#50254 [Opn->Bgs]: SPAM detector trips up on your own PHP.net site as URL
| From: | bjori@php.net | Date: | Sat, 21 Nov 2009 01:50:10 +0000 |
| Subject: | #50254 [Opn->Bgs]: SPAM detector trips up on your own PHP.net site as URL | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.webmaster |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-webmaster+get-6582@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
ID: 50254
Updated by: bjori@php.net
Reported By: daevid at daevid dot com
-Status: Open
+Status: Bogus
Bug Type: Website problem
PHP Version: Irrelevant
New Comment:
We intentionally do not tell you "the spam word" (which in this case is
multiple links, more then 3) to avoid spammers simply removing that
single word/link.
We need to deal with aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalot of spam, and still spam
gets through our checks.
I prefer one or two false positives rather 1000-2000 extra spams a
month.
If you think you can implement a better system, please take it up on
the webmaster mailinglist (see http://php.net/mailinglists).
-Hannes
Previous Comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2009-11-21 01:36:51] daevid at daevid dot com
Description:
------------
I tried to post this note in the include() page:
---
see 'reproduce code' below on this form.
---
I tried to post this note to here:
http://us2.php.net/manual/add-note.php
But the stupid-ass form says:
"Your note contains a prohibited (usually SPAM) word. Please remove it
and try again."
WTF!? It doesn't even TELL me what f'n word is the problem. Seriously?
It already asked me the stupid math question and now this
B.S.?
Then, I had to laugh because I removed the text:
http://php.net/manual/en/function.include.php
http://php.net/manual/en/function.require.php
http://php.net/manual/en/function.require-once.php
http://php.net/manual/en/function.include-once.php
And the submit note worked. LOL. So apparently one of those words in
there is considered SPAM by PHP's own web form. Ha! Suckas.
Reproduce code:
---------------
Well now, I am confused because these pages:
http://php.net/manual/en/function.include.php
http://php.net/manual/en/function.require.php
http://php.net/manual/en/function.require-once.php
http://php.net/manual/en/function.include-once.php
All show them as functions:
Include(), require(), require_once(), include_once()
Yet ALL of the examples show the PEAR way:
http://pear.php.net/manual/en/standards.including.php
"Note: include_once and require_once are statements, not functions.
Parentheses should not surround the subject filename."
include_once "a.php";
To change all require_once('foo.php'); to require_once 'foo.php'
execute this:
cd /var/www/
find . -name '*.php' -print | xargs egrep -l \
'require_once\s*(\(.*\));'\ | xargs sed -i.sedorig -e \
's/require_once\s*(\(.*\));/require_once \1;/'
(thanks to Robert Hajime Lanning for that)
Then to remove all the ".php.sedorig" backup files execute this:
find . -name "*.php.sedorig" -type f -exec rm -rf {} \;
Expected result:
----------------
I expected the form to not be so stupid and just let me post. You
already ask me for a dumb math question so why the added check. And at
the VERY least, tell me what word you consider SPAM so I can remove it.
duh. Are you new to writing web pages/forms? Help the user out man. If
I've taken the time to post a useful note, then work with me, not
against me.
This is related to 45055.
I agree that the resulting error message needs to be more
helpful/descriptive. If its' because of too many links, then damnit tell
me that. If it is some word that is offensive, then tell me that too!
UGH.
I posted this again to show an example of what I'd consider a good note
and that there aren't too many links. They are referencing relevant PHP
pages even.
Actual result:
--------------
fail.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Edit this bug report at http://bugs.php.net/?id=50254&edit=1