From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-05 14:18:46
"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
> On Sat, 05 Mar 2005 09:09:44 -0500, David Abrahams wrote
>> I don't see any reason our Wiki should be so vulnerable, and before
>> we make it official I would insist that we fix that. The Boost list
>> never gets spammed, and moderators don't even seem to have to reject
>> any spammers. All we need to do is use the same approval and
>> posting process for the Wiki. Is something wrong with that?
> Well it's generally against the philosophy of Wiki's to require a login to
> modify pages. It prevents the casual user from making minor updates as they
> read a page, etc. Even Wikipedia, which is one of the top 100 sites on the web
> and a huge spam target doesn't require a login to edit.
> Since I'm the one that gets to deal with a large part of the spam, I'm already
> looking at better ways to protect the Wiki from Spam. The current process
> involves waiting for someone to spam the wiki, reverting it, and banning the
> address that submitted the content. This is bad because of the time it
> requires and some legitmate users can get blocked (that's come up a couple
> times now after I got tired and started blocking out whole domains that have
> repeatedly spammed).
> Other Wiki's are now using content filters to prevent spam from ever being
> committed. At the core of the spamming is a desire to get links into google.
> So the filters essentially evaluate the content of the submitted pages
> looking for off-wiki links and certain words associated with common spamming.
> I'm working on implementing such a filter for our Wiki now. I'm actually
> hoping to have this in place this weekend.
Cool! Spambayes is a great adaptable spam filter; I'm using it with
great success for my email. FWIW.
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk