remote control I've been nice, I've been good,
    please don't do this to me Turn it off, turn it off, I don't want to
    have to see
    Lewis, Apr 3, 2013
    #7
  8. 2013-04-03 3:31, Lewis wrote:

    >> It looks like a comment declaration ("comment block"), but it isn't.
    >> Trying to validate a document with that foolishness causes an error
    >> message like

    >
    > This is because there are double dashes '--' in the block.


    Technically, no. It is not the second "--" that triggers a validator
    error message but the letter after it, in the construct that starts with

    <!--
    SHSQGQGYVH--TKUAEFPQAF

    > Very odd.


    It's explained well at
    http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/wilbur/misc/comment.html

    >> The question was nonsensical, but there's a lesson to be learned from
    >> the answer: don't use a pair of hyphens "--" inside a comment declaration.

    >
    > At least in HTML4/HTML5, the string "--" in comments is completely
    > forbidden.


    In HTML 4, that is formally true, but just because "comment" means
    something else than you (or most people) think. The string "--" is not
    allowed within a comment, but it is allowed within a comment
    declaration, under certain rules. The following is syntactically correct
    (though not advisable) in HTML 4:

    <!-- Hello -- -- Hello-->

    HTML5 simplifies things: it has just a "comment" concept, which
    corresponds to a simplified form of SGML comment declaration, and indeed
    forbids any "--" inside a comment.

    So here's yet another reason why it is incorrect to say that any HTML
    1.0 Strict document is valid HTML5.

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Jukka K. Korpela, Apr 3, 2013
    #8
  9. richard

    Lewis Guest

    In message <kjgcj4$3l9$>
    Jukka K. Korpela <> wrote:
    > 2013-04-03 3:31, Lewis wrote:


    >>> It looks like a comment declaration ("comment block"), but it isn't.
    >>> Trying to validate a document with that foolishness causes an error
    >>> message like

    >>
    >> This is because there are double dashes '--' in the block.


    > Technically, no. It is not the second "--" that triggers a validator
    > error message but the letter after it, in the construct that starts with


    That is because the '--' is only allowed as part of the closing tag, '-->' when the > is not there, the error occurs.

    >> At least in HTML4/HTML5, the string "--" in comments is completely
    >> forbidden.


    > In HTML 4, that is formally true, but just because "comment" means
    > something else than you (or most people) think. The string "--" is not
    > allowed within a comment, but it is allowed within a comment
    > declaration, under certain rules. The following is syntactically correct
    > (though not advisable) in HTML 4:


    > <!-- Hello -- -- Hello-->


    It throws errors here, but I did not check it agains the w3 validator.

    I tested:

    <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
    <html lang="en">
    <head>
    </head>
    <body>
    <!-- -- Test -->
    <h1>This is a header</h1>
    </body>
    </html>

    And BBEdit not only errors, but it doesn't see the comment block as
    closed, so the rest of the document shows up in syntax coloring as a
    comment. It does display the file "correctly".

    And throws the error:

    "untitled text 5:15: Unexpected EOF; document ended in the middle of an
    SGML Comment."

    > HTML5 simplifies things: it has just a "comment" concept, which
    > corresponds to a simplified form of SGML comment declaration, and indeed
    > forbids any "--" inside a comment.


    > So here's yet another reason why it is incorrect to say that any HTML
    > 1.0 Strict document is valid HTML5.


    HTML 1.0?

    --
    'Why is it all Mr Dibbler's films are set against the background of a
    world gone mad?' said the dwarf. Soll's eyes narrowed. 'Because Mr
    Dibbler,' he growled, 'is a very observant man.' --Moving Pictures
    Lewis, Apr 3, 2013
    #9
  10. 2013-04-03 19:13, Lewis ?rote:

    > That is because the '--' is only allowed as part of the closing tag,
    > '-->' when the > is not there, the error occurs.


    Not correct. There is no tag involved; it's a comment declaration in
    SGML, comment in XML. In SGML, '>' terminates it, and '--' is a comment
    delimiter. In XML, '-->' is a comment terminator, but not a "closing tag".

    >> <!-- Hello -- -- Hello-->

    >
    > It throws errors here, but I did not check it agains the w3
    > validator.


    In HTML 4.01, it is valid and contains two comments.

    > I tested:
    >
    > <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
    > "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd"> <html lang="en"> <head>
    > </head> <body> <!-- -- Test --> <h1>This is a header</h1> </body>
    > </html>


    That's something completely different. Here you have something that
    starts like a comment declaration that contains first the comment
    '-- --' and then 'Test', which makes it invalid.

    >> So here's yet another reason why it is incorrect to say that any
    >> HTML 1.0 Strict document is valid HTML5.

    >
    > HTML 1.0?


    Sorry, HTML 4.01.

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Jukka K. Korpela, Apr 3, 2013
    #10
  11. richard

    Guest


    > SHSQGQGYVH--TKUAEFPQAF--TWSQRVTBLS--IGADWGUFHQ--PBDKBHRRBT--YWRRNJPJMD--CXJDBILVOT--PGUSSWDKQG--EPDXKSJAEW--
    >
    > EGUPLXYXUP--RMVOFQNKDE--QHWVIJQRLU--QRENIPMJPJ--YHVWYBNMOQ--TFAQEKCUDN--QVIUKSMYCD--IDMEALHPBV--IUEKNIVPFB--FXWPUJIIIK--
    >
    > NQPAUPOFHP--DRMHDARBRX--CYVYPTJXCT--LPLBRITGNB--XRVKBYMTAE--TEERFVLQTP--LHFWJAHFIV--IHPERSFHOF--LILRDRNOIK--HVROSDOBIX--
    >
    > YRHQXYJEIY--LUJXOMPDEA--PLWJCRNRUX--RVRYMQAYUJ--XIGJGUWXAD--BRQACSRPMP--PELIDBBEAV--PAEVLNSKNT--NOLEONAJFM--YVRMGUNHBP--
    >
    > FQRLOEYION--CFEPJTGJDN--WELQQRNHYP--WGIRSAXTIO--JMTOEGKKRN--YQTKHKFVRG--NRNXLIXJCG--XMUUDABNKS--DLKWYTHERC--KFVAGHIESN--



    > Can anyone shed some light as to what the code is rerring to and how it
    >
    > works?


    http://www.ngenerator.com/

    Input Data:
    Total passwords to generate: 49
    Length of each password: 10
    Check only "Character Set (A..Z):"

    Output Formatting:
    Separator: --

    Here you are e.g.:

    DRVWZLCTSE--AFGHZOQGTP--YDNWVZLESC--ABQEZIVPYE--KWDXVGPEOR--RVUBWDYISM--FPLNNWBMTE--BTDCQQFBCI--PLYRNUIXTY--QYTNLNOFTL--XAZDMUJJMP--ZBXTFOYHAW--EQBFQCNAIV--ZQBBKCMCRD--JNGIOKCYFQ--QYSZJJXLHU--WAEZWZAHEW--NAHBRWOOQF--ZHEBDPFLRF--TLZTHBRUKM--VGEIHSUHQJ--LMOBAWJQQN--KOQDQPWZIH--GQMKUCFFIL--KHIJVUEUYJ--HDRMICHYTW--QNTDVLVURB--FDCSZPXSOJ--EXQHWEDCDE--ZWNVGHFVGM--KLKIBNDKZH--ENUBLMBACP--LLLAYDUMUN--VKYHZMKBMJ--RWEJMKZOOX--AQKBIKPTPX--WWPZXKFLYG--EIHXDBZCWF--XAQKFXUJBK--PRWRIMOIAF--MNMJXXKDQK--HDVFNZXBMT--BMCHTGXLLO--DJTTMKNFER--IFKXZCGPIV--LXUSAOMHSO--VZPAZFMYSG--EPXTEXQNVZ--TGZIDKIBHV--

    (& Finally comment it out.)
    , Apr 4, 2013
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Joe Van Meer

    wtf am I doing wrong?

    Joe Van Meer, May 6, 2004, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    361
    Joe Van Meer
    May 6, 2004
  2. Ishmael Rufus

    WTF? Spam on this newgroup?

    Ishmael Rufus, May 2, 2005, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    571
    Darryl Pierce
    May 8, 2005
  3. Psymaster

    WTF is this?

    Psymaster, Aug 1, 2003, in forum: C++
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    452
    Psymaster
    Aug 2, 2003
  4. Maciej Mrozowski
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    5,815
    tkaczerski
    Jan 9, 2008
  5. Noah Roberts

    wtf is this?

    Noah Roberts, Sep 29, 2003, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    737
    Noah Roberts
    Sep 30, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page