Handling Log Spammers

Seems to me....

[pendanticist]

...that since most log spammers inherantly repeat the spam several times, over a short period of time and if there is a way to detect and ban such occurances...

[1]217.xxx.122.11 - - [04/Nov/2003:11:09:51 -0800] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 20624 "http://www.example.com" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt)"
217.xxx.122.11 - - [04/Nov/2003:11:09:53 -0800] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 20624 "http://www.example.com" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt)"
217.xxx.122.11 - - [04/Nov/2003:11:09:55 -0800] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 20624 "http://www.example.com" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt)"
217.xxx.122.11 - - [04/Nov/2003:11:09:57 -0800] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 20624 "http://www.example.com" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt)"
217.xxx.122.11 - - [04/Nov/2003:11:09:58 -0800] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 20624 "http://www.example.com" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt)"
217.xxx.122.11 - - [04/Nov/2003:11:10:00 -0800] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 20624 "http://www.example.com" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt)"
217.xxx.122.11 - - [04/Nov/2003:11:10:02 -0800] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 20624 "http://www.example.com" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt)"
217.xxx.122.11 - - [04/Nov/2003:11:10:04 -0800] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 20624 "http://www.example.com" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt)"
217.xxx.122.11 - - [04/Nov/2003:11:10:05 -0800] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200 20624 "http://www.example.com" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.0; Windows 98; DigExt)"[/1]

...we wouldn't have to ineffectively try banning each and every poster/spammer since odds are, they ain't coming back no way!

Otherwise, the .htaccess file will become bloated for sure.

This is about the fourth instance of multiple log entries this week.

Given that Log Spamming seems to be on the rise, do you all think there is any way for the common website owner to have such a device to, uh, impede these fools?

Thanks.

Pendanticist.

[edited by: jdMorgan at 8:20 pm (utc) on Nov. 4, 2003]
[edit reason] No specific IPs or URLs. Thanks! [/edit]

[jdMorgan]

In my opinion, blocking or banning log spammers is a waste of time and .htaccess space; No matter what response your server sends, they have already accomplished what they want (creating an entry in your logs) and nothing you can do will change that.

I just ignore them.

Jim

[pendanticist]

Good point, Jim. Caused me to think a bit and Viola! I can still report them to their ISP...<snicker, snicker>

Pendanticist.

[BlueSky]

On my site, they make stray requests over an extended time not rapid repeat ones like yours. Software would have a tough time detecting them on mine with any accuracy. I ignore them too.