Spambot activity - How you can stop it

124816

Lirex wrote:
What about a CAPTCHA like this one?

What is a CAPTCHA? Is it used for security?

Last edited by 124816 (Nov. 27, 2013 22:19:42)

Want to be part of the Scratching Post? Apply here!
Want to stop the AE war? Click Me! Also click Me! You might want to click me too!
Want to stop bullying? Click Me! Click Me too! Also click me! Click Me if you want to stop cyberbullying!

<[] = []>//This boolean block looks like a reporter block. I resent that.

Nobody will forget the semicolon.
;

ErnieParke

124816 wrote:
Lirex wrote:
What about a CAPTCHA like this one?

What is a CAPTCHA? Is it used for security?

Yes it is. Captcha is some text or words shown in a somewhat confusing way. Humans can still read it though. Computers cannot. That's very helpful because spammers out there have computers always making accounts, and each of those accounts are posting spam. With captcha, a computer can no longer make accounts, and hence no spam.

The problem is that Scratch doesn't have captcha or anything in the registration that's against spammers. The other bad news is that even if captcha is added, it'd have to be unique because there's a program called XRumer which can get past captcha.

Do you see how this is important?

Reviewing,

ErnieParke

turkey3_test

We definitely need a captcha. On the old website it was fine because there weren't that many users, but the traffic has increased so much today, and this website is becoming more popular.

cheddargirl

Before we start thinking out other ways to consider how to stop spambots, you guys do have to consider the human component. Now unless you can prove how a bot can avoid account blocks and create appeal messages, I'm more likely to believe that a good handful of our spammers are human (or, if a bot is involved, it's a bot that is under human control at the time of posting and can avoid measures that are designed to stop spambots in their tracks).

Sadly, my forum signature was eaten by an evil kumquat.

ScratchJahd2011

cheddargirl wrote:
Before we start thinking out other ways to consider how to stop spambots, you guys do have to consider the human component. Now unless you can prove how a bot can avoid account blocks and create appeal messages, I'm more likely to believe that a good handful of our spammers are human (or, if a bot is involved, it's a bot that is under human control at the time of posting and can avoid measures that are designed to stop spambots in their tracks).

Ohh, didn't think of that. I WAS thinking, of human spammers, see, they can STILL click the red button, and they can STILL spam, how about adding a small fill-up survey about what is the registrant's motives in making a Scratch Account? I also think that would be to complicated for younger children, but their parents can help them there right?

…..

scimonster

ScratchJahd2011 wrote:
[H]ow about adding a small fill-up survey about what is the registrant's motives in making a Scratch Account? I also think that would be to complicated for younger children, but their parents can help them there right?

But do you really think that spammers will write "I'm here to SEO. Go [my company]!" or whatever?

Retired Community Moderator
BTW, i run Google Chrome 41.0.2272.101 on a Linux system - Ubuntu 14.04. NEW: iPad 4th gen. w/retina.

418 I'm a teapot (original - to be read by bored computer geeks)
THE GAME (you just lost)
; THE SEMICOLON LIVES ON IN OUR SIGS

ScratchJahd2011

scimonster wrote:
ScratchJahd2011 wrote:
[H]ow about adding a small fill-up survey about what is the registrant's motives in making a Scratch Account? I also think that would be to complicated for younger children, but their parents can help them there right?
But do you really think that spammers will write "I'm here to SEO. Go [my company]!" or whatever?

I mean a survey that they CHOOSE the answers, not write them. But that would pose a new problem altogether…

…..

scimonster

ScratchJahd2011 wrote:
scimonster wrote:
ScratchJahd2011 wrote:
[H]ow about adding a small fill-up survey about what is the registrant's motives in making a Scratch Account? I also think that would be to complicated for younger children, but their parents can help them there right?
But do you really think that spammers will write "I'm here to SEO. Go [my company]!" or whatever?

I mean a survey that they CHOOSE the answers, not write them. But that would pose a new problem altogether…

In any case, do you think a spammer would openly admit it?

Retired Community Moderator
BTW, i run Google Chrome 41.0.2272.101 on a Linux system - Ubuntu 14.04. NEW: iPad 4th gen. w/retina.

418 I'm a teapot (original - to be read by bored computer geeks)
THE GAME (you just lost)
; THE SEMICOLON LIVES ON IN OUR SIGS

Deerleg

Of course a spammer would not admit that they were going to spam. Otherwise they would get stopped in their tracks. The survey probably would not work.

ProdigyZeta7

Why not have the forums parser “destroy” outside links posted by New Scratchers? Let me rephrase that: when a New Scratcher goes to post a link to a website outside of Scratch, the link will be ignored once it is parsed, so in the data that is sent to the database the link will not exist in the post.

Either that or if external links are found in a post, a red alert will appear and say “You cannot post links outside of scratch.mit.edu!” and the post will be rejected.

How about that?

Lirex

This is a great idea!

Last edited by Lirex (Nov. 28, 2013 17:59:26)

Scratch-DACH-Wiki author

;

Yay, 500+ posts! (05/25/2014)

Deerleg

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:
Why not have the forums parser “destroy” outside links posted by New Scratchers? Let me rephrase that: when a New Scratcher goes to post a link to a website outside of Scratch, the link will be ignored once it is parsed, so in the data that is sent to the database the link will not exist in the post.

Either that or if external links are found in a post, a red alert will appear and say “You cannot post links outside of scratch.mit.edu!” and the post will be rejected.

How about that?

How would that help?

scimonster

ProdigyZeta7 wrote:
Why not have the forums parser “destroy” outside links posted by New Scratchers? Let me rephrase that: when a New Scratcher goes to post a link to a website outside of Scratch, the link will be ignored once it is parsed, so in the data that is sent to the database the link will not exist in the post.

Either that or if external links are found in a post, a red alert will appear and say “You cannot post links outside of scratch.mit.edu!” and the post will be rejected.

How about that?

But then legitimate New Scratchers can't post legitimate external links.

And also, many spammers don't even use the [url] tag.

Retired Community Moderator
BTW, i run Google Chrome 41.0.2272.101 on a Linux system - Ubuntu 14.04. NEW: iPad 4th gen. w/retina.

418 I'm a teapot (original - to be read by bored computer geeks)
THE GAME (you just lost)
; THE SEMICOLON LIVES ON IN OUR SIGS

GreenDog3

I have an idea. Bots are computers, right? How about – no wait. people might not have webcams. Nvm. But the idea was: How about if they don't see a person in a webcam, the account will be rejected?

EDIT: but laptops are increasingly popular, and they ALWAYS come with webcams, right?

Last edited by GreenDog3 (Nov. 28, 2013 20:16:11)

when green flag clicked
if <[Scratch Team] = [Reading this]> then
say [Why are the scratchblocks still in the style of 2.0?]

NoxSpooth

GreenDog3 wrote:
I have an idea. Bots are computers, right? How about – no wait. people might not have webcams. Nvm. But the idea was: How about if they don't see a person in a webcam, the account will be rejected?

EDIT: but laptops are increasingly popular, and they ALWAYS come with webcams, right?

No way. Not everyone uses laptops and/or has webcams.

Arrivederci.

Lirex

NoxSpooth wrote:
GreenDog3 wrote:
I have an idea. Bots are computers, right? How about – no wait. people might not have webcams. Nvm. But the idea was: How about if they don't see a person in a webcam, the account will be rejected?

EDIT: but laptops are increasingly popular, and they ALWAYS come with webcams, right?
No way. Not everyone uses laptops and/or has webcams.

+Some people may not want that a website can use their webcam… Also this won't solve the issue about real people spamming.

Last edited by Lirex (Nov. 28, 2013 20:30:14)

Scratch-DACH-Wiki author

;

Yay, 500+ posts! (05/25/2014)

ProdigyZeta7

scimonster wrote:
ProdigyZeta7 wrote:
Why not have the forums parser “destroy” outside links posted by New Scratchers? Let me rephrase that: when a New Scratcher goes to post a link to a website outside of Scratch, the link will be ignored once it is parsed, so in the data that is sent to the database the link will not exist in the post.

Either that or if external links are found in a post, a red alert will appear and say “You cannot post links outside of scratch.mit.edu!” and the post will be rejected.

How about that?
But then legitimate New Scratchers can't post legitimate external links.

Right. Maybe I could expand that so links to wikipedia and google are allowed…

Pipko411

I must join this!

<[Scratchers] > [spambots]>

hey I'm becca! scratch's resident old witch

when I receive [Falco]
forever
broadcast [Up Tilt]
end

Rumanti

I think we should be creative with the captchas. (whatever. I almost never need to spell it

) Nowdays, peoples needs to be creative to survive. I vote to have unique securities, so that it'll that longer time to hack, because it's different than most websites. *designing a security system, I'll share it when it's done.*

:wq

Rumanti

Lirex wrote:
NoxSpooth wrote:
GreenDog3 wrote:
I have an idea. Bots are computers, right? How about – no wait. people might not have webcams. Nvm. But the idea was: How about if they don't see a person in a webcam, the account will be rejected?

EDIT: but laptops are increasingly popular, and they ALWAYS come with webcams, right?
No way. Not everyone uses laptops and/or has webcams.
+Some people may not want that a website can use their webcam… Also this won't solve the issue about real people spamming.

Yes, I agree. It's against my privacy. Someone could hack Scratch and see my face! Lol.

:wq

Discuss Scratch