441–450 of 516 posts
We block China and Russia. DDOS attacks and other hack attempts went down by 95%. We have no chinese users/customers so in theory this does not effect business at all. Also russia is sanctioned and our russian userbase does not actually live in russia, so blocking russia did not effect users at all.
Which will ensure you never get customers from those countries. And so the circle closes ...
Yes, I've seen this one in our logs. Quite obnoxious, but at least it identifies itself as a bot and, at least in our case (cgit host), does not generate much traffic. The bulk of our traffic comes from bots that pretend to be real browsers and that use a large number of IP addresses (mostly from Brazil and Asia in our case). I've been playing cat and mouse trying to block them for the past week and here are a couple…
Pick an obscure UA substring like MSIE 3.0 or HP-UX. Preemptively 403 these User Agents, (you'll create your own list). Later in the week you can circle back and distill these 403s down to problematic ASNs. Whack moles as necessary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Visiting the website" is the method. It's nonsense to say that visiting from a different location is a different method. I don't care if you won those disputes, you did a bad thing and screwed over your customers.
> Visiting the website" is the method. It's nonsense to say that visiting from a different location is a different method. This is a naive view of the internet that does not stand the test of legislative reality. It's perfectly reasonable (and in our case was only path to compliance) to limit access to certain geographic locations. > I don't care if you won those disputes, you did a bad thing and screwed over your cu…
Are you saying they tried a chargeback just because they were annoyed at being unable to reach your website? Something doesn't add up here, or am I giving those customers too much credit?
Were you selling them an ongoing website-based service? Then the fair thing would usually be a prorated refund when they change country. A chargeback is bad but keeping all their money while only doing half your job is also bad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Ignore the trolls. Also, if they are upset with you they should focus their vitriol on me. I block nearly all of BRICS especially Brazil as most are hard wired to not follow even the simplest of rules , most data-centers, some VPN's based on MSS, posting from cell phones and much more. I am always happy to give people the satisfaction of down-voting me since I use uBlock to hide karma. In ublock -> my filters # HN Bl…
Thank you. :)
I've been working on a web crawler and have been trying to make it as friendly as possible. Strictly checking robots.txt, crawling slowly, clear identification in the User Agent string, single IP source address. But I've noticed some anti-bot tricks getting applied to the robot.txt file itself. The latest was a slow loris approach where it takes forever for robots.txt to download. I accidentally treated this as a 404…
I doubt that’s on purpose. The bad guys that don’t follow robots don’t bother downloading it. Never assume malice what can be attributed to incompetence.
I would never have considered this, but someone on HN pointed out that web user agents work like this. Servers send ads and there is no way for them to enforce that browsers render the ads and hide the content or whatever. The user agent is supposed to act for the user. "Your business model is not my problem", etc. Well, my user agents work for me, not for you - the server guy who is complaining about this and that.…
The problem is that there is no way to "block me if you don't want me". That's the entire issue. The methods these scrapers use mean it's nigh on impossible to block them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My own shitty personal website that is so uninteresting that I do not even wish to disclose here. Hence my lack of understanding of the down-votes for me doing what works for my OWN shitty website, well, server. In fact, I bet it would choke on a small amount of traffic from here considering it has a shitty vCPU with 512 MB RAM.
Personal sites are definitely interesting, way more interesting than most of the rest of the web. I was thinking I would put your site into archive.org, using ArchiveBot, with reasonable crawl delay, so that it is preserved if your hardware dies. Ask on the ArchiveTeam IRC if you want that to happen. https://chat.hackint.org/?join=%23archiveteam-bs
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It really isn’t. What do the lists do? They allow or deny access, right? Seems allow/deny are fitting descriptive terms for them then. White/black are much more ambiguous prefix terms and and also come with much more semantic baggage. All in all an easy, clarifying change.
> What do the lists do? They allow or deny access, right? In part. A whitelisted party is always allowed access. If you are whitelisted to enter my home, you always have access. This is different from conditionally having access, or having access for a pre-set period of time. Same for a blacklist. An IP on a blacklist clearly communicates that it should not be casually overridden in a way a ‘deny-access list’ does no…
Irrelevant since the terms allowlist/denylist do not presuppose conditionallity or pre-set time limits.
> If someone says to add an IP address to an allow access list, that’s longer
Allowlist/denylist (9 + 8 chars) is shorter than whitelist/blacklist (9 + 9 chars).
> Inventing a personal language
Sounds like you think the proposal was to invent a whole new language (or one per person)? I would be against that too. But it is really only about updating a technical industry term pair to a more descriptive and less semantically loaded pair. Win-win.
> we aren’t going to solve racism by literally removing black and white from our language.
Changing to allowlist/denylist would not remove the terms black/white from language. There is good reason for making the change that do not involve any claim that doing so would solve racism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I'll have the black pudding. My cat has a black tail. The top of my desk is black. I have several pairs of black shoes. Every single computer in my possession has a black case. My phone and its case are both black. Black Power![0][1][2] I will put you on my personal blacklist. Which I'm sure you won't mind since I'm a huge bigot, right? [0] https://www.britannica.com/topic/Black-Power-Movement [1] https://en.wikipedi…
I've switched to using allowlist/denylist in computer contexts because more descriptive and less semantically loaded or contested. Easy win-win.
Using 'black' to refer to the color of objects is fine by me.
'Black power!' as a political slogan self-chosen by groups identifying as black is fine too, in contexts where it is used as a tool in work against existing inequalities (various caveats could be added).
As for 'white/black' as terms for entities that are colorless but inherently valenced (e.g. the items designated white are positive and the items designated black are negative, such as risks or costs), I support switching to other terms when not very costly and when newer terms are descriptive and clear. Such as switching to allowlist/denylist in the context of computers.
As for import, I don't think it is a super important change and I don't think the change would make a huge difference in terms of reducing existing racially disproportional negative outcomes in opportunity, wealth, wellbeing and health. It is only a small terminology change that there's some good reason to accept and no good reason to oppose, so I'm on board.