Comments on: Linkspam up considerably http://spamhuntress.com/2005/12/24/linkspam-up-considerably/ Just another WordPress weblog Sat, 30 Aug 2008 00:07:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: Daniel Poon http://spamhuntress.com/2005/12/24/linkspam-up-considerably/#comment-3276 Fri, 10 Feb 2006 06:45:18 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2005/12/24/linkspam-up-considerably/#comment-3276 My blog had the same problem but fortunately I coded the ultimate against those robots. I was getting spammed every 15 minutes on my blog. Blogspot should use my secret too. That is, you plant a cookie when the user visits your page. If someone posts to the guestbook, it should check the return of that cookie and its value. If it comes back blank then that means it's a robot post and just ignore them and don't post them. My blog had the same problem but fortunately I coded the ultimate against those robots. I was getting spammed every 15 minutes on my blog. Blogspot should use my secret too. That is, you plant a cookie when the user visits your page. If someone posts to the guestbook, it should check the return of that cookie and its value. If it comes back blank then that means it’s a robot post and just ignore them and don’t post them.

]]> by: John D http://spamhuntress.com/2005/12/24/linkspam-up-considerably/#comment-3083 Fri, 03 Feb 2006 05:00:05 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2005/12/24/linkspam-up-considerably/#comment-3083 Spamlinking had gotten REALLY bad on my site (even when I removed all direct links to the guestbook from my site)...... eventually I resorted to password protecting the directory the guestbook software's located in. Most of it was linking to Pharmacy sites registered through ESTDomains (who weren't much help).... and as for the plonker in the Abuse department for the company in charge of the IP Address 72.36.244.143 where one of them came from, and I reported within 10mins of it being posted (was already logged-in, deleting all the **** posted previously before the database blew-up again)........ *bangs head on desk in frustration* Spamlinking had gotten REALLY bad on my site (even when I removed all direct links to the guestbook from my site)…… eventually I resorted to password protecting the directory the guestbook software’s located in.
Most of it was linking to Pharmacy sites registered through ESTDomains (who weren’t much help)…. and as for the plonker in the Abuse department for the company in charge of the IP Address 72.36.244.143 where one of them came from, and I reported within 10mins of it being posted (was already logged-in, deleting all the **** posted previously before the database blew-up again)…….. *bangs head on desk in frustration*

]]> by: Olliver http://spamhuntress.com/2005/12/24/linkspam-up-considerably/#comment-2277 Fri, 06 Jan 2006 23:52:23 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2005/12/24/linkspam-up-considerably/#comment-2277 Hola, I guess when using free services you're SOL in regard to preventing bandwidth consumption. Much better would be .htaccess, a bunch of SetEnvIf/Rewrite rules and very slim custom error pages. Just omitting any html code and only leaving "forbidden" and "not found" (both 10 bytes) will considerably reduce both load and bandwidth consumption. Purists can of course serve 0 byte files (aka blank page) as well, as it's only the header sent that matters to applications and/or bosts ;-). There's a surprisingly high amount of people who don't use .htaccess or their httpd.conf to regulate the traffic, probably because they've got no clue how to get started. So they let the spam thrive instead and blame it on the software/scripts they're using, as this seems to be more convenient than to learn something new ;-) Olliver - ranting dept. - Hola,
I guess when using free services you’re SOL in regard to preventing bandwidth consumption. Much better would be .htaccess, a bunch of SetEnvIf/Rewrite rules and very slim custom error pages. Just omitting any html code and only leaving “forbidden” and “not found” (both 10 bytes) will considerably reduce both load and bandwidth consumption. Purists can of course serve 0 byte files (aka blank page) as well, as it’s only the header sent that matters to applications and/or bosts ;-) .

There’s a surprisingly high amount of people who don’t use .htaccess or their httpd.conf to regulate the traffic, probably because they’ve got no clue how to get started. So they let the spam thrive instead and blame it on the software/scripts they’re using, as this seems to be more convenient than to learn something new ;-)

Olliver
- ranting dept. -

]]> by: Joe http://spamhuntress.com/2005/12/24/linkspam-up-considerably/#comment-2203 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 23:05:05 +0000 http://spamhuntress.com/2005/12/24/linkspam-up-considerably/#comment-2203 Comment spam has actually been <a href="http://chongq.blogspot.com/2005/12/most-spammed-posts.html" rel="nofollow">slowing</a> on my Blogspot blog over the last month. Since yours has been going up I guess Blogspot may have improved their spam prevention methods. Comment spam has actually been slowing on my Blogspot blog over the last month. Since yours has been going up I guess Blogspot may have improved their spam prevention methods.

]]>