| 1 |
On Thu, 2020-05-21 at 22:07 +0200, Toralf Förster wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 5/21/20 11:43 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Thu, 2020-05-21 at 11:17 +0200, Toralf Förster wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > On 5/21/20 10:47 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 5 |
> > > > TL;DR: I'm looking for opinions on how to protect goose from spam, |
| 6 |
> > > > i.e. mass fake submissions. |
| 7 |
> > > > |
| 8 |
> > > |
| 9 |
> > > I'd combine IP-limits with proof-of-work. |
| 10 |
> > > CAPTCHA should be the very last option IMO. |
| 11 |
> > > |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > To be honest, I don't see the point for proof-of-work if we have IP |
| 14 |
> > limits. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> The POW has to be made for every submission and should (somehow) include the IP-address. |
| 18 |
> So you have 2 barriers. None of both is perfect but their combination is expensive. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
No, one of them is expensive while the other is completely covered by |
| 21 |
it. I can't imagine requiring PoW that expensive that it would limit |
| 22 |
requests more than a reasonable IP limiting. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
-- |
| 25 |
Best regards, |
| 26 |
Michał Górny |
Archives