Live data from Hacker News

Nearly 90% of our AI crawler traffic is from ByteDance

haproxy.com

11–20 of 45 posts

Re: Nearly 90% of our AI crawler traffic is from ByteDance

#11
post #5

How do you differentiate between "ai" (whatever that means) and other crawlers?

You don't. Theoretically, they would respect the user agent, but who can trust that anymore?

And it is a fine pickle we jarred ourselves into. We thought it would be sweet but it just came out dill.

Re: Nearly 90% of our AI crawler traffic is from ByteDance

#12
post #7
post #3

tl;dr the crawlers do not respect robots.txt or the user agent anymore, but you can drop big bucks on the enterprise HA offering to stop them through other means.

Should we webmasters just start blocking user agents wholesale? I mean except known good actors. I guess known actors would need a verifiable signature

Search engine crawlers do have verifiable signatures, if a client claims to be Googlebot or Bingbot you don't have to take their word for it.

https://developers.google.com/search/docs/crawling-indexing/...

https://www.bing.com/webmasters/help/how-to-verify-bingbot-3...

Re: Nearly 90% of our AI crawler traffic is from ByteDance

#13
post #8
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't. Theoretically, they would respect the user agent, but who can trust that anymore?

More than user-agent, because user-agent cannot be trusted.

Great! Well then... how?

Re: Nearly 90% of our AI crawler traffic is from ByteDance

#14
post #7
post #3

tl;dr the crawlers do not respect robots.txt or the user agent anymore, but you can drop big bucks on the enterprise HA offering to stop them through other means.

Should we webmasters just start blocking user agents wholesale? I mean except known good actors. I guess known actors would need a verifiable signature

Greedy crawlers will use fake user-agent strings.

Re: Nearly 90% of our AI crawler traffic is from ByteDance

#16
Cloudflare radar, which presumably a much bigger and better sample, reports Bytespider as the #5 AI Crawler behind FB, Amazon, GPTBot, and Google: https://radar.cloudflare.com/explorer?dataSet=ai.bots And that's not including the most of highest volume spiders overall like Googlebot, Bingbot, Yandex, Ahrefs, etc.

Not to say it isn't an issue, but that Forture article they reference is pretty alarmist and thin on detail.

Re: Nearly 90% of our AI crawler traffic is from ByteDance

#17
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their user-agent.

Ah, so this is just marketing.

(disclaimer: i wrote that post)

It is not. We rely on more than User Agents because they are too often faked, so it is not just marketing. There are other signals we see that confirm whether the request came from a "legitimate" AI scraper, or a different scraper with the same user agent.

Re: Nearly 90% of our AI crawler traffic is from ByteDance

#19
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, so this is just marketing.

(disclaimer: i wrote that post) It is not. We rely on more than User Agents because they are too often faked, so it is not just marketing. There are other signals we see that confirm whether the request came from a "legitimate" AI scraper, or a different scraper with the same user agent.

> There are other signals we see that confirm whether the request came from a "legitimate" AI scraper, or a different scraper with the same user agent.

Great! What are these signals? That seems to be the meat of the post but it's conspicuously absent. How are we supposed to validate the post?

Re: Nearly 90% of our AI crawler traffic is from ByteDance

#20
post #7
post #3

tl;dr the crawlers do not respect robots.txt or the user agent anymore, but you can drop big bucks on the enterprise HA offering to stop them through other means.

Should we webmasters just start blocking user agents wholesale? I mean except known good actors. I guess known actors would need a verifiable signature

Not viable. They are going to use user agents that look like those coming from completely normal human users.

"Verifiable signature"? That's a dangerous road to go down, and Google actually wanted to do it (Web Integrity API). Nobody supported them and they backed out.

Post reply on HN