Spam attack offensive idea

[KeepItSimpleStupid]

What if say a spammer is identified. Lately I've seemed to see the same activity about the same time at night and I can see the royal pain in trying to deal with it.

So, here's a suggestion. Once the spammer is identified let him post to his hearts content, but all of his posts go to a global ignore list for everybody.

If he logs in again under the same IP, still allow him to see his posts.

Then after a few days make the posts dissapear unless he appears to be active with the same IP address.

i.e Let him/her waste the effort. Let him think he got satisfaction because he sees his posts and once he logs out, the posts dissapear. Personally, I'd like it to work for sometime, say a week or until his IP address changes.

It's probably not dooable, but it's just a thought. If it's a robot, then that's another problem.

Here is another idea to. For new members make their post to HAVE to use Capcha or whatever it is that has two words, one that's unintelligible and one that isn't that you have to type.

or how about the first 5 posts, you have to acknowledge an email link that also links to a Capcha page.

Just ideas.

 

[alec_t]

When I'm the supreme global dictator (ha-ha) my first task will be to ensure that all ISPs make a nominal charge (say 0.001 $/£) per n-bytes uploaded, regardless of data type/content. That should cut out the vast majority of the spam/junk/malware in the world and leave the Internet clear for sensible use, with transmission rate greatly improved by not having to filter out all the garbage.

 

[DerStrom8]

What if say a spammer is identified. Lately I've seemed to see the same activity about the same time at night and I can see the royal pain in trying to deal with it.

So, here's a suggestion. Once the spammer is identified let him post to his hearts content, but all of his posts go to a global ignore list for everybody.

If he logs in again under the same IP, still allow him to see his posts.

Then after a few days make the posts dissapear unless he appears to be active with the same IP address.

i.e Let him/her waste the effort. Let him think he got satisfaction because he sees his posts and once he logs out, the posts dissapear. Personally, I'd like it to work for sometime, say a week or until his IP address changes.

It's probably not dooable, but it's just a thought. If it's a robot, then that's another problem.

Here is another idea to. For new members make their post to HAVE to use Capcha or whatever it is that has two words, one that's unintelligible and one that isn't that you have to type.

or how about the first 5 posts, you have to acknowledge an email link that also links to a Capcha page.

Just ideas.

The problem with the capatcha idea is that most spammers I've seen lately (probably the same guy under a different name each time) is human. The capatcha wouldn't help stop him, unless he just really hates capatchas

How about if within the first 10 posts, a member cannot post a link to anywhere but an ETO page (thread, album, hosted photo, etc)? And after that, a capatcha is required for any external links until he's posted 20 times? Do you think that would be fair, or am I going over the top here?

I was here for the spam attack last night. I'm glad the moderators are on top of things here. That's the fourth or fifth spam attack I've seen that time of night. A couple of times they got a good 10-20 posts in before they were stopped, but last night they only got 5 or 6. Many thanks to the mods for their hard work!

 

[bryan1]

Just an idea to toss around....

With the spammers I've reported over the last few weeks I have noticed they have just joined and gone on a posting spree. Now for new members how about a max posts per day until a set amount of post have been done. Now say it was set to max 5 posts per day I'm sure we will soon see if it is a spammer then action can be taken.

Cheers Bryan

 

[alec_t]

how about a max posts per day until a set amount of post have been done.

Good idea. +1. Perhaps even reduce the max to 3 per day? Genuine posters shouldn't be deterred by that.

 

[DerStrom8]

Just an idea to toss around....

With the spammers I've reported over the last few weeks I have noticed they have just joined and gone on a posting spree. Now for new members how about a max posts per day until a set amount of post have been done. Now say it was set to max 5 posts per day I'm sure we will soon see if it is a spammer then action can be taken.

Cheers Bryan

Definitely agree with that one, except if they're answering posts on their own thread. Let's say someone starts a legitimate thread. They get an answer asking for more info. They post again. Someone asks for clarification. They clarify. Then they wouldn't be able to post anymore (if restricted by the limit alec_t suggested). If they're in a hurry, and can't post more than 3-5 times per day, they may not be able to get their question answered in time. That's the only problem I see with it.

 

[alec_t]

Point taken. Back to a 5-post limit then

 

[DerStrom8]

Well something should definitely be done--As I'm writing this, some stupid spammer by the name of jo45sefd is trashing the forums!!!

 

[DerStrom8]

I like the idea of the email confirmation link. For the first 5-10 posts, the user must confirm his/her post through email, which goes through a capatcha before ever actually posting. You're definitely on to something, KISS.

I'm also been thinking about another idea. A lot of the time, members are online when the attacks happen and report them immediately. What if, if a new user's (<10 posts, for example) post is reported by anyone, it will temporarily suspend the account until it can be reviewed by a moderator? There's bound to be someone online during a spam attack, and should be able to report it quickly. A temporary suspension might be a good way to stop them from going on a spamming spree.

 

[ericgibbs]

Well something should definitely be done--As I'm writing this, some stupid spammer by the name of jo45sefd is trashing the forums!!!

Electromaster and the Mods are working on new procedures.

The spam we get and quickly deal with could hardly be called trashing the forums!!! .

If you see spam posts dont reply to them, ignore them.

 

[alec_t]

If you see spam posts dont reply to them, ignore them.

If I identify a spammer I just add their name to my 'ignore' list (I have a list of 1 so far!). Is it preferable to report the spammer? I guess the mods spot them anyway.

 

[ericgibbs]

If I identify a spammer I just add their name to my 'ignore' list (I have a list of 1 so far!). Is it preferable to report the spammer? I guess the mods spot them anyway.

hi alec,
When you report a post, by using the exclamation mark symbol [enclosed in a triangle], for whatever reason, all the Mod's get an email, so it quickly dealt with.

E.

 

[alec_t]

What we need is a gizmo the Mods can use to send high voltage spikes back down the line to the spammer's kit (or preferably to the spammer)

 

[DerStrom8]

Electromaster and the Mods are working on new procedures.

The spam we get and quickly deal with could hardly be called trashing the forums!!! .

If you see spam posts dont reply to them, ignore them.

Sorry, I just realized how rude that post sounded. What I meant was that he was cluttering the forums with his trash. I don't reply to the spam posts, but sometimes I reply to an old thread because I don't realize it was re-opened by a spammer.

I meant no offense--you guys do a great job, and I appreciate all your hard work

 

[MrAl]

Hi,

I have to say the amount of spam i see on this site is amazing. Amazing because there is so little!
Once in a while i see something i believe is some sort of clever spam. Why they would take the time to do this i dont know. On another site where i worked i used to see this kind of thing but they would post a sig line with a link to some ad site. I would promptly remove the link
Of course i would remove the whole post if it was total spam.

On that site we used to get hit really bad. A few times there would be literally 100's of new spam posts after i logged off for less than an hour. The software was updated and there was a delay built in where a user could not post more than once within about a 5 minute period. There were times however when this got annoying to regular users though because sometimes you can post pretty quick for simple questions.

What i noticed is that some people post over a time period of hours to years. That is, some people post regularly and others only post a few times and that's it. That's the key i think to helping to solve this kind of problem. Note the 'regulars' and give them more posting privileges and limit new users who havent posted much yet. For the above solution where limiting the time between successive posts, this would mean regular users would not be limited but newer users would have to go through an initial trial period where their successive posts are limited to one per every two to five minutes until they past the trial period and their membership was verified as a true user and not a trouble maker or spammer. This would help i think and not bother the regular users who have genuine content to share.

 

[Ian Rogers]

Sorry, I just realized how rude that post sounded. What I meant was that he was cluttering the forums with his trash. I don't reply to the spam posts, but sometimes I reply to an old thread because I don't realize it was re-opened by a spammer.

I meant no offense--you guys do a great job, and I appreciate all your hard work

Hey DS!! Sorry about the spam..... I'm nowhere as quick as Eric..... I cleaned it up as soon as I could....All gone now, ready for the next batch..

 

[DerStrom8]

Hey guys. I just got a flood of emails this morning saying I had all sorts of responses to subscribed threads, only to find it was all by a spammer. I see you've gotten it all removed already, so thank you for that.

Something I've noticed, though, is that all recent spam like that has been from the same person. The usernames are clearly randomly generated in the format xxxYYxxxxx (Xs being letters and Ys being numbers). I have the feeling that they'll keep coming back until a more offensive approach is used. Just curious if there's any progress so far? I think even a capatcha for getting an account, or for the first 10 posts, would help. What do you think?

Also, is the IP address always the same? If so, is there a way to block it? I'm sure you'd have done this already if it were possible, but I just wanted to double-check.

Regards,
Matt

 

[KeepItSimpleStupid]

It's problematic to block IP addresses because most folk get assigned them dynamically from their ISP. Sometimes to get a new one all you have to do is reset your router. Now blocking a MAC address makes more sense, but they can be spoofed too. Blacklisted MAC addresses would be best done at a switch.

 

[atferrari]

Blacklisted MAC addresses would be best done at a switch.

Hola KISS, could you explain that expression?

 

[picbits]

would be best done at a switch.

How ironic that this thread has just been spammed by the above ......