Fresh Spam Accounts

[Canoe]

Surely there's a way for the forum to automatically identify new accounts and when their posts contain certain key words (supplement, etc.) anywhere in the post, then the forum quarantines those posts and freezes the account.
Yes, no?

I remember when the first "50,000 eplaya member" posted thanking for that distinction, then made a spam post for toys...

[TT120]

This is the only forum I've ever seen those kinds of spam posts on. I'm not even sure what their goal is most of the time. Some are obvious what they want but others are just gibberish.

[AntiM]

It's better than the spambot attacks from years ago.

I'm just a mod, so I don't know if it could be done automatically. I do know we don't have the must authorize new post/users turned on because in the busy season people who want to buy tickets or Post Right This Minute don't want to wait for approval. We may have a mod team, but we do not work 24/7. Having us in different time zones is about as good as it gets.

As for "keywords" have you read eplaya? Seriously?

edit: I am all for a solution and changes, but I haven't a clue how that might be effectively implemented.

[Canoe]

Sure keywords. As mods encounter spam they can add to the keyword list as they feel appropriate, including linking sites that hide the actual link.

No way to have a comprehensive list that blocks all spam, but with the main offending keywords, the worst side effect would to occasionally block new users until a mod was on.

[Traveller in Time]

Even in "the busy season" new accounts should not have to use external websites in their first posting.

[Canoe]

Even in "the busy season" new accounts should not have to use external websites in their first posting.

But possibly.
As a start, just restrict the re-linking sites that hide the actual target site.
And threads that put a link in the subject.

[The Rod]

others are just gibberish.

the latest for Testo-Drive male enhancement had me laughing out loud

[Traveller in Time]

Is there a way to get the Robots not to collect first day postings ?

[Sham]

My guess is that these accounts are set up by individuals who make just pennies for each post. I wonder if there could be an email confirmation required before the first post is allowed. Spam posts have their email address banned as well, so it would require a new email account to be set up for each spam account.

Also, THANK YOU to those of you who flag spam or questionable posts. As AntiM said, we are in different time zones, so that helps to swat them, but flagging them makes finding them much easier.

[gaminwench]

I AM A WARRIOR!!!

[AntiM]

others are just gibberish.

the latest for Testo-Drive male enhancement had me laughing out loud

Now and then the spam becomes pure word salad poetry. If I am in the mood, I copy and it ends up on FB. I had a good one the other day, but deleted before saving the You think I was Born yesterday? There is no Easter Bunny! one. It went on about dreams. A gem.

[Sham]

I can take these cheesy diet supplement posts that are showing up, but several years back there was pure underage porn showing up. That was really worrisome.

[some seeing eye]

I have heard that there are phpBB plug-ins to target spam. Beyond that, there would be machine learning tools. Especially easy, because the spammers are simplistic. It would relieve mod time.

[BBadger]

Even maybe just a simple question at the end of the sign-up screen that they have to answer, like "name one of the principles," would probably eliminate a huge percentage of them (unless this is already being done; it's been a long time since I signed up). Might even eliminate some potential "low effort" members too.

[Ratty]

BBadger, If you screen the applicants there would be nothing here. Some days, the spam is the only contributor.

[Traveller in Time]

. . . . Some days . . .

Some WestCoast late night hours the spam is the only contribution.

At least two or three messages each day .

[Ratty]

Yes, from 10 pm till 12:30 am you and I will zap them.

[BBadger]

BBadger, If you screen the applicants there would be nothing here. Some days, the spam is the only contributor.

[MrHedgehog]

I have heard that there are phpBB plug-ins to target spam. Beyond that, there would be machine learning tools. Especially easy, because the spammers are simplistic. It would relieve mod time.

Even maybe just a simple question at the end of the sign-up screen that they have to answer, like "name one of the principles," would probably eliminate a huge percentage of them (unless this is already being done; it's been a long time since I signed up). Might even eliminate some potential "low effort" members too.

Having just played another game of whack-a-mole a.k.a reporting yet more spam posts, I've got to say that this is the only online community that I am part of that seems to suffer from this level of regular and unchecked spam posts.

There are definitely solutions that are available to reduce the problem, if the Admins and Moderators wish to use any of them.

Here are some threads that a quick search came up with ...

Preventing Spam in phpBB3
Control Spam post and accounts
Is there a good spam ext that is good
Anti-Spam by CleanTalk (Spam protection without CAPTCHA)


From my perspective, I worry that the constant onslaught of spam posts makes this forum appear dangerous to potential new members.

[gaminwench]

*raises hand*

I'll take the late night, post-Ratty shift from the West Coast; I'm a night owl.

I could also arrange a day shift.

Happy to whack spam, and also to 'screen' (calm down, y'all) new posters (tix, whatever) and, perhaps, throw in a wee bit of acclimation.

[Canoe]

There's an idea.
Many of the weekly/daily regulars could sign up to be "Mini-mods": only the power to quarantine (spam) posts.

Mini-mods would be instructed to quarantine only spam or offensive disallowed/porn type threads/posts.

Quarantine power means many can be Mini-mods, with true Mods reviewing the flagged and Quarantined posts for deletion, where Mods can restore/release an incorrectly quarantined thread/post. This handles errors and a Mini-mod that goes rogue.

This gets the spam out of sight quicker. May discourage it?

Yes?
No?

[TT120]

On my forum, I require a new user have 3 posts before allowing them to have a hyperlink in their post. It has eliminated spam and has not discouraged any new users from joining.

[Canoe]

> three posts
A minimum number of posts, and those first posts not within 48 hours?
And, No Links As Thread Subject...

Simple start: no "http" in subject.
Then mods can add "text" to a subject filter?

.
Our first 50,000 eplaya member posted an ad, got deleted.
So did the second 50,000 eplaya member.

second 50K eplian posted ad -core.png

Third 50,000 eplaya member was good.

[JohnEBGud]

The only foolproof way of eliminating spam from the open internet is through filtering by a moderator. There are, as noted, many automated solutions, such as services like askismet that examine post content, services that maintain blacklists of spammer email addresses to prevent them from registering, tricks such as timing how long the registration process takes and rejecting those where the form is completed faster than any human can, and of course, email verification, puzzles, and captchas.

These can have a very real impact on bots, but increasingly, cheap labor is employed to foil these methods. There's simply no way to distinguish a human spammer from a human non-spammer until the spam is posted. Things like prohibiting links until a certain number of posts have been made are easily circumvented.

On a forum I operate, in addition to the methods mentioned above, new registrants are moderated for an indefinite period of time and spam making its way to the open forum is a rare occurrence.

[Skuzzy61]

In the open forums I moderate, I have had one spam post in the last ten years. There are over 5 million posts in those forums.

It can be done.

[Popeye]

In the open forums I moderate, I have had one spam post in the last ten years. There are over 5 million posts in those forums.

It can be done.

I'd worry that, at that level of filtering, a large percentage of good posts would be excluded. AI isn't that accurate.

[Skuzzy61]

In the open forums I moderate, I have had one spam post in the last ten years. There are over 5 million posts in those forums.

It can be done.

I'd worry that, at that level of filtering, a large percentage of good posts would be excluded. AI isn't that accurate.

I do not employ any type of AI, per se. Spammers have patterns, especially the bots.

Start at the front end.

I have two forms of human verification. One is the pattern image. Requires a check mark identifying what is in the image. It can be circumvented by a very good bot, but catches a lot of the bulk bots.

Second level is answering two questions. The answers are in a paragraph. Bots have yet to get passed this one.

Last requires admin approval of the account. Check the email address. Most spammers will tell you they are spammers in the email address ([email protected]), or look for emails from one country being posted from another. Simple examples.

If they pass muster, then they are approved, but require email verification where they have to click the a link in the email. This will catch the rest.

Out of the thousands of attempts to register, I usually only have to manually deal with 10 or 20 a day. I have never gotten an email from any human that could not get registered.