5 ms·

The intention is to crash bots' browsers, not users' browsers

by seventh12 1y ago

jillyboel 1y ago
[flagged]
- anthk 1y ago
  If you are crashing some browser from a disallowed directory in robots.txt, is not your fault.
  - chrismorgan 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - BeFlatXIII 1y ago
      > If you’re not familiar with this, read up on it, the reasons can be quite thought-provoking Are the reasons relevant to headless web browsers?
      - chrismorgan 1y ago
        Some, definitely not. Others, quite possibly.
      - bryanrasmussen 1y ago
        here's a potentially relevant example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43947910 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43947910
    - doubled112 1y ago
      Because people may be hurt. Which people may be hurt by crashing the machine where the bot is running?
      - johnisgood 1y ago
        When said people decide to rob your home, they lose the right to not be hurt, IMO. Of course proportionality and all that.
- lightedman 1y ago
  If that's the case what do we do about websites and apps which do things like disable your back button (mobile phone's direct one) or your right click capabilities (desktop browser) while such functionality disabling is not present in the ToS or even presented to you upon visiting the site or using the app?
- h4ck_th3_pl4n3t 1y ago
  If you are scraping forbidden data in my robots.txt, I don't give a damn. I am gonna mess with your bots however I like, and I'm willing to go as far as it takes to teach you a lesson about respecting my robots.txt.
  - bryanrasmussen 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - anthk 1y ago
      Not my problem. The problem will be the for the malware creator. Twice.
    - h4ck_th3_pl4n3t 1y ago
      Malware installation is something completely different than segfaulting an .exe file that is running the scraper process. If illegal scraping behavior is expected behavior of the machine, then what the machine is doing is already covered by the Computer Fraud Act.
      - bryanrasmussen 1y ago
        several points here - not sure if the same jurisdictions that are under the Computer Fraud Act have determined there is such a thing as "illegal scraping". Does the Computer Fraud Act cover segfaulting an .exe file? I don't know, I don't live in the country that has it. If The Computer Fraud act says it is ok to segfault an .exe which I highly doubt, is the organization doing this segfaulting as part of their protection against this supposed "illegal scraping" actually checking that the machines that they are segfaulting are all in jurisdictions that are under the Computer Fraud Act? What happens if they segfault outside those jurisdictions and there are other laws that pertain there? I'm guessing it might happen they screwed then. Should have thought about that, being so clever. Hey I get it, I am totally the kind of guy who might decide to segfault someone costing me a lot of money by crawling my site and ignoring my robots.txt. I'm vengeful like that. But I would accept hey what I am doing is probably illegal somewhere, too bad, I definitely wouldn't be going around arguing it was totally legal, and I would also be open to the possibility hey, this fight I'm jumping into might have some collateral damages - sucks to be them. Everybody else here seems to be all righteous about how they can destroy people's shit in retaliation, and the people whose computers they are destroying might not even know they got a beef with you. on edit: obviously once it got to courts or the media I would argue it was totally legal, ethical and the right thing to do to prevent these people from being able to attack other sites with their "illegal scraping" behavior. Because I don't win the fight if I get punished for winning. I'm just talking about keeping a clear view of what one is actually doing in the process of winning the fight.
ramesh31 1y ago
Please point me to this 100% correct bot detection system with zero false positives.
- FridgeSeal 1y ago
  You understand the difference between intent and reality right? The article even warns about this side-effect.

The intention is to crash bots' browsers, not users' browsers

jillyboel 1y ago

[flagged]

anthk 1y ago
If you are crashing some browser from a disallowed directory in robots.txt, is not your fault.
- chrismorgan 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - BeFlatXIII 1y ago
    > If you’re not familiar with this, read up on it, the reasons can be quite thought-provoking Are the reasons relevant to headless web browsers?
    - chrismorgan 1y ago
      Some, definitely not. Others, quite possibly.
    - bryanrasmussen 1y ago
      here's a potentially relevant example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43947910 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43947910
  - doubled112 1y ago
    Because people may be hurt. Which people may be hurt by crashing the machine where the bot is running?
    - johnisgood 1y ago
      When said people decide to rob your home, they lose the right to not be hurt, IMO. Of course proportionality and all that.
lightedman 1y ago
If that's the case what do we do about websites and apps which do things like disable your back button (mobile phone's direct one) or your right click capabilities (desktop browser) while such functionality disabling is not present in the ToS or even presented to you upon visiting the site or using the app?
h4ck_th3_pl4n3t 1y ago
If you are scraping forbidden data in my robots.txt, I don't give a damn. I am gonna mess with your bots however I like, and I'm willing to go as far as it takes to teach you a lesson about respecting my robots.txt.
- bryanrasmussen 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - anthk 1y ago
    Not my problem. The problem will be the for the malware creator. Twice.
  - h4ck_th3_pl4n3t 1y ago
    Malware installation is something completely different than segfaulting an .exe file that is running the scraper process. If illegal scraping behavior is expected behavior of the machine, then what the machine is doing is already covered by the Computer Fraud Act.
    - bryanrasmussen 1y ago
      several points here - not sure if the same jurisdictions that are under the Computer Fraud Act have determined there is such a thing as "illegal scraping". Does the Computer Fraud Act cover segfaulting an .exe file? I don't know, I don't live in the country that has it. If The Computer Fraud act says it is ok to segfault an .exe which I highly doubt, is the organization doing this segfaulting as part of their protection against this supposed "illegal scraping" actually checking that the machines that they are segfaulting are all in jurisdictions that are under the Computer Fraud Act? What happens if they segfault outside those jurisdictions and there are other laws that pertain there? I'm guessing it might happen they screwed then. Should have thought about that, being so clever. Hey I get it, I am totally the kind of guy who might decide to segfault someone costing me a lot of money by crawling my site and ignoring my robots.txt. I'm vengeful like that. But I would accept hey what I am doing is probably illegal somewhere, too bad, I definitely wouldn't be going around arguing it was totally legal, and I would also be open to the possibility hey, this fight I'm jumping into might have some collateral damages - sucks to be them. Everybody else here seems to be all righteous about how they can destroy people's shit in retaliation, and the people whose computers they are destroying might not even know they got a beef with you. on edit: obviously once it got to courts or the media I would argue it was totally legal, ethical and the right thing to do to prevent these people from being able to attack other sites with their "illegal scraping" behavior. Because I don't win the fight if I get punished for winning. I'm just talking about keeping a clear view of what one is actually doing in the process of winning the fight.

ramesh31 1y ago

Please point me to this 100% correct bot detection system with zero false positives.

FridgeSeal 1y ago
You understand the difference between intent and reality right? The article even warns about this side-effect.