[aur-general] We've got a spam issue in our AUR

Tai-Lin Chu tailinchu at gmail.com
Tue Jul 14 06:58:13 UTC 2015

I have seen some spam filters that have layers.

The first layer is captcha, which blocks most bots. Google recaptcha
is very useful in this case. I don't think this will block any human
user. In addition, users don't have to enter captcha every time once
it determines that a person is not a bot. For reference:

The second layer is letting users to report spams, or having some kind
of rating system (reddit). This blocks diligent human spammers. In
particular reddit's rating system is smart because it requires no
moderator; users actively downvote bad comments and upvote useful

I generally don't like keyword-based spam filters because they take
time to maintain a good keyword list and are easy to block legit

On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Oon-Ee Ng <ngoonee.talk at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 3:43 AM, Johannes Löthberg
> <johannes at kyriasis.com> wrote:
>> Not all spam is automated , so just requiring a CAPTCHA wouldn't be very
>> useful. I think a slightly better approach would be to add the comment to a
>> queue if it fails the spam filter, and require a TU to approve it.
> Seems like a lot of unnecessary work for TUs though. Maybe it would be
> better for maintainers approval to be required for posts that fail a
> spam filter (they could just ignore it). Even if its not really spam,
> its probably aimed at the maintainer anyway.

More information about the aur-general mailing list