October 13, 2015 at 1:57 am
Currently there are filters based on post numbers, with automatic approval for people over a certain number of posts. This is a bit more robust than just the age of the account, as spammers will often sign up to sites and leave an account dormant for a long time (possibly to sell on) before suddenly starting to post spam.
October 13, 2015 at 2:22 am
Dave Convery (10/13/2015)
Currently there are filters based on post numbers, with automatic approval for people over a certain number of posts. This is a bit more robust than just the age of the account, as spammers will often sign up to sites and leave an account dormant for a long time (possibly to sell on) before suddenly starting to post spam.
Just looking at the most recent occurrence:
User dixiecra
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/UserInfo1201325.aspx
Joined:Yesterday @ 5:17:50 PM (14 visits since)
Last Login:Today @ 2:14:51 AM
Total Points:8 point out of 1,698,930 total points. (% of total)
All 8 posts are new (i.e. no posts on existing threads, or I am not seeing any other such posts [might have been deleted already?] and they are not included in the "8 points" total) all are SPAM and posted at various times since registering.
Not sure how that tallies with "filters based on post numbers, with automatic approval for people over a certain number of posts" - perhaps there is something not quite tight enough in the filters?
It does seem to me that they favour "Data corruption" forum ... not sure what to infer from that though 😀
October 13, 2015 at 2:23 am
Dave Convery (10/13/2015)
Currently there are filters based on post numbers, with automatic approval for people over a certain number of posts. This is a bit more robust than just the age of the account, as spammers will often sign up to sites and leave an account dormant for a long time (possibly to sell on) before suddenly starting to post spam.
Does this mean that there should never be spam from new posters, because new posts need to be approved (and presumably if they are not, the account itself is disabled)?
If you haven't even tried to resolve your issue, please don't expect the hard-working volunteers here to waste their time providing links to answers which you could easily have found yourself.
October 13, 2015 at 2:25 am
P.S. Does anything happen if anyone FLAGs a post as SPAM? Looking at e.g. page 5 of "Data Corruption" forum there are lots showing (from a week or more ago)
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/Forum266-5.aspx
EDIT: Hmmm ... when I click on that link it doesn't seem to take me to Page 5 on the Data Corruption forum ...
EDIT2:Fixed it I think - I had quotes around the URL="MyLink" tag
October 13, 2015 at 2:26 am
Kristen-173977 (10/13/2015)
Dave Convery (10/13/2015)
Currently there are filters based on post numbers, with automatic approval for people over a certain number of posts. This is a bit more robust than just the age of the account, as spammers will often sign up to sites and leave an account dormant for a long time (possibly to sell on) before suddenly starting to post spam.Just looking at the most recent occurrence:
User dixiecra
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/Forums/UserInfo1201325.aspx
Joined:Yesterday @ 5:17:50 PM (14 visits since)
Last Login:Today @ 2:14:51 AM
Total Points:8 point out of 1,698,930 total points. (% of total)
All 8 posts are new (i.e. no posts on existing threads, or I am not seeing any other such posts [might have been deleted already?] and they are not included in the "8 points" total) all are SPAM and posted at various times since registering.
Not sure how that tallies with "filters based on post numbers, with automatic approval for people over a certain number of posts" - perhaps there is something not quite tight enough in the filters?
It does seem to me that they favour "Data corruption" forum ... not sure what to infer from that though 😀
This is exactly the point I was targeting.
If you haven't even tried to resolve your issue, please don't expect the hard-working volunteers here to waste their time providing links to answers which you could easily have found yourself.
October 13, 2015 at 2:31 am
It means that posters beyond the posts threshold don't get run through the spam filters at all - in other words, all new posters are run through the spam filters until they reach a certain number of approved posts. The spam filters work based on keywords and known patterns, which while not perfect, is stopping thousands of posts from ever getting onto the site.
October 13, 2015 at 2:48 am
When you flag a post it's reported to moderators and we generally ban that user. There seems to be something going wrong with the data corruption forum (sweet, sweet irony) as about 30% of the spam posts seem to getting through and the reports are not coming through to email. I've asked our engineers to take a look at it.
October 13, 2015 at 3:06 am
Dave Convery (10/13/2015)
When you flag a post it's reported to moderators and we generally ban that user. There seems to be something going wrong with the data corruption forum (sweet, sweet irony) as about 30% of the spam posts seem to getting through and the reports are not coming through to email. I've asked our engineers to take a look at it.
That sounds like good news (in the sense that there appears to be something fixable 🙂 )
October 14, 2015 at 1:55 am
Lowell (10/5/2015)
they added code that insta-deletes anything Celko posts(thank you for that!)
So that's why I received an email saying:
A new reply has been added by CELKO to a topic you're subscribed to.
But when I clicked the link, I was greeted by:
An error occurred whilst attempting to view the requested topic. It could be this topic has been removed or you don't have the correct permissions access the topic.
If Celko's posts is automatically deleted, why not ban his account instead? Just asking.
October 14, 2015 at 2:13 am
Felix Pamittan (10/14/2015)
Lowell (10/5/2015)
they added code that insta-deletes anything Celko posts(thank you for that!)So that's why I received an email saying:
A new reply has been added by CELKO to a topic you're subscribed to.
But when I clicked the link, I was greeted by:
An error occurred whilst attempting to view the requested topic. It could be this topic has been removed or you don't have the correct permissions access the topic.
If Celko's posts is automatically deleted, why not ban his account instead? Just asking.
Because it's more fun for others to see evidence that the posts have been expunged? 🙂
If you haven't even tried to resolve your issue, please don't expect the hard-working volunteers here to waste their time providing links to answers which you could easily have found yourself.
October 14, 2015 at 2:50 am
And now I just got this warning in Gmail, for a "SQLServerCentral.com - New Topic " e-mail:
This message could be a scam. The sender's account may have been compromised and used to send malicious messages. If this message seems suspicious, let us know and then alert the sender as well (in some way other than email). Learn more
Report this suspicious message Ignore, I trust this message
If you haven't even tried to resolve your issue, please don't expect the hard-working volunteers here to waste their time providing links to answers which you could easily have found yourself.
October 14, 2015 at 2:54 am
We're in the middle of switching our email backend, and trying convince a new provider that the 800k or so emails a day we send are legit is proving tricky. Hopefully this should disappear in the next day or two, but we're working on it.
October 21, 2015 at 12:29 am
Dave Convery (10/13/2015)
Currently there are filters based on post numbers, with automatic approval for people over a certain number of posts. This is a bit more robust than just the age of the account, as spammers will often sign up to sites and leave an account dormant for a long time (possibly to sell on) before suddenly starting to post spam.
Another large batch of spam overnight.
Have you considered creating a limit on the number of new threads which can be created in a certain period – maybe 24 hours – by any user? No need to filter out anyone for this. I'm sure that established users would be happy to be capped at, say, five new threads per 24 hours.
If you haven't even tried to resolve your issue, please don't expect the hard-working volunteers here to waste their time providing links to answers which you could easily have found yourself.
October 21, 2015 at 2:37 am
Yes - unfortunately the current forum software seems powerfully resistant to that idea.
February 6, 2016 at 12:52 am
It may be my imagination but are spam links showing up in the active threads list but not on the actual forums? If so then it looks like nearly a solution!!!
Correction:
It seems as though, those with no content are not showing up on forum boards, could removing content be a possible solution??
I hate spam!!........
Correction II
Unless it is on bread!
...
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 39 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply