In case you still care, see https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16726
which even our very human spam detector hasn't decided to label as spam (yet). -pd > On 08 Feb 2016, at 18:34 , frede...@ofb.net wrote: > > Ah, thank you for that explanation. I somehow didn't catch that my > Bugzilla account had been disabled by a human. > > "Common pattern is to post ... something copied from a generic bug > report" - that sounds very annoying. > > Frederick > > On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 11:54:11AM +0100, peter dalgaard wrote: >> Unfortunately, the spammers in question appear to be human (of sorts). >> >> We're not sure what they're up to, but a common pattern is to post random >> text, or something copied from a generic bug report (like "able to add 6 >> item"), later followed by a comment containing a link or a file attachment. >> >> Presumably, it is some sort of click-bait scheme, but it could also be a >> covert channel for contrabande files. At any rate, it is very hard to >> distinguish by mechanical means. So it is done by eye, with some risk of >> Type-I error. Thus, the Bugzilla maintainers are pretty vigilant to stamp >> out spammers, sometimes edging on being ham-fisted (er, -footed?). >> >> -pd >> >> >>> On 07 Feb 2016, at 00:25 , frede...@ofb.net wrote: >>> >>> No problem. >>> >>> Another suggestion would be to simply validate user input like most >>> websites, and reject invalid submissions immediately, rather than >>> blocking the user's account. I don't know what kind of spambots you >>> are up against, but unless they are very intelligent I doubt they'll >>> be able to understand a message like "You submitted a bug with no body >>> text, please enter something and try again." There may also be the >>> option of using Captchas. >>> >>> Not sure how hard it is to get Bugzilla to do these things. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Frederick >>> >>> P.S. (I now see that all errors on the bug tracker are displayed with >>> a red background) >>> >>> On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 03:00:21AM -0500, Duncan Murdoch wrote: >>>> Thanks for the suggestions. >>>> >>>> Duncan Murdoch >>>> >>>> On 05/02/2016 10:07 PM, frede...@ofb.net wrote: >>>>> Hi Duncan Murdoch, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for your time. I apologize for not telling you that my email >>>>> address on the bug tracker is slightly different - >>>>> "frederik-rproj...@ofb.net" vs "frede...@ofb.net". I was going to >>>>> follow up with this information, but then I thought, he probably knows >>>>> how to find a tagged email address. >>>>> >>>>> I do hope that you are able to fix the bug tracker. In particular, >>>>> people should be made aware that their account is blocked before being >>>>> invited to submit a bug. The error they get should be less rude - no >>>>> need to make it red - and the email address in the error should be >>>>> filled in. You complained about wasting time having to look for my >>>>> email address - well, I wasted time looking for yours. The error >>>>> message could even hint at what triggered the ban. I don't think that >>>>> you're going to get very far by trying to scare off actual spammers >>>>> with a big red accusation - I imagine they all have pretty thick skin. >>>>> >>>>> Reading the first line of my bug report was generous of you, but if >>>>> you read the rest, you'll see that, indeed, after checking with the >>>>> knowledgeable i3 guys, it appears to be an R bug. So I would like to >>>>> submit it. What appears at the top of my bug report is a copy of the >>>>> original bug I posted to i3, at the linked URL (are links OK or will I >>>>> get banned again?). >>>>> >>>>> The reason a bug appeared with the subject "til" is because I noticed >>>>> that when typing into the subject field, some "related bugs" come up. >>>>> However, this "suggestion" process appeared to be stalled when I typed >>>>> "til" (for "tiling" or "tilable"). I tried hitting "enter" and it >>>>> ended up opening a bug with that subject, which I never submitted, >>>>> because I clicked "back" and figured out that *four* characters are >>>>> actually necesary to start getting suggestions. The whole point of >>>>> doing this was to see if another bug had been submitted with the same >>>>> topic, and thereby save you time! I'm not going to try to reproduce >>>>> this error, because you said it will get me banned again, but I think >>>>> somebody should try to fix the site so that people don't get banned >>>>> for any content which is not submitted. Especially people with >>>>> months-old accounts, like me. >>>>> >>>>> I definitely sympathize with the spam problem, and thank you for your >>>>> hard work. Best wishes, >>>>> >>>>> Frederick >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 08:19:40PM -0500, Duncan Murdoch wrote: >>>>>> On 05/02/2016 7:26 PM, frede...@ofb.net wrote: >>>>>>> Dear Dirk Eddelbuettel and Duncan Murdoch, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you for your work on the wonderful R project! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I recently attempted to submit a bug with your Bugzilla interface: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://bugs.r-project.org/bugzilla/enter_bug.cgi >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I created an account, typed in all my information, first checking >>>>>>> details with another project. Then I clicked submit, and was taken to >>>>>>> a web page with a big red banner, it said >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Spammer >>>>>>> If you believe your account should be restored, please send email to >>>>>>> explaining why. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What a hostile thing to say to your users! I tried resubmitting my >>>>>>> bug, but removing any links, and I still get the message - so it looks >>>>>>> like my account has really been blocked. Please do something to warn >>>>>>> your users about this so they can avoid the upset. >>>>>> >>>>>> Your account isn't blocked now, but it wasn't easy to unblock it: you >>>>>> used a >>>>>> different email address in the submission, not the same one you used in >>>>>> this >>>>>> email. At least one of the people who can deal with this kind of thing >>>>>> would now demand an apology from you before ever reading your email >>>>>> again. >>>>>> I won't do that, but I have to admit, I don't like the fact that you >>>>>> wasted >>>>>> 10 minutes of my time. I'm Bcc'ing a couple of people who are working on >>>>>> putting together a better interface to the bug reporting system, so they >>>>>> know to deal with this kind of issue as well as all the others. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm not hostile, I just sound that way, because I've wasted a lot of time >>>>>> this week on issues like this. >>>>>> >>>>>> Duncan Murdoch >>>>>> >>>>>> (Here's my previous email to you, for the benefit of those who are Bcc'd: >>>>>>> You posted a bug report, but it had no content other than "til". That's >>>>>>> what many abusers of the system have done, so you were blocked. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have read the first line of your bug report, and it says " I'm not >>>>>>> sure if this is a bug with i3 or R ". If you're not sure if it's a bug >>>>>>> or not, then please post to R-devel. That's a moderated list so if this >>>>>>> is your first post, it may take a while to appear. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This probably seems unreasonable to you, but a lot of abuse is sent to >>>>>>> the bug list, so we block it quite early. I'll unblock you now, but >>>>>>> please don't post there again unless your discussion on R-devel >>>>>>> indicates this is a problem with R rather than i3. >>>>>> Duncan Murdoch >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, I don't know what it means to "email to explaining why", so I >>>>>>> tried to subscribe to R-devel. However, it's been ten minutes and no >>>>>>> confirmation email. So I tracked down your email addresses from the R >>>>>>> website. I'm still cc'ing r-devel. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I hope it is OK to send the bug by email. I really want to get back to >>>>>>> what I was doing, but I don't want to lose the work I put into writing >>>>>>> this bug report, so I'm attaching it to this message. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank you, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Frederick Eaton >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>> ______________________________________________ >>> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel >> >> -- >> Peter Dalgaard, Professor, >> Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School >> Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark >> Phone: (+45)38153501 >> Office: A 4.23 >> Email: pd....@cbs.dk Priv: pda...@gmail.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- Peter Dalgaard, Professor, Center for Statistics, Copenhagen Business School Solbjerg Plads 3, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark Phone: (+45)38153501 Office: A 4.23 Email: pd....@cbs.dk Priv: pda...@gmail.com ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
