Spamblock needed

[blackbird71]

blackbird71 last edited by

Some observations regarding the most recent waves of spam:

1. Most, if not all, first-post spam timestamps occur within 1-2 minutes of that user's listed 'Join' time
2. Subsequent posts under both the same or different names used in a spam wave can occur in as little as 1-3 minutes apart
3. A typical spam micro-burst starts with a new name and contains ~1-5 consecutive posts following the first appearance of that name, then further spams often occur under different names; sometimes a particular name in the wave will be reused later, sporadically, after its initial appearance or burst
4. During a spam wave, changes in posting name typically appear most often after gaps of either 1-2, ~7 minutes, or much longer

A thought: if spammers are using dynamic IP's or VPN's to get around forum IP blocking when registering new names, perhaps the best approach would be to employ 2-factor authentication for future user registration, with the authentication factor being via phone, cell phone, or eMail address. This would certainly increase the 'cycle time' and the associated user effort in creating new user accounts for spamming, and would more importantly provide additional options for better filtering of repeat offenders.

[burnout426]

burnout426 Volunteer last edited by

employ 2-factor authentication for future user registration, with the authentication factor being via phone, cell phone, or eMail address

Yes. This should definitely be done. With sms/phone, you get a unique pin. With email, you get a unique registration link. Without one of those confirmations sent in, the account isn't fully activated and the user can't post. Lots of sites still do this. I've come to expect it.

Also, for tidiness purposes, if the confirmation doesn't happen within 24 hours for example, the account is deleted.

Also, for the English forums at least, we could limit the characters allowed in the subject of a thread, at least for the first N posts. A lot of spam posts contain Korean characters for example. Or, for threads with subjects like this, allow any user to tag the post as spam with 2 or 3 tags causing an auto-remove.

[leevi]

leevi last edited by

I was asking for SMS verification back in My Opera days, back then the forum spam wasn't anywhere this bad as it seems now (but then again spammers had My Opera Blogs to play with back then).

If the post editing to add spam links later confuses the spam block, just take the edit feature away.

[sgunhouse]

sgunhouse Moderator Volunteer last edited by

SMS doesn't work for PC/laptop only users. Nor would I tell them my phone info if I came here to ask a question about desktop Opera - I don't give out my info, I have a prepay plan and you're using my money when you text or call me. As long as they still accept email as well...

[leevi]

leevi last edited by

For SMS verification you don't need to send SMS, just give the site your phone number and they will send you a SMS with code and you enter the recieved verification code to website.

Costs for the site a bit, but dealing with excessive amounts of spam is not cheap either (even if you have non-paid moderators deal with most of it).

[burnout426]

burnout426 Volunteer last edited by admin

I've been playing with a Tampermonkey script to hide all those spam posts (the annoying ones at least) in the "Opera for Windows" section. I'm limiting threads in the list to subjects that only contain printable ascii and hiding the rest.

// ==UserScript==
// @name         Block Spam on Opera Forums
// @namespace    https://example.com/
// @version      0.1
// @description  try to take over the world!
// @author       You
// @match        https://forums.opera.com/category/11/opera-for-windows
// @grant        none
// ==/UserScript==

(function() {
    'use strict';
        var titles = document.querySelectorAll("tr.Item > td.Discussion > h3 > a.Title");
        for (var i = 0; i < titles.length; ++i) {
            var subject = titles[i].textContent;
            if (!(/^[\x20-\x7E]*$/.test(subject))) {
               // select ancestor tr.Item and hide it
                titles[i].parentNode.parentNode.parentNode.style.display = "none";
            }
        }
})();

In the case that the page is all spam posts, the thread table will be empty and you'd just go on to the next page.

A more advanced script could auto-flag those posts.

But, something like this could be done (for the English section) server-side to automatically put the new thread up for moderation.

[browzer1]

browzer1 last edited by

I posted (in the wrong forum) about this very thing and got a very snarky response from Leo.

[burnout426]

burnout426 Volunteer last edited by admin

// @match        https://forums.opera.com/category/11/opera-for-windows

Make that:

// @match        https://forums.opera.com/category/11/opera-for-windows*

[burnout426]

burnout426 Volunteer last edited by admin

Just to make it nicer, I switch the script to use forEach:

// ==UserScript==
// @name         Hide Spam Posts in 'Opera for Windows' Forum
// @namespace    burnout426
// @version      0.1
// @description  try to take over the world!
// @author       Michael A. Puls II
// @match        https://forums.opera.com/category/11/opera-for-windows*
// @grant        none
// ==/UserScript==

(function() {
    'use strict';
    document.querySelectorAll("tr.Item > td.Discussion > h3 > a.Title").forEach(function(title) {
        if (!(/^[\x20-\x7E]*$/.test(title.textContent))) {
            // Hide ancestor tr.Item
            title.parentNode.parentNode.parentNode.style.display = "none";
        }
    });
})();

Still been working really well at hiding all the spam posts.

[leocg]

leocg Moderator Volunteer last edited by

In my opinion, the forum should:

• Limit the number of joins in a day. At least from the same IP.
• Implement a 'first post needs approval' policy

[Deleted User]

Deleted User last edited by

@leocg:

+1.

your 2nd proposal would also reduce the number of vapid threads with pointless complaints from n00bs about opera's alleged shortcomings etc and thus improve the overall signal/noise ratio and quality of the forum.

[burnout426]

burnout426 Volunteer last edited by

Ok, so how to we get the ball rolling on implementing something? Who's handling the forum code these days? Would they consider the "first post needs approval" policy? If not, what are they willing to implement?

[blackbird71]

blackbird71 last edited by

Sigh! Given that there are roughly 4.7 quintillion character combinations in a 12-character user name, at 150 spams a day (which seems the spammer's current pace for a 'good' day) and averaging 2.5 spams per user-name before the name gets banned, it will take roughly at least 215 trillion years to exhaust all user-name character combinations by banning. Somehow, I have a feeling that the present mechanism of banning user-names for spam control isn't working --

[amatczak]

amatczak Opera last edited by

Hold tight - we're working on a solution :knight:

[blackbird71]

blackbird71 last edited by

Hold tight - we're working on a solution

Well, thus far it seems to be working. Or at least, it's working for the Asian spam that was so afflicting the forums.