Another useful trick for spotting bots is to look for things coming
from the IP address blocks assigned to AWS (and other cloud
providers). If a request is coming from a server farm, something, is
sitting between wikipedia and the human; whether that thing is classed
as a bot boils down largely to semantics.

cheers
stuart

On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Okay. Methodology:
>
> *take the last 5 days of requestlogs;
> *Filter them down to text/html requests as a heuristic for non-API requests;
> *Run them through the UA parser we use;
> *Exclude spiders and things which reported valid browsers;
> *Aggregate the user agents left;
> *???
> *Profit
>
> It looks like there are a relatively small number of bots that
> browse/interact via the web - ones I can identify include WPCleaner[0],
> which is semi-automated, something I can't find through WP or google called
> "DigitalsmithsBot" (could be internal, could be external), and Hoo Bot (run
> by User:Hoo man). My biggest concern is DotNetWikiBot, which is a general
> framework that could be masking multiple underlying bots and has ~ 7.4m
> requests through the web interface in that time period.
>
> Obvious caveat is obvious; the edits from these tools may actually come
> through the API, but they're choosing to request content through the web
> interface for some weird reason. I don't know enough about the software
> behind each bot to comment on that. I can try explicitly looking for
> web-based edit attempts, but there would be far fewer observations that the
> bots might appear in, because the underlying dataset is sampled at a 1:1000
> rate.
>
> [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:NicoV/Wikipedia_Cleaner/Documentation
>
>
> On 20 May 2014 07:50, Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Actually, belay that, I have a pretty good idea. I'll fire the log parser
>> up now.
>>
>>
>> On 20 May 2014 01:21, Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think a lot of them use the API, but I don't know off the top of my
>>> head if it's all of them. If only we knew somebody who has spent the last 3
>>> months staring into the cthulian nightmare of our request logs and could
>>> look this up...
>>>
>>> More seriously; drop me a note off-list so that I can try to work out
>>> precisely what you need me to find out, and I'll write a quick-and-dirty
>>> parser of our sampled logs to drag the answer kicking and screaming into the
>>> light.
>>>
>>> (sorry, it's annual review season. That always gets me blithe.)
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19 May 2014 13:03, Scott Hale <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks all for the comments on my paper, and even more thanks to
>>>> everyone sharing these super helpful ideas on filtering bots: this is why I
>>>> love the Wikipedia research committee.
>>>>
>>>> I think Oliver is definitely right that
>>>>>
>>>>>  this would be a useful topic for some piece of method-comparing
>>>>> research, if anyone is looking for paper ideas.
>>>>
>>>> "Citation goldmine" as one friend called it, I think.
>>>>
>>>> This won't address edit logs to date, but do  we know if most bots and
>>>> automated tools use the API to make edits? If so, would it be feasibility 
>>>> to
>>>> add a flag to each edit as to whether it came through the API or not. This
>>>> won't stop determined users, but might be a nice way to identify cyborg
>>>> edits from those made manually by the same user for many of the standard
>>>> tools going forward.
>>>>
>>>> The closest thing I found in the bug tracker is [1], but it doesn't
>>>> address the issue of 'what is a bot' which this thread has clearly shown is
>>>> quite complex. An API-edit vs. non-API edit might be a way forward unless
>>>> there are automated tools/bots that don't use the API.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1. https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11181
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Oliver Keyes
>>> Research Analyst
>>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Oliver Keyes
>> Research Analyst
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
>
>
> --
> Oliver Keyes
> Research Analyst
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Reply via email to