Codeberg/Community
54
325
Fork
You've already forked Community
12

Spam account #1293

Closed
opened 2023年09月18日 02:47:20 +02:00 by jessienab · 17 comments

Hi there, there seems to be a spam account here:
https://codeberg.org/arwana388slotgacor

Spam post that I noticed was here:
teddit/teddit#400 (comment)

Hopefully this is an acceptable place to report this, possibly faster than emailing.
Thank you!

Hi there, there seems to be a spam account here: https://codeberg.org/arwana388slotgacor Spam post that I noticed was here: https://codeberg.org/teddit/teddit/issues/400#issuecomment-1159040 Hopefully this is an acceptable place to report this, possibly faster than emailing. Thank you!

I have emailed two spams to Codeberg Abuse. But I haven't received any replies so I will also copy paste here.

Spammer on Codeberg/Community #696 issue

Me: #696 (comment)
Me: The repo still isn’t removed yet. https://codeberg.org/elguet/first/issues
Codeberg Moderation: The user was simply re-recreated after it was deleted.
Me: The user was simply re-recreated after it was deleted.
Me: The persistent spammer has just recreated the account again today! We should do something else to remove the spammer for real!
Me: Maybe ban that IP and that username for a while.
Me: No actions have been done yet. And elguet is still hosting ever-increasing trash vile issues.

Another issue tracker flooded with spam issues

Me: https://codeberg.org/neuhalje/bouncy-gpg/issues
Me: If you are interested, I found this issue tracker from a forum spammer that appeared in "codeberg spam" search query. https://kythuatphancung[dot]vn/forum/index[dot]php?/topic/56919-what-are-the-benefits-of-buying-bitsoft360-ai/
Me: However, DON'T delete the repo owner's account. From my check, this is a legit account.

I have emailed two spams to Codeberg Abuse. But I haven't received any replies so I will also copy paste here. ## Spammer on Codeberg/Community #696 issue _Me:_ https://codeberg.org/Codeberg/Community/issues/696#issuecomment-1117078 _Me:_ The repo still isn’t removed yet. https://codeberg.org/elguet/first/issues _Codeberg Moderation:_ The user was simply re-recreated after it was deleted. _Me:_ The user was simply re-recreated after it was deleted. _Me:_ The persistent spammer has just recreated the account again today! We should do something else to remove the spammer for real! _Me:_ Maybe ban that IP and that username for a while. _Me:_ No actions have been done yet. And `elguet` is still hosting ever-increasing trash vile issues. ## Another issue tracker flooded with spam issues _Me:_ https://codeberg.org/neuhalje/bouncy-gpg/issues _Me:_ If you are interested, I found this issue tracker from a forum spammer that appeared in "codeberg spam" search query. `https://kythuatphancung[dot]vn/forum/index[dot]php?/topic/56919-what-are-the-benefits-of-buying-bitsoft360-ai/` _Me:_ However, DON'T delete the repo owner's account. From my check, this is a legit account.

When in doubt, tag @moderation. (Moderation team, please take a look at the original post <3)

https://codeberg.org/neuhalje/bouncy-gpg/issues

This case is known - the bot(s) presumably went to the oldest repository with open issues and started spamming the tracker.

When in doubt, tag @moderation. (Moderation team, please take a look at the original post <3) > https://codeberg.org/neuhalje/bouncy-gpg/issues This case is known - the bot(s) presumably went to the oldest repository with open issues and started spamming the tracker.
Owner
Copy link

There is currently no way to prevent recreation of spam accounts. We are handling all reports sent to the inbox, but we do not actively participate in discussions there - there is no time to discuss our workflows or speculate about the source of spam with everyone individually. This is where issue trackers are made for.

The bouncy-gpg repo is continously filled with spam. You can see that there are currently 500 open issues, and the issue index is at 11896. So we already removed more than 10k issues in this repo.

There is currently no way to prevent recreation of spam accounts. We are handling all reports sent to the inbox, but we do not actively participate in discussions there - there is no time to discuss our workflows or speculate about the source of spam with everyone individually. This is where issue trackers are made for. The bouncy-gpg repo is continously filled with spam. You can see that there are currently 500 open issues, and the issue index is at 11896. So we already removed more than 10k issues in this repo.

There is currently no way to prevent recreation of spam accounts.

I thought we can ban IPs and usernames temporarily like Wikipedia?

> There is currently no way to prevent recreation of spam accounts. I thought we can ban IPs and usernames temporarily like Wikipedia?

The bouncy-gpg repo is continously filled with spam. You can see that there are currently 500 open issues, and the issue index is at 11896. So we already removed more than 10k issues in this repo.

Since the repo is inactive for years, maybe just disable creating issues on that repo?

> The bouncy-gpg repo is continously filled with spam. You can see that there are currently 500 open issues, and the issue index is at 11896. So we already removed more than 10k issues in this repo. Since the repo is inactive for years, maybe just disable creating issues on that repo?

Let's change "sing_up" to "sing_down"! :D

Let's change "sing_up" to "sing_down"! :D
Owner
Copy link

I thought we can ban IPs and usernames temporarily like Wikipedia?

The software has no built-in support. we need to manually grep them from the access logs, then go to the reverse proxy, add a banlist there, and reload. We do it for mass-actions like scaping / crawling when we cannot identify the source and consider the speed to be rude, but these spam bots do way too few requests to be visible by the traffic alone.

> I thought we can ban IPs and usernames temporarily like Wikipedia? The software has no built-in support. we need to manually grep them from the access logs, then go to the reverse proxy, add a banlist there, and reload. We do it for mass-actions like scaping / crawling when we cannot identify the source and consider the speed to be rude, but these spam bots do way too few requests to be visible by the traffic alone.

@fnetX I think this is what you need. Implement it server-wide and just focus on what matters to you/CB/whoever.

@fnetX I think [this](https://www.crowdsec.net/) is what you need. Implement it server-wide and just focus on what matters to you/CB/whoever.

I think that the scope of this issue is getting way too broad - I have issued an update to our instructions to better explain how reports should be dealt with and the implementation-specific recommendations would better work in repositories like Codeberg/Contributing instead.

The general problem has been acknowledged, the overall problem is a big deal for us and the OP's concerns have been dealt with. Closing.

I think that the scope of this issue is getting way too broad - I have issued an update to our instructions to better explain how reports should be dealt with and the implementation-specific recommendations would better work in repositories like `Codeberg/Contributing` instead. The general problem has been acknowledged, the overall problem is a big deal for us and the OP's concerns have been dealt with. Closing.

I think that the scope of this issue is getting way too broad

I think the scope is to remove these two spammers permanently:

  1. https://codeberg.org/neuhalje/bouncy-gpg/issues
  2. https://codeberg.org/elguet/first/issues
> I think that the scope of this issue is getting way too broad I think the scope is to remove these two spammers _permanently_: 1. https://codeberg.org/neuhalje/bouncy-gpg/issues 2. https://codeberg.org/elguet/first/issues

I deleted both (EDIT: all) of them including all their issues and comments

I deleted both (EDIT: all) of them including all their issues and comments

To prevent eulget from coming back, I had taken their username! >:)
After 1 year, they hopefully will give up getting back the username, then I will delete the account.

To prevent eulget from coming back, I had taken their username! >:) After 1 year, they hopefully will give up getting back the username, then I will delete the account.
Member
Copy link

I very much doubt that they particularly care about the username. If your only goal is to post SEO spam, which username you get is completely irrelevant.

I very much doubt that they particularly care about the username. If your only goal is to post SEO spam, which username you get is completely irrelevant.

@crystal But will it make their lives a bit more dificult as they can’t copy-paste the same username again? Many old spam links they have posted will break.

@crystal But will it make their lives a bit more dificult as they can’t copy-paste the same username again? Many old spam links they have posted will break.
Member
Copy link

It really won't. I'm not sure about that specific account, but most of the links that are being posted point to some external site. In most cases, any username will do for spam, so they can just mash the keyboard and be back in business in no time at all.

EDIT: Even if the links they're posting lead back to their own profile, they can easily use any text editor's find and replace function to swap it out in the bodies of text that they're pasting. My point is, it is completely trivial to workaround.

It really won't. I'm not sure about that specific account, but most of the links that are being posted point to some external site. In most cases, any username will do for spam, so they can just mash the keyboard and be back in business in no time at all. EDIT: Even if the links they're posting lead back to their own profile, they can easily use any text editor's find and replace function to swap it out in the bodies of text that they're pasting. My point is, it is completely trivial to workaround.

they?

@crystal you sure these are 2 different people? Are they real people even? Cannot be that there are (were) bots and - once banned here - will appear elsewhere?

Whoever/whatever it was, I highly recommend using software I posted link to in my prev post. Ive been using it on all my servers (both VPS and physical) for well over 5 years and I have not seen single spamming person/bot. Seriously.

> they? @crystal you sure these are 2 different people? Are they real people even? Cannot be that there are (were) bots and - once banned here - will appear elsewhere? Whoever/whatever it was, I highly recommend using software I posted link to in my prev post. Ive been using it on all my servers (both VPS and physical) for well over 5 years and I have not seen single spamming person/bot. Seriously.
Member
Copy link

you sure these are 2 different people? Are they real people even? Cannot be that there are (were) bots and - once banned here - will appear elsewhere?

????????? I never made any such implication. I suspect that this work is being distributed among a number of human click workers, but that is entirely irrelevant. "They" is, in fact, not exclusively a group pronoun. It can also refer to a single person of indeterminate gender, which was how I was using it in that context.

P.S. They're seriously not bots. Human labor is very inexpensive in some parts of the world and every indication points to this spam coming from humans using human web browsers. See #1297

Additionally, I think blocking a massive swath of IP addresses/ranges is something Codeberg wants to avoid doing.

> you sure these are 2 different people? Are they real people even? Cannot be that there are (were) bots and - once banned here - will appear elsewhere? ????????? I never made any such implication. I suspect that this work is being distributed among a number of human click workers, but that is entirely irrelevant. "They" is, in fact, not exclusively a group pronoun. It can also refer to a single person of indeterminate gender, which was how I was using it in that context. P.S. They're seriously not bots. Human labor is very inexpensive in some parts of the world and every indication points to this spam coming from humans using human web browsers. See #1297 Additionally, I think blocking a massive swath of IP addresses/ranges is something Codeberg wants to avoid doing.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
main
No results found.
Labels
Clear labels
accessibility

Reduces accessibility and is thus a "bug" for certain user groups on Codeberg.
bug

Something is not working the way it should. Does not concern outages.
bug
infrastructure

Errors evidently caused by infrastructure malfunctions or outages
Codeberg

This issue involves Codeberg's downstream modifications and settings and/or Codeberg's structures.
contributions welcome

Please join the discussion and consider contributing a PR!
docs

No bug, but an improvement to the docs or UI description will help
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists
enhancement

New feature
infrastructure

Involves changes to the server setups, use `bug/infrastructure` for infrastructure-related user errors.
legal

An issue directly involving legal compliance
licence / ToS

involving questions about the ToS, especially licencing compliance
please chill
we are volunteers

Please consider editing your posts and remember that there is a human on the other side. We get that you are frustrated, but it's harder for us to help you this way.
public relations

Things related to Codeberg's external communication
question

More information is needed
question
user support

This issue contains a clearly stated problem. However, it is not clear whether we have to fix anything on Codeberg's end, but we're helping them fix it and/or find the cause.
s/Forgejo

Related to Forgejo. Please also check Forgejo's issue tracker.
s/Forgejo/migration

Migration related issues in Forgejo
s/Pages

Issues related to the Codeberg Pages feature
s/Weblate

Issue is related to the Weblate instance at https://translate.codeberg.org
s/Woodpecker

Woodpecker CI related issue
security

involves improvements to the sites security
service

Add a new service to the Codeberg ecosystem (instead of implementing into Gitea)
upstream

An open issue or pull request to an upstream repository to fix this issue (partially or completely) exists (i.e. Gitea, Forgejo, etc.)
wontfix

Codeberg's current set of contributors are not planning to spend time on delegating this issue.
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
7 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
Codeberg/Community#1293
Reference in a new issue
Codeberg/Community
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?