[Sugar-devel] freenode spam measures

[James Cameron]

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 11:50:41AM +0000, D. Joe wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2018 at 09:57:05AM +1000, James Cameron wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 11:20:31PM +0000, D. Joe wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 07:49:22AM +1000, James Cameron wrote: 
> > > > #sugar and #sugar-meeting are now +cnrt.                    
> > > > 
> > > > New users must register with freenode.                    
> > > > 
> > > > "meeting" 'bot is absent.                              
> > > >
> > > > "gcibot" 'bot is absent.                             
> > > > 
> > > > Both presumably unregistered or have not identified to services. 
> > >    
> > > I've tried to draw various resources or references to resources together here: 
> > >     
> > >   https://gitlab.com/deejoe/freenode-moderation                                                                                  
> > >      
> > > Just as we were getting +r set on #sugar and #sugar-meeting another
> > > channel I frequent was getting different advice, switching to +q
> > 
> > Thanks.  Yes, had considered, but realised we didn't have enough
> > people present to give voice to new joiners.
> 
> I noticed in the thread about jita you mentioning the problem with
> supybot.

Yes.  supybot is hosted on the virtual machine jita.sugarlabs.org, and
meeting.sugarlabs.org points to jita.

> Using the +q approach removes the need for tight coordination
> between starting a bot, getting it to join the channel, and voicing
> it: The bot can be started, +q allows it to join the channel as soon
> as it is ready, then one can come along later and voice it. If I
> recall correctly, services can also be configured constituitively to
> voice it.
> 
> The ability to voice new users can also be delegated to those that
> idle in the channel without having to give them full ops.
> 
> +r leaves only registration as a way fully to participate in the
> channel. +q gives users that option plus the additional option of
> being voiced.
> 
> I believe IRC has the tools available to keep it useful and relevant
> in the face of persistent trollspam attacks, if only we use them.

Yes.  However, I don't have the time to do all this myself.  An
alternative is to register the robot, but that may require code
changes.  During the meeting, it was said that supybot is written in
Perl; in case anybody is interested.  Source is on git.sugarlabs.org,
which is also hosted on jita.

> Without taking full advantage of these options I'm afraid the push
> towards more centralized, proprietary chat mechanisms or even just
> to free software options, but ones that are more idiosyncratically
> siloed, will only accelerate.

Yes.  We're already seeing that with several developers using GitHub,
Skype, Slack, Facebook, or other methods.

The meeting robot did help those who had siloed in the time domain.

> The current wave of trollspam attacks has been going on for months
> now. I expect it will not abate for a usefully long enough period of
> time to remove the restrictions in place, and that even if it does,
> it will recur more frequently and for longer periods.

-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/