Re: Anti-Phishing with digital watermarking

["Umil" <umil () hotmail com>]

But I don't think would hurt if this is added.  If they remove it, that 
"notification" is gone and we are back to other controls we have.  If they 
don't remove it, we have something valuable, don't you think?
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron" <ron () skullsecurity net>
To: "Razi Shaban" <razishaban () gmail com>
Cc: <mflynn () netvision com>; <security-basics () securityfocus com>
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 1:04 PM
Subject: Re: Anti-Phishing with digital watermarking


> Razi Shaban wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:42 PM, Matt Flynn <mflynn () netvision com> 
> > wrote:
> > True, but the majority of phishers simply copy the HTML code whole
> > from the original site, with very few modifications. I've seen
> > phishers who even leave comments in HTML code. Even those who modify
> > the HTML usually do not modify the .js files, if you put the
> > obfuscation in another .js that is used to run something or another, I
> > highly doubt any phishers will notice.
> >
> > --
> > Razi Shaban
>
> I disagree; I expect that, if nothing else, the phishers at least *look* 
> at the page they copied, at which point they'd notice and remove it.
>
> Ron