|
In my sweeps on the forums to find spam and spammers I realized that much of the slipped-by spam is stored inside the personal forums of the members. This is an ongoing practice as I have just found spam messages posted this way on the 4th 11th of February, so it is not possibile to ascribe this kind of spam as a single past wave.
I think that the access to personal forums should be allowed only to high ranking members (silver/gold or higher) or at least to stable non-spamming members for a threshold time (weeks? months?).
My two cents.
EDIT: more recent spam found
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
I'd have to disagree: if it's a group with a personal forum (and why else would there be one?) then they may have good reasons for keeping it private: if what they as a group are working on is not ready for publication, say.
It's pretty easy to get Silver, and not difficult to get Gold - so suddenly the "privacy" of the forum is completely gone.
I can see what you are saying, but my personal feeling is that privacy can be important; more so than a limited amount of spam. Just my two cents worth!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Limited? The latest spam message I queued to my well-known list (the one I use for the Big Old) has been posted 6 hrs ago. Since I started loggin all my antispam activities I found 1320 spammers plus the ones I still have to report and the ones I did on the spur of the moment.
There is continuous incoming spam through that channel and it isn't defended at all - spam arrives unseen and remains to be indexed for years. Since the average spammer is a bot or a bot-minded individual and the common behaviour is register->post using a well known channel forcing them to wait would spoil a great number of spam attempts.
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Except...it's private.
Which means that only the spammer can see it.
I can't, you can't, Google web crawlers can't.
So nobody can follow the links, google can't index them, no page rankings are involved.
Yes, it takes up space on CP servers, but it doesn't achieve the desired affect! 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Understood!
EDIT:
OriginalGriff wrote: I can't, you can't, Google web crawlers can't.
Apparently bing can[^]
Almost all of this spam is deleted because I cleansed much of those keyword's spam on CP, but actually it IS indexed apparently.
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
modified 18-Feb-15 6:59am.
|
|
|
|
|
Are we talking about private personal forums, or just personal forums?
Most of the spammy personal forums aren't marked as private, so they will get picked up by search engines.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I'm talking about personal forums, not private personal forums.
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leslie pointed that too 
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
I love the work you're doing, but private is private.
Sorry.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Well... once you find them and they are nuked, you can always ask someone of the staff to clean up the lasting messages.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: I think that the access to personal forums should be allowed only to high ranking members
Hang on - I think I initially misunderstood you.
When you say "access" you mean "ability to post on their own forum", right?
In this case it's actually not a bad idea at all, and simple to change.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: When you say "access" you mean "ability to post on their own forum", right?
Yes, I was referring precisely to the possibility to create and post in one's own forum.
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
I Would like to upload the error message image ,that would help me from Code Project members to guild the mistake in the my code.
|
|
|
|
|
Use copy and paste of the text; images are not allowed, for very good reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that I had a multi-threading issue in the Spam filter that is too embarrassing to even describe.
However, I have repaired the issue, and Chris will soon, or is deploying the change.
I think that it came to light on the weekend because so many of us developers don't have a life and all decided to post a lot at the same time as we were getting a bunch of Spam.
Hopefully, everything will be smooth from now on. (laughing as I say it )
Matthew
|
|
|
|
|
If you had problems in understanding multithreading you could have asked in the forums 
Geek code v 3.12
GCS d--- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L- E-- W++ N++ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t++ 5? X R++ tv-- b+ DI+++ D++ G e++>+++ h--- r++>+++ y+++*
Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
And that message would have gone to moderation..
"When you don't know what you're doing it's best to do it quickly"- SoMad
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Folks,
Still can't reach the code for ASP.NET Multiple File Upload With Drag & Drop and Progress Bar Using HTML5[^] at http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?aid=460142&av=669590[^]
The author sent me a different link but that only went to another article in VB that shows a rather simple version of drag and drop capability. I was looking for the much larger version that provides more details of his chunking method and how the author got it to work in IE 10, a difficult achievement.
Again the original links in the old article to the code don't work and the link to a newer version of the article doesn't work either.
Any help you can provide greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately this article has been deleted, so *waves hand* "this isn't the source code you're looking for."
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
What are the reasons an article gets deleted? Did it not meet standards? Did the author ask that it be taken down for business reasons? Why would you leave the old material online if the backup code is no longer available? Could i get the old code from a historical location?
|
|
|
|
|
There are a variety of possible reasons. Sometimes an author deletes their own article for their own reasons. Supposing that's the case, it would be against their wishes for us to continue sharing code they no longer want public.
What you are looking at is a version of an article. The only way to get that link is going into the revision history, which you should not even be able to see if the article is deleted.
Could you please let me know how / where you got that link? If there's a loophole we haven't considered that would be most helpful.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
All I did was search for html5 drag and drop capability for uploads or something like that and the article appeared. After reading and reviewing it, I tried to download the code at the links on the page and of course none of the links worked as you already know. Disappointed but I can imagine many reasons the article was deleted. Thanks for your time.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
