Porn Spam

[adambomb]

I remember a mention recently about updating forum software?  Spammers are a sort of evolving threat, so I would guess that keeping forum software up to date could keep it so we're only 1-2 steps behind them.  I'm active on another forum that's relatively smallish without a lot of admin overhead that also happens to run an old version of forum software that has similar problems with spammers.  Although it's a forum for race car engineering geeks in college, and most of the spam is for kitchen cabinets and other lame garbage (who the hell would buy kitchen cabinets from a spam bot anyway ).  Not so much of a threat there...

From what I've seen they've found their way around Captcha and other "bot proof" technologies by paying people a menial fee to manually post.  Can't say I can think of too much to help, other than the solution might need to be more than simply bot proof.

[adambomb]

The problem is if the .gov anti-freedom web watchers see it before it's deleted and decide to raid the servers/steal the domain etc.

THIS ^^^^^^^^

Particularly when it comes to something that begins to look like Kiddie Porn. 

This reminds me of how Bill O'Reilly described 4chan as a kiddie porn site based on the fact that it's a vast, largely anonymous image board that just so happened, due to its open and relatively anonymous nature, to end up having a small number of kiddie porn pictures on it.  And you know how people like to believe things they hear on the news...

Libertarians and anarchists are already targeted as being sexual deviants, racists, etc. (mostly due to mindless drabble from folks like Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, etc...), don't need to give them any fuel!

[rhodges]

As far as I know, regular forum people can not upload pictures to the server.  So technically, the forum does not and CAN not have porn on it.

They can, of course, post links to images.  If your browser decides to load an image from some other server, based on some text that someone put in a message, that is not the fault of the forum and the forum's server.

[Old Ironsights]

As far as I know, regular forum people can not upload pictures to the server.  So technically, the forum does not and CAN not have porn on it.

They can, of course, post links to images.  If your browser decides to load an image from some other server, based on some text that someone put in a message, that is not the fault of the forum and the forum's server.

That hasn't stopped File Sharing passthrough companies from being shut down for simply facilitating the link...

[Paul Bonneau]

From what I've seen they've found their way around Captcha and other "bot proof" technologies by paying people a menial fee to manually post.

No, I think the bot software has gotten so good that it can read and decipher captchas. That is why captchas are getting harder and harder for humans to decipher. I hate the damn things.

I don't see how they get by the requirement for new users to receive a confirmation email. It must be a hole in the old software we are running.

I think the spam would be reduced considerably if new users had to be confirmed by a human admin before they could post.  On the other hand, that could add a fair workload for the admins.  Perhaps new users could be restricted (for posting) to a sub-forum just for the purpose of introducing themselves and asking for general posting privileges?  Of course, that sub-forum could fill up with the same spam...

We might give delete privileges to all users in that board only.

I also like the idea of requiring 5 response postings before being able to start a new thread. It's my impression the large majority of spams are new threads.

To do any of these things, or upgrading software which is the correct first step, requires an admin who is around. We don't have that. IIRC I once volunteered to take that over with the proviso I could get some help from Joseph as a backup when I couldn't figure things out, but that went nowhere.

[Vince]

Ok, as a rule I NEVER respond to these "leak thru" messages; our forum guys do a good job catching and vaporizing them.

Some of the text here is eye catching:

As potentate internet be worthwhile for problem instructors bring forth she or he stunning acquaintances influential let go 20 inhibition which you keister 30mph prepay factors, barring colleges substantially gathered spots.

or this:

They brawls you spinal column bikers disgust their hither be communicated driver's seat, profit what patent serve necessitates lapse your kulki gejszy instructors bared these accessible action. leadership range is go off at a tangent usually travel-ling tattle on their voice-over round slows anyway exploring.

I seem to remember someone on the net expounding on this type of creative textual dyslexia.  I am not saying that I'm happy to see it pop up on the forum (well, it IS better than kiddie p*rn) but it can at least briefly amuse.

Anyone remember the name they gave this type of jumble speak? 

[manfromnevada]

Vince asked:
Anyone remember the name they gave this type of jumble speak? 

Yes, it's called "Presidential campaign speech." 


Mac

[Vince]

Mac,

Kinda unfair to the spammers, don't you think? 

Neither one of the so called majors sounds half as good!

[manfromnevada]

My apologies to the synthesized text program!
1,000,000,000,000 monkeys on typewriters can produce much more meaningful thought than what comes out of either candidate's mouth.

Mac

[300dragonflies]

The techical term for that is "word hash."

You mean, when I've been reporting posts for being "word hash spam" nobody knew what I meant? 

[Boston]

I don't see how they get by the requirement for new users to receive a confirmation email. It must be a hole in the old software we are running.

My thoughts also, Paul, thanks.

Folks, we are working towards a new forum Adminmeister, software, etc.
Currently snagged on something, but that will break free pretty soon.
Thanks for everyone's forebearance!

Boston

[adambomb]

My apologies to the synthesized text program!
1,000,000,000,000 monkeys on typewriters can produce much more meaningful thought than what comes out of either candidate's mouth.

Mac

Sometimes it's amazing how willfully meaningless their speeches can be.  How so many words can convey absolutely nothing, yet people still consider them "great speakers."  Reminds me a lot of Atlas Shrugged at times.

[rhodges]

Sometimes it's amazing how willfully meaningless their speeches can be.  How so many words can convey absolutely nothing, yet people still consider them "great speakers." 

Most people do not notice the gaping potholes in the road. Their minds skip over the missing pieces and "fill in the blanks" from their own context, which is mostly what they expect or desire to hear. The speaker says nothing and the audience hears exactly what they hoped to hear. Each listener gets a speech custom provided by his or her subconscious. Putting facts in the speech would ruin that effect.

[manfromnevada]

Yup, just like "Hope and Change". It's what you want it to be!
And now, "Forward!"  Is that like "Forward over the abyss?"

Mac

[Terence]

Sometimes it's amazing how willfully meaningless their speeches can be.  How so many words can convey absolutely nothing, yet people still consider them "great speakers." 

Most people do not notice the gaping potholes in the road. Their minds skip over the missing pieces and "fill in the blanks" from their own context, which is mostly what they expect or desire to hear. The speaker says nothing and the audience hears exactly what they hoped to hear. Each listener gets a speech custom provided by his or her subconscious. Putting facts in the speech would ruin that effect.

Well said. People do this while talking with each other, too, sadly.

Terence