Is our SimSIg website getting hacked?

How difficult is it for SimSig to filter this out or are we expected now to just put up with this sort of action?

" said:

How difficult is it for SimSig to filter this out or are we expected now to just put up with this sort of action?

With spammers its fairly difficult, becuase how do you define a test to differentiate them? for instance we have forum members named y10g9 and Aurora, neither of which have any railway bearing and are seemingly random usernames. you can't tell how genuine they are until they make a post on here. so the mods cant "filter" new members as such.

" said:

" said:

How difficult is it for SimSig to filter this out or are we expected now to just put up with this sort of action?

With spammers its fairly difficult, becuase how do you define a test to differentiate them? for instance we have forum members named y10g9 and Aurora, neither of which have any railway bearing and are seemingly random usernames. you can't tell how genuine they are until they make a post on here. so the mods cant "filter" new members as such.

Could we not introduce the random image thingy where you have to type the letters in the warped image to submit a post? I've seen other forums use it to good effect and, whilst marginally increasing the length of time it takes to reply to a post, massively decreases the amount of SPAM :D

Edit: Would obviously only work for spam bots, but would still help to reduce spam

Or for new members before there post goes onto the forum a moderate could check it then as soon as that person has done 5-10 posts he/she gets to post straight away?

To be honest, I'm not too sure where these spammers are hiding - I don't recall having ever seen one in "Recent Topics".

To be honest, I'm not too sure where these spammers are hiding - I don't recall having ever seen one in "Recent Topics".

" said:

Or for new members before there post goes onto the forum a moderate could check it then as soon as that person has done 5-10 posts he/she gets to post straight away?

I recall I looked into that before and from memory it was an everyone or no-one option. But we can look again- or maybe there's a module to install.

Peter

" said:

To be honest, I'm not too sure where these spammers are hiding - I don't recall having ever seen one in "Recent Topics".

For example there were 3 new topics raised between 09:41 and 09:42 BST today by ampfc574 which were clearly spam. They were reported to the mods by 09:45 and removed by 10:08 with the user name locked out. Because of the swift action, most people will not have seen any trace of these posts but they were there for a while.

Could we not introduce the random image thingy where you have to type the letters in the warped image to submit a post? I've seen other forums use it to good effect and, whilst marginally increasing the length of time it takes to reply to a post, massively decreases the amount of SPAM :D


Please if you insist on using this remember those with none too good eyesight. Sorry to say this but I regularly have difficulty with these.


Geoff

Could we not introduce the random image thingy where you have to type the letters in the warped image to submit a post? I've seen other forums use it to good effect and, whilst marginally increasing the length of time it takes to reply to a post, massively decreases the amount of SPAM :D


Please if you insist on using this remember those with none too good eyesight. Sorry to say this but I regularly have difficulty with these.


Geoff

I think Pascal has signed up for email notification of new posts.

I see the 'Jenny2013' is listed as the lastest memeber, as those prebious spammers were also.

" said:

To be honest, I'm not too sure where these spammers are hiding - I don't recall having ever seen one in "Recent Topics".

The spam posts usually get deleted quite quickly, what with me 8 hours behind the UK, Matt C doing work shifts around the clock, and Peter/Andy also moderating.

But they should be disabled from posting - I generally exterminate the ones I find but others just inhibit - same effect really. I vaguely recall inhibiting was the preferred option.

alot of the random image generators also use a sound alternative to allow users who are visually impaired or have decresing eye sight to listen to the random code rather than read it. this option would only be a problem for persons who have sight and hearing difficulties.

" said:

alot of the random image generators also use a sound alternative to allow users who are visually impaired or have decresing eye sight to listen to the random code rather than read it. this option would only be a problem for persons who have sight and hearing difficulties.

Have you ever tried the audio captcha tests? They're impossible. http://www.google.com/recaptcha/learnmore has examples if you click the speaker icon in the captcha at the top of the page.