Sponsorship for feature tracker item #290 - Spammer database
|
Posted
|
|
|---|---|
|
Community saint |
Bob |
|
Posted
|
|
|
ocStaff (admin) |
I will try and summarise what is out there, and what I propose, and how long each component would take. I'm going to do that here, before moving it all back to the tracker. I've taken 3 hours going over all this already, for what was going to be a 3 hour task, but I'll still meet the very simplest form for the 3 hour quote (discussed below). Of course, anyone else may contribute code here if they have the skills, it does not have to be sponsoring ocProducts. Solutions out there:
1/2 are run by commercial companies, although there are free versions. As far as I am concerned they can be ignored, because they aren't a true representation of how to best do things:
I like the look of 3. "Bad behaviour" is a nice open source package that implements HTTP:BL and some heuristic checks. This could be implemented as an addon, in 4 hours work. We obviously have 4 already. Eventually the new style CAPTCHA that currently is only available by turning on a hidden option will be on by default. It is working stably. We just haven't gotten around to promoting the hidden options to proper ones yet. The problem with CAPTCHA is that real humans are used to spam sites. For 1 hour we could make that a proper option sooner and also add a privilege to bypass the CAPTCHA (i.e. don't just show it to Guests, show it to newbie/unvetted registered users too – a good way to limit spam by those manually creating accounts, or people signed in via Facebook!) 5 is pretty lame, it can easily be beaten by a spammer – it only works so long as what you are doing is obscure enough, and that'll never last. We could implement our own honey pot (6) in ocPortal, and tie it into the hackattack alert system. However there'd be no guarantee it would be hit before spam comes through, so it wouldn't really help a great deal. I think that's best forgotten. I don't like 7. We're not restricted to the automated mechanism of the e-mail protocols, we can create whatever blocks and intercessions we want without having to fall to the last resort of implementing keyword analysis (which is not a winnable battle anyway). I really like 8. That could be done in the 3 hours which is the original proposal, for one of the services. stopforumspam seems to be the best. The rest I think rely on a human component in identifying spammers, than sharing that data, or they just have smaller databases. I don't think a human component would work reliably, I suspect a spammer would hit tens of thousands of sites successfully before they ever got reported. Regarding '3' and '8' we would probably want it to be configurable which of the following events it happens on:
I am not a fan of '9', it seems very draconian. We can do '10' already with permissions, but it'll annoy users and waste time. For '11', we do have this, but I don't like it so much. I don't think flooding is much of a problem, and flood control can lead to irritation to user. I'll say how we could deal with what (in my opinion) is a better way of dealing with that below (easy mass delete). A quick review of why we care about bots:
1 is the main thing we are talking about here. 2 is dealt with if we do the 'all page views' blocking discussed above. 3 is a non-issue, ocPortal protects emails 4 is dealt with already in ocPortal More stuff that could be done… We could add in additional virtual topics:
This would be 3 hours. We could integrate the punishment actions (ban etc) into the delete post form. i.e. combined punish & delete. This would be 1 hour. We could spend some time ensuring that we log the registration IP for a member permanently (probably storing the stats entry against the member when they register even though they are not technically logged in). This would be 1 hour. The lookup user features are already fairly good I think, you can see what accounts use an IP, and what IPs an account uses. There's also this issue regarding ideally we would log both proxy and connection IPs and display both: 0000418: Dual IP address logging and checking - ocPortal feature tracker Phew. I think that covers all the bases:
Last edit: by Chris Graham
If I answered something that you think should be in the documentation, please take the initiative and add it to the community documentation. We really need people to help out here and build a well-organised large support resource. |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
Thanks so much for taking the time to analyze this properly. I currently make use of HTTP:BL through the CloudFlare service and it is very good at catching at least several problems each day, so I am a strong proponent of number 3. I also use StopForumSpam to look up problem IPs. It provides the means to look up by IP, username or email address and is thus the most comprehensive. I am not familiar with the StopForumSpam API, but Project Honey Pot returns the number of days since the submitted IP was last used maliciously. I like this since it allows IPs to be aged off any ban list as spammers move on to new IPs. For me, I think the ideal solution would be a combination of 3 and 8 with the site owner able to specify a cutoff number of days after which an IP would be removed from the list. I suppose for the sake of thoroughness, there should also be a permanent ban option. I've been meaning to go through my ban list to see how current some of the early IPs are and whether they still represent a current threat. I'll try to get to that this week just to get a sense of how important aging of bans is. Bob |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
Can you please complete this thought:
Also, is that supposed to be "'3' and '8'" or is '2' correct? Thanks. Bob |
|
Posted
|
|
|
ocStaff (admin) |
If I answered something that you think should be in the documentation, please take the initiative and add it to the community documentation. We really need people to help out here and build a well-organised large support resource. |
|
Posted
|
|
|
ocStaff (admin) |
FEATURE: stopforumspam TIME: 3 hours PLAN:
FEATURE: stopforumspam & validation TIME: 1 hour PLAN:
FEATURE: "Bad behaviour" addon TIME: 4 hours PLAN:
FEATURE: Improve CAPTCHA TIME: 1 hour PLAN:
FEATURE: Virtual topics for mass moderation of spam TIME: 3 hours PLAN:
FEATURE: Punish & Delete TIME: 1 hour PLAN:
FEATURE: Keep track of IPs at joining TIME: 1 hour PLAN:
FEATURE: Make proxy/client IPs part of the UI and database structure TIME: 3 hours PLAN:
If I answered something that you think should be in the documentation, please take the initiative and add it to the community documentation. We really need people to help out here and build a well-organised large support resource. |
|
Posted
|
|
|
ocStaff (admin) |
Personally I think 'stopforumspam' is the core thing for people. It was essentially what was originally discussed, and HTTP:BL ("Bad behaviour" addon) is already available via CloudFront and overlaps quite a bit with it. If I answered something that you think should be in the documentation, please take the initiative and add it to the community documentation. We really need people to help out here and build a well-organised large support resource. |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
I rethought this and arrived at the same solution. CloudFlare currently offers a free service which would allow anyone to sign up and gain the benefits of HTTP: BL. It also has the additional benefit of occuring before the IP ever hits your server. In light of this, it seems silly to pay to have this done specifically for ocPortal unless CloudFlare becomes a paid-only solution with no alternative free services. I check problem IPs using StopForumSpam, so this seems like the logical next step and, to me, the only question is whether or not we also add validation. We could always add the additional options over time, but my feeling is that being proactive and heading off the spam is the most important issue. Also, it is important to feed banned IPs back into the system. Bob |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
Hate to be a pest but I think this point is unfinished:
Also, can you describe how you would implement a confidence level check? Bob |
|
Posted
|
|
|
ocStaff (admin) |
If I answered something that you think should be in the documentation, please take the initiative and add it to the community documentation. We really need people to help out here and build a well-organised large support resource. |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
I'll provide half the funding for this – 3 support credits. We can have the stopforumspam with validation if someone else will provide the other 3 support credits for this feature. 0000432: stopforumspam & validation - ocPortal feature tracker Bob |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
I'll take up the slack on the remaining three credits - I think I have enough in the piggy-bank. If I haven't, I'm sure Chris will let me know pretty soon! I've dropped CloudFlare in any case. I found it to be too aggresive for my needs, especially since ocPortal was fending off the 'pimples' without any outside assistance. Also, CloudFlare became a bit of a nightmare when attempting to upgrade the site. Putting it in 'Developer Mode' wasn't the solution as it still needed to clear its caches, and I really didn't like to have to wait for their servers to catch up when I was ready to go!
Take my advice. I'm not using it!
View my working ocPortal site (version 9.x.x) at Anglo-Indian Portal |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
As far as CloudFlare, they need to do some work on the "Development mode" as far as I can tell. However, the option to toggle (or pause) CloudFlare off in the cPanel CloudFlare plug-in seems to work quite well. Still, if you don't need it, you don't need it. Bob |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
Me too! I'm sure Chris will get around to fixing it.
Take my advice. I'm not using it!
View my working ocPortal site (version 9.x.x) at Anglo-Indian Portal |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
Regarding the basic stopforumspam addon: is there any provision for feeding manually banned IPs back to stopforumspam so that we are not just leeching off the resource? If so, we will need to be able to store the API key for each site. Bob |
|
Posted
|
|
|
ocStaff (admin) |
If I answered something that you think should be in the documentation, please take the initiative and add it to the community documentation. We really need people to help out here and build a well-organised large support resource. |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
Success!
Take my advice. I'm not using it!
View my working ocPortal site (version 9.x.x) at Anglo-Indian Portal |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
Bob |
|
Posted
|
|
|
Community saint |
Chris- I think this got passed over. Can you comment on this please? Bob |
|
Posted
|
|
|
ocStaff (admin) |
If I answered something that you think should be in the documentation, please take the initiative and add it to the community documentation. We really need people to help out here and build a well-organised large support resource. |
1 guests and 0 members have just viewed this: None
Control functions:








Last edit: by 