On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Jonathan Schleifer <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 09.01.2009 um 15:34 schrieb Matthew Wild: > >> I put it down in the end to just one 'innocent' user testing >> something, though I had my fingers ready to ban the lot if they began >> anything. The odd thing is that they don't seem to be bots, but lots >> of Gajim instances. Puzzling for sure, and now my doubts are raised >> that they are really as clueless as they made out to be. > > Gajim instances? That's strange. Are you sure it's not a bot using Gajim's > XMPP lib? I mean, why would someone run dozens of Gajim instances to flood a > MUC? There are far better ways. >
The resource was "Gajim", the version info was Gajim. Seems mad to me too, which is why I was happy to let it go as a user with too much time on their hands, than something malicious. Puzzling indeed. Matthew.
