The officially official Devuan Forum!

You are not logged in.

#1 2017-01-25 01:37:52

golinux
Administrator
Registered: 2016-11-25
Posts: 552

Discussion on possible new spam control

UPDATE:  The mod requiring answers to questions worked for a while but now the bots are finding us again.  sad  The best solution I can think of to deal with the bots is to require account activation.  A new group with no posting privileges would contain all new registrations. An admin could then delete the bot accounts and move 'legitimate' accounts to the members group. This is distasteful because it is a type of censorship.  But it's something I can live with and as the primary 'unverified' bot hunter, would be grateful for.

Chanku and I would appreciate feedback from all of you before we consider implementing this change.  So please share your thoughts why you think this is or is not a good solution.  Perhaps some of you can come up with some better ideas.

golinux

Offline

#2 2017-01-25 03:06:15

ralph.ronnquist
Administrator
From: Clifton Hill, Victoria, AUS
Registered: 2016-11-30
Posts: 101

Re: Discussion on possible new spam control

Maybe https://www.stopforumspam.com could be of some use?

Offline

#3 2017-01-25 03:32:30

golinux
Administrator
Registered: 2016-11-25
Posts: 552

Re: Discussion on possible new spam control

ralph.ronnquist wrote:

Maybe https://www.stopforumspam.com could be of some use?

We've been using SFS since we went online.  The spam domains are well-known to us and we can delete them with confidence.  But it is CONSTANT manual labor and some are getting through before we can get to them.  This approach is not sustainable.  We have not yet found a way to automate deleting those registrations against the SFS database.

The question asked here is whether forum members have any thoughts about or objections to requiring activation of new accounts via admin intervention.

Offline

#4 2017-01-25 04:27:27

Chanku
Moderator
Registered: 2016-11-25
Posts: 27

Re: Discussion on possible new spam control

Although, if someone is willing to help out and create a way for us to use the SFS database in conjunction with our own (with some restrictions/requirements. Mainly regarding backup size) in an automated fashion, then we would be willing to do that as well (whether or not it's in place of, or in conjunction with this plan is up to what occurs.).

Well at least I would be willing to do that, I doubt golinux would have strong objections to that either, especially since it would require less work for everyone after it's implemented. tongue

However if we could stay on topic and hear feedback on this plan, that would be nice smile

Offline

#5 2017-01-25 07:30:53

Pick2
Member
Registered: 2016-12-01
Posts: 4

Re: Discussion on possible new spam control

Way back in '04 , We used to kick in 'account activation'  till that group of spammers went away , then kick it back out untill they came back.  Month on , couple months off as needed.  Spamming is an arms race , you will just have to be vigilant , and switch your tools out when needed.  They find ways around most of them , SFS included.
Good luck and happy hunting !

Last edited by Pick2 (2017-01-25 07:32:16)

Offline

#6 2017-01-25 15:09:26

golinux
Administrator
Registered: 2016-11-25
Posts: 552

Re: Discussion on possible new spam control

@Pick2 . . . bots are much more sophisticated now than they were back in '04.  I have not noticed any 'groups of spammers'.  It's a steady flow.  Some domains are more prominent than others but I see no pattern that would ever allow 'account activation' to be disabled.  Even if we could get a script to nuke them based on the SFS db, some would still get through.  It would however, simplify the process of activating legitimate accounts.  The only solution I can see that would be 100% effective is to 'jail' the bots at the door with account activation.

Offline

#7 2017-01-25 18:16:48

sgage
Member
Registered: 2016-12-01
Posts: 48

Re: Discussion on possible new spam control

I see no problem with account activation.

As someone who has been using the Internet since before it was the Internet (I was on ArpaNet back in the day), I must say that the Web has become a cesspool. A classic case of 'the Tragedy of the Commons'. I wish I had the smarts to come up with a solution to the pollution. It seems there ought to be a way to find these a**holes and prosecute them to the max. Except, freedom. Oh well.

Offline

#8 2017-01-25 23:10:38

FOSSuser
Member
From: Surrey/Hants border UK
Registered: 2016-12-11
Posts: 151

Re: Discussion on possible new spam control

Have you thought about using captcha - http://captcha.net/

Offline

#9 2017-01-25 23:50:42

golinux
Administrator
Registered: 2016-11-25
Posts: 552

Re: Discussion on possible new spam control

FOSSuser wrote:

Have you thought about using captcha - http://captcha.net/

Chanku says it requires JS and wants to avoid that..

Offline

#10 2017-01-28 18:08:35

fanderal
Member
Registered: 2017-01-14
Posts: 5

Re: Discussion on possible new spam control

FOSSuser wrote:

Have you thought about using captcha - http://captcha.net/

Was thinking of suggesting the same, but when searching the Past Month I found a lot of stuff like this: robot beats 'I am not a robot.'

Offline

#11 2017-01-28 18:33:59

golinux
Administrator
Registered: 2016-11-25
Posts: 552

Re: Discussion on possible new spam control

The spam situation has been resolved.  Spammers are being filtered at the door.  But we can't get a break.  Now our host's reverse DNS is down so some registration confirmation emails are not being delivered and we're having to manually enable them.

Offline

Board footer