Continuing the discussion from Inappropriate / Obscenity / Profanity Language Filter: So the profanity filter works well … not that we see it used often. But is there a way to add regex/patterns so it could block people from putting an email address in a post?

Fair enough, but the filter already exists in Discourse, even if you aren’t using it personally. Also, keep in mind (in response to your blog post) that the Discourse filter doesn’t replace strings, it masks them with squares. :slightly_smiling: Regexes are inherently difficult, so I’m not necessarily proposing that you ask everyday users to use them as the mainstream use case. The current system works fine for most cases, but there’s no way to surefire way prevent people from posting most common email addresses. (I am not interested in the debate on the “perfect” email regex.) Meanwhile, I’m simply blocking some of the most common domain names like @gmail.com, @yahoo.com, etc. [image] Mittineague: And as for a valid email regex, it is notoriously difficult to craft a fool-proof one. Many come close and are “good enough” but without additional processing there will likely be problems at some point. I am not interested in letting perfect get in the way of good here. Just trying to prevent the most common occurrences.

[image] codinghorror: That would be extremely dangerous, though. “Extremely dangerous” is a strong phrase. Can you say more about why you feel that way?

[image] Obscenity Filters: Bad Idea, or Incredibly Intercoursing Bad Idea? I’m not a huge fan of The Daily WTF for reasons I’ve previously outlined. There is, however, the occasional gem – such as this one posted by ezrec: Browsing through a web archive of some old computer club conversations, I ran across this... Etc etc etc

Regex is like a language unto itself. Even a lot of seasoned programmers have trouble with it. Using it requires not only understanding every possible variation you want to match, but also every possible variation you want to not match. A lot of people do fairy well with the first, but fail with the second. For example, using (.)* matches everything, anything, and nothing. I see it used way too often as a “short cut” to get things to match, but unfortunately it often results in matching what it shouldn’t. I guess if it were under the “developers only” section it might be enough to scare off Admins that shouldn’t mess with it. But human nature being what it is, give out loaded guns and it’s only a matter of time before someone shoots themselves in their foot. And as for a valid email regex, it is notoriously difficult to craft a fool-proof one. Many come close and are “good enough” but without additional processing there will likely be problems at some point.

[image] downey: the Discourse filter doesn’t replace strings Actually, last I knew it replaces the characters with the box decimal value eg. blocking “@gmail.com”, “someone@gmail.com” would look like someone■■■■■■■■■■ and the source would be someone■■■■■■■■■■

[image] Mittineague: Actually, last I knew it replaces the characters with the box decimal value That is what I meant when I finished the sentence with: [image] downey: it masks them with squares. Forgive my error of specificity. What I meant was that it doesn’t replace it with other letters to change the word, as described in the blog post above. :wink:

Hi, So, I’m interested in preventing people from sharing their email address in public discussions in our community, for the sake of their privacy (perhaps some people don’t realize, despite our best efforts, that the discussions are public?). Would this be suitable? Or would it have significant risks I am not appreciating? *@*.com *@*.org *@*.net *@*.edu *@*.info *@*.biz

All regexes carry huge risk, the more broad, the more risk. Those are.. quite risky.

My naive hope would be that the “@” and the inclusion of top level domains would narrow it down to just email addresses. Is there no way to target these?

Something like *.?@gmail.com would be significantly safer. Ideally I would say word characters only not asterisk (all chars) too.

Blocking email addresses using profanity filter?

Product Support

codinghorror (Jeff Atwood) February 18, 2016, 12:37am 2

That would be extremely dangerous, though.

Topic		Replies	Views
Blocking email address with regular expression not working Product Support	3	669	April 16, 2021
Is there any way I can automatically censor email addresses on posts? Product Support	18	2753	April 25, 2023
Blocking spammer.<random>.domain registration attempts Product Support	11	711	October 8, 2025
Suggestion: Wildcard Block Email Address Feature	32	5112	December 7, 2021
Protect forum against email harvesters bots Product Support	2	1008	May 17, 2017

Blocking email addresses using profanity filter?

Related topics