4 ms·
I wouldn't be surprised if just delaying the server response by some 3 seconds will have the same effect on those scrapers as Anubis claims.
by iefbr14 1y ago
I wouldn't be surprised if just delaying the server response by some 3 seconds will have the same effect on those scrapers as Anubis claims.
- ranger_danger 1y agoYea I'm not convinced unless somehow the vast majority of scrapers aren't already using headless browsers (which I assume they are). I feel like all this does is warm the planet.
- kingstnap 1y agoThere is literally no point wasting 3 seconds of a computer's time and it's expensive wasting 3 seconds of a person's time. That is literally an anti-human filter.
- Imustaskforhelp 1y agoFrom tjhorner on this same thread "Anubis doesn't target crawlers which run JS (or those which use a headless browser, etc.) It's meant to block the low-effort crawlers that tend to make up large swaths of spam traffic. One can argue about the efficacy of this approach, but those higher-effort crawlers are out of scope for the project." So its meant/preferred to block low effort crawlers which can still cause damage if you don't deal with them. a 3 second deterrent seems good in that regard. Maybe the 3 second deterrent can come as in rate limiting an ip? but they might use swath's of ip :/
- OkayPhysicist 1y agoAnubis exists specifically to handle the problem of bots dodging IP rate limiting. The challenge is tied to your IP, so if you're cycling IPs with every request, you pay dramatically more PoW than someone using a single IP. It's intended to be used in depth with IP rate limiting.
- loeg 1y agoAnubis easily wastes 3 seconds of a human's time already.
- psionides 1y agoYou've just described Anubis, yeah
- kingstnap 1y agoI know, I read the article and that's the thesis.