[geeklog-devel] Home-made problems with forum spam

Tom Willett tomw at pigstye.net
Fri Feb 11 14:06:34 EST 2005

On 2/11/2005 1:49 PM, Dirk Haun wrote:

>>It seems to me by the time you get here you have already done most of 
>>the processing (when lib-common is included), about all you would save 
>>is the template processing and a small portion of the bandwidth.
>The code I was quoting was the one that processes a post, e.g. in the
>forum plugin. Currently, we then send a redirect to index.php, which the
>spammer's scripts now seem to follow. So rendering index.php causes extra
>load - it's an entirely separate HTTP request.
>I was proposing that instead of the redirect we abort the script right
>when we recognized the post as being spam and output a short message
>instead there and then.
>bye, Dirk
Ok I thought you were going back through the whole process again.  If 
you just aborted it when spam was detected that might help with the load 
a bit.

I had someone trying to download for offline use a site I have with 
almost 2000 stories.  The person was very impolite and was asking for a 
story a second ate up all my bandwidth and brought the site to its 
knees.  I put them in the geeklog ban (which just stops processing when 
it hits a ban an exits) but it didn't help because even though it didn't 
get anything he kept on coming and the server load stayed about the 
same.  I finally instituted an apache rewrite ban that freed up my 
bandwidth and server resources. For that reason I am skeptical of any 
technique that causes geeklog to be loaded even though it doesn't return 


Tom Willett
tomw at pigstye.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist8.pair.net/pipermail/geeklog-devel/attachments/20050211/e1296889/attachment.html>

More information about the geeklog-devel mailing list