Enemies at the Gate

kelderic · Post by **kelderic** » Thu Feb 01, 2007 3:08 am

The Blue Knight wrote:What do the spammers do?

They are all diferent. The worst one I saw was someone was posted a bunch of thumbnail images of pornography. The post was deleted rather quickly though, so it wasn't really a big problem.

Kelderic

Lord Felix · Post by **Lord Felix** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:14 am

They are all diferent. The worst one I saw was someone was posted a bunch of thumbnail images of pornography. The post was deleted rather quickly though, so it wasn't really a big problem.

Ouch. That is nasty. Lately we have been getting one spammer that comes back with those annoying links.

kelderic · Post by **kelderic** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:12 am

Lord Felix wrote:
They are all diferent. The worst one I saw was someone was posted a bunch of thumbnail images of pornography. The post was deleted rather quickly though, so it wasn't really a big problem.
Ouch. That is nasty. Lately we have been getting one spammer that comes back with those annoying links.

Actually, just tonight I saw one new member post 17 links to pornography, although Anthony was here and deleted him, and his posts, very quickly. Thanks, man.

Kelderic

Remyth · Post by **Remyth** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:24 am

kelderic wrote:Actually, just tonight I saw one new member post 17 links to pornography, although Anthony was here and deleted him, and his posts, very quickly. Thanks, man.

Same here, only it was Nathan and 10 posts! Thanks for being here, Nathan!

In Christ,

Lord Felix · Post by **Lord Felix** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:45 pm

Have you noticed that those links are all the same basic site? I mean the links yesterday were the same basic html as the one before. Geeze I HATE it when they don't give up after getting banned the first time geeze!

Well, I sure am glad we have a great team of MODs and ADMINs. They clean up our forum GOOD

RichardAM · Post by **RichardAM** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:51 pm

Lord Felix wrote:Geeze I HATE it when they don't give up after getting banned the first time geeze!

As far as i'm aware (and from what i've seen on other sites) it's the work of a spambot. so obviously there's no morals or conscience, no decision making process whatsoever.

I explained on another forum that banning one user isn't enough, because if you've maybe noticed, the majority of these posts are always created by people with zero postcounts- when they want to spam, they'll usually just set up a new account.

Post by **architect** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:02 pm

It does appear that the latest spammer was a spambot as they posted in atleast 2 threads for each forum. The spam has been removed and the spammer banned.

Ben
CC Sets Admin

Spongey · Post by **Spongey** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:35 pm

I know that the admins want to keep the security measures as they are. However, after the most recent assault by spammers, I believe that a re-working may be necessary.
I understand that one of the good things about this website is how it is accessible to new members. However, I don't think that many will disagree with me when I say that security is more important than convenience. A stricter application process may be a deterrent to some, but it will also get rid of unwanted spam. LEGO related questions could be a way to solve this problem.
Someone suggested using simple questions like "What is 2 + 3." However, it was countered that people in the third world are paid meagre wages to get past this. A better measure would be to have questions like "What is your favourite LEGO set," or "Name a LEGO castle faction." These would stump the people working for spammers, and would allow us to weed through unwanted members.
This could prove extra work. However, I would personally volunteer to spend a few minutes a day reviewing applications for membership, and checking over who is legitimate and who isn't; I'm sure other members would also. It is a sad fact that we are being assaulted by spammers, and unfortunately, I believe stricter security is the key to a safe website for all.

With regards,
Spongey

smcginnis · Post by **smcginnis** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:00 pm

Spongey wrote:I know that the admins want to keep the security measures as they are. However, after the most recent assault by spammers, I believe that a re-working may be necessary.
I understand that one of the good things about this website is how it is accessible to new members. However, I don't think that many will disagree with me when I say that security is more important than convenience. A stricter application process may be a deterrent to some, but it will also get rid of unwanted spam. LEGO related questions could be a way to solve this problem.
Someone suggested using simple questions like "What is 2 + 3." However, it was countered that people in the third world are paid meagre wages to get past this. A better measure would be to have questions like "What is your favourite LEGO set," or "Name a LEGO castle faction." These would stump the people working for spammers, and would allow us to weed through unwanted members.
This could prove extra work. However, I would personally volunteer to spend a few minutes a day reviewing applications for membership, and checking over who is legitimate and who isn't; I'm sure other members would also. It is a sad fact that we are being assaulted by spammers, and unfortunately, I believe stricter security is the key to a safe website for all.

With regards,
Spongey

Perhaps a filter for when a member posts a link containing obscene words or well known prescription drugs and the like, the post would be deleted automatically? I don't think any legitimate member would find that annoying.

~smcginnis

Edit: I've just looked at the memberlist, and realized that although the index says '1308 members', the newest one (who's also a spammer, by the way), is actually member number 1868. That means we've had over five hundred spammers (although I'm sure a few were just legitimate users who've asked for deletion). That makes me quite sad.

Rubberchickenknight · Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:03 pm

Maybe banning words in names: ex. some guy called edposterdick just posted about 5 times.

Post by **Bluesecrets** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:05 pm

Spammers usually fit in one of two categories, real or bots.

The spammers I have notice here usually come in both forms. The ones that post a million nasty things are usually people.

The bots, well Google bots are used by a lot of Russians and a few other places, they usually register and if they post more than once, the post is the same over and over. Mostly they don't post, and their profile contains info that is unwanted.

My experience as an admin for a business's forum is that it is nearly impossible to stop the spammers. Several times a day I am banning and deleting, it gets very tiresome. And CC has far more active a board.

Short of restricting posting ability until it is "approved" there isn't much that can be done to stop them from posting. And who really has the time to go about approving people? For that matter, who really has the time to go about checking every single profile of each registered member? Seriously?

So, thank you admin's and mods. You do a wonderful job trying to do the impossible.

Maedhros · Post by **Maedhros** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:06 pm

Rubberchickenknight wrote:Maybe banning words in names: ex. some guy called edposterdick just posted about 5 times.

Twelve to be exact

(I found your reply.... interesting btw

)

Also, what about floodcontrol? That guy must have posted four posts per minute or something...

smcginnis · Post by **smcginnis** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:08 pm

Maedhros wrote:
Rubberchickenknight wrote:Maybe banning words in names: ex. some guy called edposterdick just posted about 5 times.
Twelve to be exact (I found your reply.... interesting btw )

Also, what about floodcontrol? That guy must have posted four posts per minute or something...

I thought we had that.... For example, sometimes I'll post something, then (since I have a fast browser and connection), I'll go back right away to edit spelling or add something I forgot, and it says "You cannot make another post so soon after your last." <--That's not verbatim, but it's pretty close.

~smcginnis

Maedhros · Post by **Maedhros** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:11 pm

Oh, that might be the case, it has never happened to me though... (that guy/thing still posted curiously fast though...)

Edit: Tried... and nothing stopped me. Can´t have passed more than ten seconds...

RichardAM · Post by **RichardAM** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:16 pm

Just noticed some of the mentioned problems tonight, all of them regarding a certain Jennifer Lopez.

Yuck.