3 ms·
Even though not all of us like Microsoft, you still shouldn't do this. The best way to handle this is to send random data at 10b/s and slow down the bots.
by xorglorb 16y ago
Even though not all of us like Microsoft, you still shouldn't do this. The best way to handle this is to send random data at 10b/s and slow down the bots.
- dalore 16y agoBetter would be to redirect to a third party service that offers that.
- ultrasaurus 16y agoAre there any? I think that's weekend-project sized and donations could support it.
- jokermatt999 16y agoIt'd be interesting to keep a list of the bots, and randomly redirect the traffic back at them. My first thought was that this would mess up people who unknowingly have a bot on their computer, but then I realized this might actually make them look into getting their computer fixed. Am I missing something here, or is this actually a decent idea?
- drzaiusapelord 16y agoI doubt these bots can handle the redirect request. Its js and I don't see why someone would code to support it. Maybe someone better informed than me can say whether curl or wget respect redirect by default.
- aaronblohowiak 16y agoJS? 300 http codes cause a redirection without any JS whatsoever. http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html
- amalcon 16y agoI suppose you could always redirect to 127.0.0.1. Maybe even go for a port that's likely to be open on a statistically random compromised system, like 135 (Windows DCOM, can't close it to localhost without breaking like half the system). Edit: I just tried this in IE on my Win box; the connection even stayed open for a good long time! Firefox blocked it, though, which is probably good.
- adrianN 16y agoThere is an extension to iptables that adds a TARPIT target http://xtables-addons.sourceforge.net/ http://xtables-addons.sourceforge.net/