A question for webmasters

How do we stop ban evasion?

Attached: d6a06be61c0a02dd0e3a9f6c264c94fb.png (1135x555, 383K)

Typically the best way is to not let people know they are banned; just make their actions only visible to other banned accounts.

My websites has honeypots, speed limits and more bullshit to get rid of bots.
And you can combine IP bans with bans related to device characteristics, track the user via cookies and in some cases get rid of entire geo-locations (to get rid of pajeets).

But I'm not an expert. I just enjoy getting rid of bad traffic.

You can't.
t. posting from unbanned Saudi Arabian VPN with cookies and javascript disabled and randomized canvas fingerprinting

>have a huge neural network analyze all users' typing styles and identify a global set of aspects common across posts in general
>have one smaller neural network for each user that identifies a local set of aspects common across that user's posts
>when you ban a user, you don't just ban their account and IP address, you also ban their typing style
>if anyone trips this ban detector, their account and IP are also banned to ensure ban security
>false positives are shit outta luck and have to contact staff and prove they're not the person the ban was intended for

This. Make the user experience more miserable without letting them realize they are being punished.
If you just ban them, they will reset the IP and delete the cookies.

hitmen

there need to be levels or gradations of privilege.
new users should be lurk-only for awhile. gradually allow them to do more. post every so often, but with brutal captchas.
over time it's easier and easier, but the fact that creating a new login/identity just means days or weeks of pain, means people will be a lot more careful.

honestly this, let them still post in threads but only they and other banned IPs can see the post

>literally nothing to do with mastering webms

This. Shadowbans are highly effective because they don't let the perp know they're been banned and therefore discourages ban evasion.

For subtly, do a Twitter and shadow ban.
For effectivity, do a totalitarianism and only allow whitelisted consumer ISP's, ban known tor exit nodes and aggressively police botting. This method requires more effort but once you've made your banlist it becomes very difficult to bypass unless you have a dynamic IP, in that case you might want to look into shadow users where a users in dynamic ranges must be manually reviewed before their posts become visible.

>Shadowbans
>666
spoken like a true progressive

>>literally nothing to do with mastering webms
This is you're face when.
Dubmass

Attached: byakuya toe gummy.png (912x1497, 891K)

Attached: 1540528929712.jpg (720x340, 29K)

>Thinking this thread has to do with rendering videos

This is the only right answer. Make their lifes as miserable as possible while they think they aren't banned.
You should also look into dropping all traffic from places like Asia and India to get rid of literally 95% of all traffic just trying to see if port 22 is open.

by designing your service such that bans are completely unnecessary or logically meaningless.

This. The best ban system is one where bans are not needed in the first place.

Just don't ban.

Attached: 99 def.png (1204x1193, 863K)

>>false positives are shit outta luck and have to contact staff and prove they're not the person the ban was intended for
yikes

Niggakilla $ whois 150.150.150.150
inetnum: 150.0.0.0 - 150.255.255.255
organisation: Administered by APNIC
status: LEGACY


Then just ban the whole range.

add spectre to your ban page and kill the banned user's pc.

Fuch jannies

Attached: 1552768943522.png (800x528, 582K)

>durr me quote ALL post make GOOD point durrr

are you Kimmo Alm

interesting approach. I like it.

shadowbanning is unethical af

this guy gets it

All internet projects start by rangebanning the whole of Russia and China.

>there need to be levels or gradations of privilege.
The Register has some gradation of privileges. The forums are nevertheless rather ugly.

>shadowbanning is unethical af
so are people who get shadowbanned

since it (stopping ban evasion) cant be done (hence this thread) why have bans at all?

i realize some content is illegal and could get the host in trouble but thats no more true here than of anywhere else on the internet

i think the idea of anonymity is interwoven into peoples perception of ban evasion as a problem and bans as a solution,which frankly i tihnk they are not (bans are not a solution)

we used to call it hell banning back in the day

but wont people do bad stuff you ask? yes, they already do im certain--they will continue to

this is the same as an argument along the lines of "if murder wasnt illegal people would just fucking shoot each other senselessly" and "if rape wasnt illegal it would be complete chaos"

laws dont keep people in check

t. bootlicker

STOP

READ THIS POST
ITS THE ONLY POST WHICH MATTERS AND HAS THE RIGHT ANSA

YOU MUST STOP GIVING PEOPLE THE REASON TO GET BANNED

GIVE THEM A REASON TO NOT DO BANNABLE OFFENSES

>HURR DURR PPL STAB EACH OTHER BAN KNIVES
NO. STOP GIVING PEOPLE A REASON TO STAB EACH OTHER.

THAT IS ALL

Attached: 30084734_209281153172423_8496208896543686656_n.jpg (500x625, 58K)

inb4 someone chimes in with 'good guy with a gun' rhetoric

Just block 0.0.0.0, you won't have problems again.

>shadowbanning is unethical af
what

discourse does some of this, it seems to work fine for L1techs

Two wrongs dont make a right

It is a disingenuous and very shady practice. Ergo, unethical. It even has "shadow" in its fucking name. Come on

>It is a disingenuous and very shady practice.
So is circumventing bans. There's nothing unethical in banning people from your site.

browser fingerprinting.

Attached: 1339550542697.jpg (266x239, 10K)

>shadowbanning is unethical af
You wot?

Attached: 1550425654772.png (1113x887, 528K)

So then ban by MAC address. Lying by omission of facts is still lying. Lying is unethical.

And then you have to deal with ban evasion. Actions have consequences, this consequence is a shadow ban.

>stop
Did you mean "trigger the next wave of anonymizing proxies because you chose to control the world rather than accept that there are things you simply should not be able to do"?

You're obligated to be truthful about banning people from your own site? Lmao what the fuck are you on about

Go somewhere private

>So then ban by MAC address
a website has no knowledge of your mac address brainlet. I swear you pajeet coders don't understand shit about networking.

Attached: 1551591364535.jpg (1000x786, 74K)

Admins who shadow ban get a bullet sooner or later. It takes one betrayed user to discover the shadowban and snap. Why are you playing with basic human rights?

>Access to some Mongolian cave drawing discussion and karaoke fan forum is a basic human right
>Freedom of speech means actions have no consequences and I can say and do whatever I want

Attached: 71b.jpg (736x736, 100K)

>basic human right
Communication isn't a basic human right. If it was, we would have world peace. Ergo: We don't have the right to communicate.

>Not getting shadowbanned is a basic human right
lmao

Not to mention MACs can be spoofed just like everything else

>Freedom of speech
Meme term. What we actually have is freedom of expression, and "expression" can involve violence.

>freedom of expression
>If I call it differently it means I can do whatever I want without consequences lul

Attached: 507p6ayp91w01.jpg (576x552, 47K)

What you need to do is actually have proper counterarguments instead of hitting the ban button. Yes, I know, it's hard. stop being a faggot, stop retreating to your gay little "hobbyist" ponds where your defense against any other kind of thinking is the ban button. stop circlejerking.

>spams your forum with cheespizza and shilling till it dies and you get vanned
Nothing personnel kid

No the point is that violence is subjective. It's a social construct. Free speech has consequences because freedom of expression overrides it.

nasim

>violence is subjective
>It's a social construct
>Free speech has consequences because freedom of expression overrides it

Attached: 1529082287552.png (620x916, 257K)

how do you know?

you dont
take teh pill

If your site is worth anything make it one time pay to access. Then banning motherfuckers will actually have consequences.

greetings lowtax

shadow banning is the absolute most ethical way to ban people from your platforms

it is a deterrent as people don't like shouting into the void and having an uncertainty if they are being herd of not

it benefits the other users the most; they can worry less about the shitposters appearing again and again only to ruin their time

bonus points if you give the shadowbanned people generic bot responses using other users profiles

shadowbanning is the absolute most effective way to ban, the most ethical way for removing users and it you end up bothering them more than they can harass you

it's like what a lot of schools do with class disruptors, all the students just leave the classroom so the asshole is left alone without any way of getting attention

fuck off you sensitive baby

you can either efficiently solve the problem by banning and move on or waste your time communicating with idiots and their narcissistic need to have opinions

no one cares that you are le epic debate master after 9000 yt videos

Attached: 1551565681509.jpg (637x946, 57K)

Counter argument: Stop being passive aggressive and make their bans as public as possible. Create a public list of all the people who are banned and the when where why. Just give a reason why you banned and leave it at that. No need for all that fucking bot shit.

>muh shadowbanz
We Reddit now? The site is fine as it is. It'd be pretty easy to tell you were shadowbanned when your bait threads don't get replies and everybody ignores your posts. Then it's just a matter of resetting your modem. The site is fine as it is you stupid crybabies.

>give a reason why
It's literally this. People will always circumvent anything if you're as shitty about banning them as they were to get banned in the first place.

>Just remove anonymity!
Good idea user! We should also add a points system where you can give points to posts that are good and take away points from posts that are bad.

>200 google shill threads a day is fine

Shadowbans can be publicly announced; you just have to make sure that the people in question can't see the announcement.

Another interesting way to "fire" users who you no longer want to serve is to just degrade their level of service; make their requests run at a lower priority, send them to a different cluster of older hardware, or even introduce deliberate errors at annoying points.

Where I work, we do something like this; with abusive users relegated to a pair of old servers, rather than the massive farm we have for normal users.

shut the fuck up retard

the whole purpose of banning people is to tell them to fuck off; there is no need for some egocentric wall displaying all the fags owned

notice how you're looking out for the interests of the people banned, rather than the site as a whole

you banned them so they go away, that's the end goal here, for those people to go away

>anyone I disagree with is a shill
Wtf? Stop shilling opinions I don't like dude.

i think the piurpose of a ban is to stop certain behaviours i.e. posting illegal content

>Shill; an accomplice of a confidence trickster or swindler who poses as a genuine customer to entice or encourage others.
Now look at the Google Stavia threads. Look at how people "randomly" bring it up in tons of threads, and tell me it's not fucking shilling.

>Google stavia threads
Haven't seen a single one. But it's pretty crazy how people wanna discuss new technology on the technology board.

Great, give losers a place to compare scores

Once people find out you do shadow bans the jig is up and the method is useless.

You increase the ban evader's manual labour input.

if youre not free from the consequences then you dont have freedom of speech

Which is not the point of a ban at all.

>Haven't seen a single one.
Lucky you. But that explains:
>But it's pretty crazy how people wanna discuss new technology on the technology board.
It's not a discussion at all.

In modern times bans are pointless, as the user can easily switch IPs/accounts.

>People talking about something isn't a discussion
Hahaha what the fuck man. You are seriously challenged.
Thats exactly why changing the ban system is pointless. The one we have blocks out kiddies and low effort shitposters. A high effort shitpost is just a normal post on this site. Start policing content and you're just a step away from turning this website into some kind of discord tranny safespace.

If I tell you to go fuck yourself is that a discussion? No? Then someone saying that an extensive list of things don't matter every time problems get brought up isn't a discussion either.

You've lost the plot my friend. The one Stadia thread in the catalog right now is full of people discussing how much of a turd it is. What you call shills are probably just people who use software you don't like. The site functions fine.

its a deterrent

that's the whole point of this thread, how to stop bad evasion

make it as difficult as possible for the people ban to come back

the people banned should give up because the effort isn't worth the attention

What effort? You're acting like a redditban wouldn't be totally fucking obvious on this site.
>Wowee, I posted a porn thread on a blue board and now nobody is replying to my posts! Time to unplug my modem again!

>Where I work, we do something like this; with abusive users relegated to a pair of old servers, rather than the massive farm we have for normal users.
Where do you work, what service/product do you offer, and how exactly are these users abusing it?

He's full of shit and pushing his agenda to make this website more like Reddit. It's something you see everytime some faggot makes a thread about how to "fix Jow Forums" or "save the site."

>user posts some bannable shit
>ban by MAC address on the HTTP request they sent out
>server loses connection to gateway router

Attached: akyuu_agatha_chris_q_think_???.jpg (600x800, 124K)

just ban them over and over and over and over again until they get bored

>post CP
>get put into special CP zone
Great plan.

Incorrect, creating a "profile" ties your history/reputation and your personal information (such as e-mail) together. A typical communications platform would also require e-mail, cell phone verification, etc.
If you ban someone, you take out not only their content reputation, but you require them to re-input all of their information, and if you're a smart moderator you can ban repeat offenders based on this personal information, and block things like mailinator, drastically increasing the amount of effort involved to be disruptive. Increasingly some places require a certain amount of good content to be created before you are permitted to do things.
As we are seeing, anonymous message boards without this "proof of work" are not able to be moderated effectively hence why this site is being used by terrorists to recruit and disseminate propaganda. The only reason Jow Forums still exists is because our society has not yet figured out how to shut it down. It can't be moderated.

I don't think you replied to the right user, but if you're seriously implying we strip the anonymity from Jow Forums you can go die.
>Terrorist groups
What are you even talking about? Who are the terrorists? Virgin mass shooters?

just go on /tg/, terrorist general

Your MAC address is only preserved on your local network you retard, as soon as a packet is routed the MAC address is rewritten

Hahahahaha

This post is a violation of rule 2 (flames are not permitted) and hence this post should be moderated. However, the moderators are just not able to keep up with the sheer amount of rule-breaking behavior such as yours which ultimately results in this website being used to disseminate terrorist propaganda and recruit others into private groups to coordinate terrorist activity in violation of US law.

The reason why this website is so susceptible to this activity is because what anonymous posting is, is zero proof of identity, zero proof of work required to create content, which ultimately leads to this website being completely incompatible with the concept of moderation.

Moderation in this case is actually more of a burden than the act of creating rule-breaking content, and ultimately corrective activity is limited to removing rule breaking posts considering the vast majority of posters are able to change their only identifying feature in less than a minute. To resolve this you need proof of identity or proof of work as others have suggested.

>Let's turn Jow Forums into Reddit because of nonexistent terrorist activity!
Kill yourself.