This is quite common unfortunately and has been used by billion dollar companies like Airbnb to get traction(1). Back in the days this was just plain old spamming but nowadays it is called growth hacking

Craigslist growth hack —very early on, anyone who listed on Airbnb could cross-list on Craigslist with one click, Airbnb helped by filling out all Craigslists forms with a ‘bot.’ The hack required some technical gnarl to perform, but it was perfect for this early stage. The team also appeared to look for all listings of vacation properties being listed on Craigslist, and emailed the owners to list also on Airbnb. Yes, it’s spam. But yes, it worked.

(1) https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140918020352-142089-airbnb-...

Why is every growth hacker I meet IRL an ex-SEO guy who is convinced I want to buy their NFT bs?

What's worse an SEO black magic or NFT nonsense?

> The team also appeared to look for all listings of vacation properties being listed on Craigslist, and emailed the owners to list also on Airbnb. Yes, it’s spam. But yes, it worked.

That was arguably expressly disallowed on CraigsList since very early on. (Post pages would have a checkbox for whether people could contact you for other purposes, and displayed/scraped posts would indicate how the poster answered. I don't see how "growth hackers" could've missed that.)

CL was built on a Californian flavor of warm-fuzzy, and it was a shame to see Californian-style startups then abuse that. (Well, when CL grew mainstream, the anonymity and hookups attracted sketchiness, but was another corruption.)

Funnily enough, Airbnb also expressly stated that you were not allowed to scrape their listings early on and went to (moderate) lengths to make it difficult to do so, even when they were breaking, and/or empowering people, to break the laws in given areas.

Everyone wants to keep their data secret, but no one wants to respect others wishes.

Same thing with Facebook. They scrape everyone’s website but if you open the console on their website: a big legal disclaimer say it’s their code. The only website I have ever encounter that does that. Even Google doesn’t do it. The hypocrisy is astounding.

Wow. I thought you were joking, but nope. That appears to be real. https://i.imgur.com/jCtREao.png

It doesn't say you can't copy anything from their website, it says don't copy paste code here because you'll end up pwning yourself, with a link to "selfxss". That's an anti-scam message, doesn't sound that bad to me.

Fair point.

It seems like they recently changed the message. It was much more aggressive in the past. Something along the lines of reading it could be consider copyright infringement.

The only thing that seems to have changed in that screenshot is that the word "STOP" is not printed in red. Otherwise it's the same message I've recalled seeing for years.

Discord also has a similar message in their console.

Can you share it?

Discord "Wait!" anti-scam attempt:

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/711974054088933446/96...

That doesn't contain anything related to copyright infringement.

Yeah, this is not even related to your post, sorry for the wrong reply.

> nowadays it is called growth hacking

Nowadays it’s called illegal. At least in the EU.

Do you have a source for this?

> Do you have a source for this?

https://gdpr.eu/

It's quite comprehensive, but article 4 on consent.

They'd probably try to rely on legitimate interest rather than consent, but it would depend to a large extent on how personalised and automated the messages were.

Good luck with that. Most legitimate interests require the reason to be defensive or a relationship to exist where there's an expectation they would need to process your data. I am legitimately interested in spamming you is not really a defense.

To be clear, I wasn't defending it - I was just saying that they'd probably try to claim that rather than consent. I agree that they'd likely fail if it actually came to a court case.

Legitimate interest is not a valid legal means of processing data that has been scraped for marketing purposes.

Legitimate interest is not vague enough to be relied on.

Github provides an email address for every user to obscure their real email address as well as filtering to reject commits that use your real email address. Unfortunately, you must opt in to use this.

https://docs.github.com/en/account-and-profile/setting-up-an...

And it makes me so unhappy to see them polluting my commit logs. I won't work with people on open source and run their code on my computer unless I know who they are. Getting recruiter spam is a good problem to have.

>I won't work with people on open source and run their code on my computer unless I know who they are.

I can make a free email very easily. Having a "real" gmail in the logs means nothing.

>Getting recruiter spam is a good problem to have.

Easy for you to say. Not everyone wants that. Sign up for your own recruiters then...

In a world where activists launch shitstorms against you on twitter if they don't like something you do or say, there much reason to never go public with your real name.

Its not even about what you do, worse, its what they believe you did. And this is a factor you cannot possibly control.

Can you give some examples of this happening to “nobodies” in the sense of [internet] fame or clout? Also not if the media riled things up too. I’m sure this stuff happens but I’m not around the places people keep saying this happens (usually Twitter). I’ve only seen examples of people who were internet famous or some other reasons that wouldn’t overlap with a casual GitHub user.

Who: Other developers working on the same Linux distro. Targeting other developers or upstream maintainers by talking shit about them on twitter, probably also discord.

The thing they failed to mention is that when it does happen, it mostly comes from anonymous actors.

"Real" email doesn't have to mean real name.

For self-hosted email, the domain might also give away your name as the registrant.

Relying on the commit log email for checking someone's identity is probably a really bad idea. Public-key signed commits are the better tool for that.

Maybe some day you reconsider. Some of us just don't want to be bothered but don't mind sharing. Check my other reply for context.

It was enabled by default when I made an account (~1 year ago)

> as well as filtering to reject commits that use your real email address

This is both novel and incredibly useful to me. I know that I'm going to have to go through my old commits and do something awful like filter-branch in order to rewrite all of the email addresses, but this feature will at least make sure that I don't then accidentally push a commit with my real address again. Thank you!

I think it's nice that people have their real email in git commits. Gives it a personal touch when you are looking through commit logs. Some clients even display gravatar profile photos...

I understand and respect that some people may prefer to stay anonymous. But if you are hiding your email just to fight spam, I don't think it's worth it. I prefer being easily reachable and dealing with a few spam emails that get through the filter.

If you are committing to a github repository, then you are not hard to reach.

You’d be surprised, a few times I’ve had to resort to using commit emails to reach someone because their contact information wasn’t anywhere else.

I’m not spamming, and I’ve never gotten a negative response. It’s just that some people don’t think about setting up a personal site / publishing contact info.

Report them as spam so their email provider loses reputation and they get warned to stop these practices.

There are tools out there that facilitate this: https://github.com/paulirish/github-email

Developed by a Googler, surprise, surprise.

The about section is: "Get a GitHub user's email. "smiley sunglasses face emoji" Use this responsibly." Is the smiley face for the first sentence? (look how cool and clever I was to find this data) Or the second sentence? (lets all have a laugh that there's actually a responsible usage for this data.)

The real concern should be: Developed as an npm package.

I mean, really? It's a shell script wrapped as a package to gain traction. What has the state of the Dev world become, indeed ...

I was 99% sure you were exaggerating in a classic HN sort of cliched way. I thought it’s prob in JS code that could be done as shell but this lets it work on Windows too (at least when it came out).

But no. This is actually just a small shell script as you said. Insane!

Oh you done did it now

Pro-Googler: changes the subject to attack critics

Haha, I’m not pro-Google (read my past comments). Just tired of the repetitive nonsense here.

Spammers have been harvesting email addresses written on the web in plain text since the dawn of the web. We've all seen older websites where the author obfuscates their email address like "author [at] domain.com" or "my email is firstname at my domain" or even use an image in place of actual text. I could say that my email is my hacker news username for both the name and domain, on the dot io TLD. A bot couldn't scrape that, but you could figure it out.

Anecdatapoint: I publish my email address in plaintext on my website and I receive very little spam. People are way overthinking the impact of putting their email addresses out there.

Your email address is an address that you published in the commit, and you published it in a public place. You can’t really fault someone for trying to get in contact with you via an address you published in a public place.

The message they sent you sounds like a consulting opportunity waiting to happen!

Spam is spam. Making a commit is not authorization to spam me.

I would argue that there is a difference between low effort bulk spam and what OP received. The message OP received sounds like a fairly tailored request for expert advice, which is a great way to make $100+/hr to answer questions.

If you only want to receive messages from approved contacts, then use whitelists or stick to Facebook Messenger et al.

The message I received was absolutely not "fairly tailored request for expert advice". The rest of it reads:

> That’s exactly what has triggered us to build Language Lens, an AI Co-Pilot for developers.

> So it helps to,

    Information
        Extract core business logic across the applications and modules. Saves hundreds of hours for Business Analysts.
    Data
        The current data size and prediction size, refactor need etc. to defined storage strategy.
    Decision
        Redundant features or must have features in new applications.
    Team’s interest
        Feature and Technical Dependencies view/diagram out-of-the-box – at one place.
    Requirements
        Crystal clear micro level requirement classification.
        Mock it before code it – UI & API.
    Automation
        Defined acceptance criteria with test data.
    Save Efforts
        Generate boilerplate code of desired tech stack.
        Invest more in helping client to migrate/on-board to new platform.
        Simplify application modernization journey.

> Quick 90 second big picture video can be seen at YouTube Language Lens Intro

> I would be happy to hear your thoughts and your input/suggestion of what would you love to see in product further. I would request if you have some time to revert on this email.

> Would you like to take a demo? Please let me know.

It's clearly an advertisement, and not tailored to me in any way whatsoever - a cursory look at my profile should suggest that I'm not interested in any of the above.

Obviously we are going off a very small snippet. I agree that if this is a personalized human written snippet, that is a different situation.

I suspect this is a bulk sent marketing campaign. That is not ok.

Publishing an email address publicly could reasonably be seen as consent to receive email at that address. GitHub, including commits and those messages, is mostly public (unless you make the repo private, which is free). There are many, many other free and paid alternatives to GitHub.

I agree with you that spam is spam but at the same time the pearl clutching around "omg commit messages" is kind of silly.

If an individual contacts me - "Hey, I saw your commit and was wondering if you could explain X..." - that is fine. That is in the realm of normal human communication. No problem.

If you add my email to your business marketing list and start sending me your "unsolicited bulk commercial mail" then I'm going to:

1. Never do businsss with your company

2. CC your legal and abuse addresses

3. Contact your mail provider and file an abuse notification

The FTC has a wonderful guide on this topic that I encourage you to read.

Fortunately there is a CAN-SPAM act which means we don't have to rely on what the sender or the community thinks is reasonable. Advertisement of a commercial product or anything on a website operated for commercial purposes requires "express consent to receive the message, either in response to a clear and conspicuous request or at the recipient's own initiative". Pretty far from "putting it in a public space", then.

A lot of these spammers start with a repo’s stargazer list, so I’ve been slowly unstarring everything — if enough people do this GitHub will have to fight at least that kind of scraping. I recommend making a special email alias for git you can rotate, or at least send to a folder you don’t check often.

Does anyone here think an open source blocklist for domains associated with this developer-targeted spam would be useful?

it's impossible for github to block this.

you just need to do a git clone and you get all the email addresses in the commit history of a repository.

unless you're talking about your publicly displayed email address (visible to logged-in users), which I believe is not shown by default and can be disabled easily.

I’m talking about a genre of emails where the targets are those who’ve simply starred a GitHub repo. Even if they get the actual email addresses from a git log or off-platform, they’re still abusing the GitHub API (or screen-scraping) to discover users to spam in the first place. It is possible for GitHub to guard those list pages with captchas and use reports to catch API abusers.

I do get offended when I receive unsolicited email, but only because the ads are always so bad.

This has been going on for a long time. There was a company called geekedin that scraped data off public git repositories (among other things) and who then had their database leaked back in 2016.

https://www.troyhunt.com/8-million-github-profiles-were-leak...

This has been happening for a while, and I guess the solution is the same as always? Mark them as SPAM on your email provider, and hopefully the rest of us won't even receive it.

Now if you are in Europe/related, you could try to go the GDPR way, which TBH I don't know at all what it entails here.

Fun fact: Anyone who spams my private, other private, or business email address is going to find their domain name and IP range submitted to the various spam blackhole lists.

Let's call this "Github roulette".

Can you help add this spammer/scammer to those lists?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30871398

Say I don't care about the sanctity of my commit history, and wish to scrub my personal email from all of my public repositories. How would I go about doing this without losing the commits themselves?

I’ve found scripts online to help me change the committer on entire repos when I realized I had used the wrong config. Something like the answer here: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2919878/git-rewrite-prev...

Then you have to force push.

Note, you will still have the same number of commits in the same order with the same diffs, but they will be new commit ids.

You’re “rewriting” your history. Which in the case you outline is perfectly fine. But note, anyone who’s pulled down the branches you’re changing will need to reset rather than pull your changes otherwise git will attempt to MERGE the new history with the old one.

You’d have to rewrite the commit history for each of those repos and force push those changes. https://github.com/newren/git-filter-repo would be a decent starting point.

Startups (and scammers) also harvest e-mails from HN and phish them. I posted a unique e-mail address here once and haven't stopped getting all kinds of scams and spam to it.

I got an email like this, even better - praising my "contribution" to repo of a single .go file. Letter was from company with Rails and React on their stack. I wrote a sarcastic reply and reported it as spam, but company's founder contacted me on LinkedIn to continue the conversation. I am worried that people like him will eventually destroy all the communication channels thousands of people were building for years.

It might also come from PGP-signed commits, since emails associated with keys are public knowledge. Fairly easy way to filter for good programmers, if you ask me.

You're saying the presence of PGP-signed commits is correlated with programmer skill?

I have never signed my commits because I see absolutely no reason to (my repositories are all small personal projects that nobody uses), and I haven't gotten around to setting up a proper key management workflow with my password manager. Maybe I need to start signing them!

I sign mine because though I do not wish to be contacted, I want to be able to verify that what I published came from the online identity I am using at that time for that project. I don't share keys, I don't want to be contacted, I also don't want to be impersonated, which is easy in Git

Very good point: the best reason to sign is to prevent impersonation. This design decision in git is widespread among other commercial implementations, like Microsoft TFS.

Let’s forget the word “correlated”. Commits might be signed because an organization expects it, and the kinds of projects with that policy might be rather serious (as opposed to frivolous), and serious projects might have rather senior devs. I’m not saying anything about the type I error, just type II error.

You can create a key specifically for GitHub and use your no-reply address on the key. That is what I do.

I guess I’m willing to accept emails out of the blue to my GitHub address, so long as they’re encrypted. Must be annoying to some people, but I’ll never know.

Fairly easy way to end up right in the spam folder.

I was getting quite a lot of spams too. So, I ended up creating a brand new email address and rewriting name and email with:

    git filter-branch -f --env-filter \ 
    "GIT_AUTHOR_NAME='Newname'; GIT_AUTHOR_EMAIL='newemail'; \
    GIT_COMMITTER_NAME='committed-name'; 
    GIT_COMMITTER_EMAIL='committed-email';" HEAD

You need to ask GitHub support to reindex your repo or the old address may still show up on the contributors page

This isn't news, recruiters have been doing this for years. You can tell what languages and technologies people know from their commits. It's a great idea for recruiting companies. Your Github commit email is public, there's not much to consent to.

This has been going on for a while. GitHub has been programmatically scraped by multiple companies that feed into databases that feed into other databases.

Lots of companies are scraping data and lots of companies are buying, aggregating, and selling data to each other.

It's interesting because years ago, I remember people saying this was one of the perks of doing open source. You'd have your email address in the code and people would reach out to you for these various things. Times have changed.

Grey beard here, lemme toss out my 2 cents.

I use bogus emails like no-reply@localhost. I quite literally don't give a single care in the world what someone wants to say to me, or why. I'd rather select the times when I accept inbound comms. This is a big reason I do not carry a phone, and use one maybe once a month to organize the next cycle with my coconspirators.

I don't dislike people at all, but to contact me after the effort is taken to not be contacted is rude. I wish there were a license that could be used seriously that consists of:

This is forkware

Don't bother me

I'm a nice guy and enjoy sharing. Let's take doritos as an example. I'll share my doritos with you, but I'm not interested in the pleasantries like your analysis of why modern doritos are terrible little crunchy cardboard chunks that mouthfuck your tastebuds into submission. I even don't want to know about the ones I agree with, like how a modern mountain dew most deliciously compliments the retro doritos if you can still find them.

I don't mind if you use my code, I don't care if you take my name off it, or put it on, or write it on your arm, I don't care. Go sell it to facebook if that makes your day. If I change my mind I'll put a license on the next version, but I haven't reached that point yet, so the obese and overbearing MIT license it is, until then.

But know this: Don't you even think about contacting me for anything. I am not a business, I have a fondness for the idea that the byproduct of my struggles may help a stranger without my knowledge. I prefer to live while littering artifacts of what I make so that maybe someone else stuck in the same spot can get some relief.

Why do people think that for me to give away some code I now have to have a support staff of one?

You've got the entire game fucked up. Don't @ me.

> I'll share my doritos with you, but I'm not interested in the pleasantries like your analysis of why modern doritos are terrible little crunchy cardboard chunks that mouthfuck your tastebuds into submission.

> But know this: Don't you even think about contacting me for anything.

This got angry and weird real quick.

Eh sorry, currently on a long flight. I'm sure you're alright.

But don't you email me, you nice and wonderful person.

Hehe all good. I can empathize, long flights are a real drag.

It’s interesting that the two comments to my comment referred to support.

I remember decades ago the email address in the code being the “resume” for people. People using the Linux mailing list for example to “harvest” emails to contact those people about employment.

I think it’s fair to say if you share your email address out in an open source project and give away it’s code, it is an open invitation to contact the person. After all, the purpose of the email address is generally for contacting people.

If you don’t want to be contacted, you already have a solution: don’t use a real email address. But if you are putting your email address out there in public these days, the ONLY reason you are doing that is to be contacted.

And yet, you can't blame one for trying. Who gives a shit about what some random grey beard person on the Internet wants - if you don't want to get contacted, do not leave artifacts behind :)

Yeah, just use throwaway emails everywhere.

Though I'd say people will assume you're poor at "online presence" or something before assuming you don't want to be contacted.

I'm not mad about that, I couldn't blame them for drawing that conclusion.

Yes, the expectation nowadays is that every free open source project comes with professional 24/7 support.

That’s not a new thing. That’s been going on for decades. I also wasn’t even referring to support, but job offers.

I wish GitHub would allow me to specify additional emails for the activity graph, because mine looks pretty much empty because there's no way I'm going to put my email address into my commits.

Yep, and I think it’s perfectly reasonable. I’m always happy to receive email on my GitHub for this reason.

If enough people mark as spam it’ll go to spam for everyone else so it’s pretty self-correcting.

Seems like for me they have moved on from emails to phone calls. I get 2-3 daily calls from people who claim they're calling me because I didn't reply to their email pitch.

They're not mandated by Git, you can do:

    git commit --author "moffkalast <>"

So I can set up my global --user.email as <> and that'll work without breaking things on the upstream?

Why would it? It's just some metadata, arbitrary text as far as any git client is considered.

Ah neat, will try and see what happens :D

Git was created with a mailing-list workflow in mind, e.g. the way the Linux kernel works. That's why we have git format-patch, git am, git send-email, and that's why there is an email field in commit authorship metadata.

You can always put something else there (e.g. GitHub's anonymized addresses) or leave it empty.

GitHub uses it to associate signed commits with your user. Not sure why they can't just verify the GPG key on your account though. I think it is fair to say to them the more personal data you share the better.

GitHub allows you to use username@users.noreply.github.com as commit email and even has an option to block push commits utilizing your actual email.

Yes, but they shouldn't need any email for commits.

Is there an email address that would make a spammer get in trouble? They might call the Github "police" on themselves.

And now even more startups will do it. However, as others have pointed out, GitHub offers a way to anonymize your email address.

Doesn't everyone else fake their git email?