• Warl0k3
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    85
    ·
    1 day ago

    “If you put a large switch in some cave somewhere, with a sign on it saying ‘End-of-the-World Switch. PLEASE DO NOT TOUCH’, the paint wouldn’t even have time to dry.”
    - Terry Prachett

  • Siegfried
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 day ago

    Ehm… this looks like a pretty easy approach to tackle bots

    • Warl0k3
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      1 day ago

      We use the same honeypot system on my discord server, and man is it good at catching both basic spambots and the most tedious (or mainly inattentive) kind of user. The newest generation of bots try to only post in the more active channels though, so it’s not a perfect solution.

      • homes@piefed.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s why you seed the channel with your own honeybots to simulate “activity”, and then just filter those out

      • Axolotl@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        24 hours ago

        The bot has some experimental setting, one is a setting that will send a message and then delete it once a day

      • Adonis1172@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        24 hours ago

        I had similar issues with spam bots. Best defense is both a honeypot channel and cross channel spam prevention within a certain time bracket, about 1.3 seconds to 8.6 seconds is the sweetspot. The lower covers terrible internet and thats why its not 0.0 seconds.

        I made my own bot for it actually, had a support subreddit and everything, got banned from there for bullshit. Now you lot have to put up with me.