Bots on Boards...

Use this forum for title suggestions, bitching at moderators, whining about phpBB, and grand ideas that will solve all of Song Fight's problems.
User avatar
Spud
Hot for Teacher
Posts: 4770
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:25 am
Instruments: Bass, Keyboards, eHorn
Submitting as: Octothorpe
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by Spud »

Are you asking how do we know that YOU are not a bot?

Several things nearly all the bots that I deleted have in common:

1. Zero Posts
2. Websites that are clearly spamming
3. Failure to change the phpbbs skin to "songfight" during registration
"I only listen to good music. And Octothorpe." - Marcus Kellis
Song Fight! The Rockening
HeuristicsInc
Beat It
Posts: 5297
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 6:14 pm
Instruments: Synths
Recording Method: Windows computer, Acid, Synths etc.
Submitting as: Heuristics Inc. (duh) + collabs
Pronouns: he/him
Location: Maryland USA
Contact:

Post by HeuristicsInc »

fluffy wrote:Heuristics.
Yeah, I'll tell you who's a bot. c3p0, r2d2, Crow, Tom Servo, I know all the bots.
-bill
152612141617123326211316121416172329292119162316331829382412351416132117152332252921
http://heuristicsinc.com
Liner Notes
SF Lyric Ideas
User avatar
Spud
Hot for Teacher
Posts: 4770
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:25 am
Instruments: Bass, Keyboards, eHorn
Submitting as: Octothorpe
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by Spud »

Albatross wrote:Today we got one from a bestiality site. That's just wrong.
No, that's Klownhole.
"I only listen to good music. And Octothorpe." - Marcus Kellis
Song Fight! The Rockening
User avatar
Leaf
Jump
Posts: 2438
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 2:19 pm
Instruments: Drums, guitar, bass, vocals.
Recording Method: Cubase
Submitting as: Leaf 62, Gert, Boon Liver, Leaf and Twig, Tom Skillman, A bunch of other stuff.
Location: Campbell River, B.C.
Contact:

Post by Leaf »

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Image
User avatar
Bjam
Ice Cream Man
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 3:24 pm
Instruments: Singin', Guitarin', Mandolinin'
Location: Atlanta, GA

Post by Bjam »

There's a, uh, not quite PG new member.
Songfighter since back in the day.
User avatar
fluffy
Eruption
Posts: 11029
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:56 am
Instruments: sometimes
Recording Method: Logic Pro X
Submitting as: Sockpuppet
Pronouns: she/they
Location: Seattle-ish
Contact:

Post by fluffy »

Funny, that's the same person who was just spamming MY forum. I guess they found one from the other. Odd.
User avatar
Spud
Hot for Teacher
Posts: 4770
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 10:25 am
Instruments: Bass, Keyboards, eHorn
Submitting as: Octothorpe
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by Spud »

Bjam wrote:There's a, uh, not quite PG new member.
Most people aren't that aware of new members joining, unless they post. Well, or unless someone posts for them.

Hint: PM when you find something particularly offensive, and I will be glad to take care of it.
"I only listen to good music. And Octothorpe." - Marcus Kellis
Song Fight! The Rockening
User avatar
Niveous
Beat It
Posts: 7177
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 6:45 am
Instruments: vocals, songwriting, guitar
Submitting as: Lucky Witch and the Righteous Ghost
Pronouns: He/him
Location: Staten Island, NY
Contact:

Post by Niveous »

We've reached 40 2Rules members! They must love Songfight in Mongolia.
"I'd like to see 1984 redubbed with this in the soundtrack."- Furrypedro.
NUR EIN!
X-Tokyo
Lucky Witch and the Righteous Ghost
Eric Y.
Ice Cream Man
Posts: 1797
Joined: Sun Sep 26, 2004 12:36 pm

Post by Eric Y. »

i'm refusing to post this in the troll thread in monkey business.

i am not seeing a way to ignore a particular user on this system. does that ability exist? i was highly annoyed to find i had received a spam PM from user "oust the mods" and i would like a way to assure this will not happen again. anybody?

TIA
boltoph
Panama
Posts: 775
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 9:21 am
Submitting as: Gert
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Post by boltoph »

Looks like an influx of SPAM-based members over the past few days...delete those bitches...? Those bastards
shadowy puppetmaster
A New Player
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 8:14 pm
Contact:

Post by shadowy puppetmaster »

THERE ARE NO BOTS ON THIS MESSAGE BOARD
ALL BOTS ARE HERESY
HERESY WILL BE ELIMINATED
anti-m
Ice Cream Man
Posts: 1160
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:00 pm
Submitting as: Anti-m, Jeplexe
Location: PDX
Contact:

Post by anti-m »

...So... I know I'm flogging ye olde dead stallion here, I know... but I'd like to timidly propose once again that perhaps it's time to upgrade to a PHPBB that has more effective bot blockin'? These f@#$ers are getting out of control!

(Although I HAVE met a bevy of sexy, bored housewifes and made a ton of money in lucrative investment schemes as a result!)
User avatar
fluffy
Eruption
Posts: 11029
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:56 am
Instruments: sometimes
Recording Method: Logic Pro X
Submitting as: Sockpuppet
Pronouns: she/they
Location: Seattle-ish
Contact:

Post by fluffy »

Feel free to find such a "newer version." Ppbb has always had horrible spam control, but spam control is a hard thing to do for a forum. Most spam I see these days is posted by hand.
blakewalker
Ain't Talkin' 'Bout Love
Posts: 33
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 4:12 pm
Location: mesa, az
Contact:

Post by blakewalker »

fine. i admit it. i'm a bot. my songs are all randomly generated.
User avatar
bz£
Panama
Posts: 946
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:50 am
Location: boston ma

Post by bz£ »

fluffy wrote:Most spam I see these days is posted by hand.
So how difficult is it to delete stuff by hand? I'd volunteer to help out but it sounds like a lot of work, and I have this rule where I only volunteer to do the really easy things.

Or maybe phpbb ain't the way to go? I've been following a couple of boards that use other software, are much larger than SF and never seem to have any spam problems. Granted, I have no real experience with this, which is why I'm making suggestions about it on an internet bulletin board.
User avatar
jb
Hot for Teacher
Posts: 4159
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:12 am
Instruments: Guitar, Cello, Keys, Uke, Vox, Perc
Recording Method: Logic X
Submitting as: The John Benjamin Band
Pronouns: he/him
Location: WASHINGTON, DC
Contact:

Post by jb »

If therre was a phpBB mod that allowed an admin to delete a threat with one click, and ban a user and his IP with one click, that would make keeping up with the bots a lot easier. Or a "spammer" button that does both-- gets rid of all threads started by a user, and bans his IP and username.

Sounds like a scorched earth kind of thing I know, but since stopping them from registering and posting seems to be basically impossible, it would make it easier to handle their shit once it gets through the automated filters.

As far as I can see there is no such mod for phpBB. Perhaps fluffy can build one for us.

JB
blippity blop ya don’t stop heyyyyyyyyy
deshead
Panama
Posts: 875
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:44 am
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Post by deshead »

jb wrote:If therre was a phpBB mod that allowed an admin to delete a threat with one click
JB, have you seen this? http://starfoxtj.phpbbhelp.org/phpBB/toolkit/

There are also a few anti-spam hacks and mods for phpBB, but I think they all require a newer version of the software: http://www.phpbbhacks.com/category/10


If you don't mind messing with a little code, here are some tricks that might help:

Require javascript in the user's browser, since most bots don't support it: http://www.tfbw.com/archives/20

Remove the URL and signature fields from the signup form, and reject any submission that still provides those values as it must be an automated submission: http://www.phpbb.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=396855

Add the "noindex,nofollow" meta tag: http://boonedocks.net/mike/archives/70- ... art-2.html

Stop non-validated users from showing up: http://www.phpbb.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=239128

Add a hidden form field to the signup form, and reject submissions that don't provide the field: http://www.phpbb.com/phpBB/viewtopic.ph ... 02#1259171

Set up a CRON job to delete users who don't activitate right away: http://boonedocks.net/mike/archives/124 ... mbers.html

I think this last one would nail ALL the spam we've gotten so far. Look at user "Poted42", which registered 9 days ago and only posted its first spam today.
bzl wrote:I've been following a couple of boards that use other software, are much larger than SF and never seem to have any spam problems.
Most of the larger communities have a few moderators. The easiest low-tech way to prevent spam (and it's 100% effective) is to manually approve all user registrations. I don't think we're there yet, though
User avatar
fluffy
Eruption
Posts: 11029
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:56 am
Instruments: sometimes
Recording Method: Logic Pro X
Submitting as: Sockpuppet
Pronouns: she/they
Location: Seattle-ish
Contact:

Post by fluffy »

Every anti-spam measure has its strengths and weaknesses. Disallowing Google from indexing it is a definite double-edged sword, and it doesn't really help that much anyway since the spammers seem to keep their own registry of boards to begin with. Disallowing non-Javascript browsers is a can of worms that nobody should even CONSIDER.

Also songfight.net runs the latest version of phpBB2.

Also I think JB just didn't realize that the little "x" button at the bottom of every thread nukes the whole thread regardless of whether it's been replied to.

I personally get a lot of spam on my own forum and I'm always experimenting with techniques to deal with it and it's just a total arms race. As soon as any one technique gets widespread adoption, the spammers just find something else. The only way to truly stop spam is to shut down all legitimate communication. Spammers actually have large pools of resources where they pay starving college students (like Jenhere, whose legacy lives on with the whole 'A NEW PLAYER' thing) and people in third-world countries to actually personally register on a board, read a thread, and post a specific reply to it which is vaguely on-topic and then with various links hidden in the punctuation and the user profile and so on, whether or not the board adds rel="nofollow" to outgoing links or whatever. I have friends who have posted very personal weblog posts (like about their favorite pet dying or their grandmother being sick) only to get posts from spammers with a message like, "I am sorry to hear about your loss. http://PORN-SEX-BLOWJOB.INFO"

Spammers are both stupid and extremely determined. (By stupid I don't mean that the people causing the spam to happen are stupid, but that they make use of very stupid resources which don't discriminate between a board which makes their spamming worthwhile and one which doesn't.)

No matter HOW HARD YOU TRY to get rid of automated techniques, you won't stop spammers, because they don't USE automated techniques anymore. Sure, there are things you can key on to stop them (like a lot of them convolute their referrer strings in specific ways which are easy to detect) but with everything you do to stop a spammer you run the risk of also messing up legitimate traffic, and at the same time it's so very trivial for them to change their tactic.

Spammers have HUGE numbers. Think of them as several thousand (at least!) very determined Denyers.

By the way, I wrote a mod a long time ago to disable robots from showing up in the memberlist, and was largely ignored by the phpBB community. Now that it's a huge problem there have been about a dozen different solutions to it, which just shows that phpBB modders have an annoying tendency to not look to see if other people have already solved a problem. If you patch your board with every little thing which comes out you end up with a hundred instances of the same thing. Just applying patches willy-nilly is a horrible idea.
deshead
Panama
Posts: 875
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:44 am
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Post by deshead »

fluffy wrote:The only way to truly stop spam is to shut down all legitimate communication.
Or moderate more, especially on a low-traffic board like this.
fluffy wrote:No matter HOW HARD YOU TRY to get rid of automated techniques, you won't stop spammers, because they don't USE automated techniques anymore.

It kinda reads like you're saying it's futile to try.

Just because the problem can't be solved outright doesn't mean it's pointless to ameliorate it a little. Accepting that it's not possible to stop spammers, you've basically got two choices: do something, or do nothing. Only one of those choices results in less spam.
fluffy wrote:Think of them as several thousand (at least!) very determined Denyers.
Heh.
User avatar
jb
Hot for Teacher
Posts: 4159
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:12 am
Instruments: Guitar, Cello, Keys, Uke, Vox, Perc
Recording Method: Logic X
Submitting as: The John Benjamin Band
Pronouns: he/him
Location: WASHINGTON, DC
Contact:

Post by jb »

The little X will help, thanks for pointing it out. I'd still like a "ban and clean" for a user that bans the username and IP and destroys all threads and posts made by a user. A DESTROY USER button.
blippity blop ya don’t stop heyyyyyyyyy
User avatar
fluffy
Eruption
Posts: 11029
Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 10:56 am
Instruments: sometimes
Recording Method: Logic Pro X
Submitting as: Sockpuppet
Pronouns: she/they
Location: Seattle-ish
Contact:

Post by fluffy »

deshead wrote:
fluffy wrote:The only way to truly stop spam is to shut down all legitimate communication.
Or moderate more, especially on a low-traffic board like this.
Well, yeah, more moderators would definitely help. But moderation leads to another path which some people object to on an open community since it inherently leads to a subjective representation of what is acceptable objective. or whatever the hell people like OTM are saying this week.

I don't like mods in general, but if we had people in, say, a 'spam patrol' role that'd be a lot better.
fluffy wrote:No matter HOW HARD YOU TRY to get rid of automated techniques, you won't stop spammers, because they don't USE automated techniques anymore.

It kinda reads like you're saying it's futile to try.
I'm saying that there is no silver bullet and that people who have "the answer" are smoking crack. None of the things you mentioned or linked to, aside from more moderators, are an actual reasonable solution which doesn't cause other problems.
Just because the problem can't be solved outright doesn't mean it's pointless to ameliorate it a little. Accepting that it's not possible to stop spammers, you've basically got two choices: do something, or do nothing. Only one of those choices results in less spam.
Doing something is good. Doing whatever you can think of because it seems like a good idea at the time is not. Consideration must be paid to side effects.
User avatar
Bjam
Ice Cream Man
Posts: 1687
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 3:24 pm
Instruments: Singin', Guitarin', Mandolinin'
Location: Atlanta, GA

Post by Bjam »

fluffy wrote: I don't like mods in general, but if we had people in, say, a 'spam patrol' role that'd be a lot better.
Duh-nuh-nuh-nuh-duh-duh-nuh... Duh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh-nuh... Who you gonna call...

Spambusters.
Songfighter since back in the day.
Post Reply