We all migrate to smaller websites try not to post outside drawing attention just to hide from the "Ai" crawlers. The internet seems dead except for the few pockets we each know existed away from the clankers

top 78 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 213 points 11 months ago (21 children)

I have a testing website. I have never gave the address to absolutely anyone, ever. It's not linked with anything. It's just a silly html site living in a domain.

It's still being ping and probed to death by bad actors. No necessarily AI scrappers. But it's dozens or hundreds of http petitions a day for random places all over the world.

There's no black forest. It's all light up and under constant attack, every tree is already on fire.

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 109 points 11 months ago (10 children)

    That's because it's numerically possible to sweep through the entire IPv4 address range fairly trivially, especially if you do it in parallel with some kind of botnet, proverbially jiggling the digital door handles of every server in the world to see if any of them happen to be unlocked.

    One wonders if switching to purely IPv6 will forestall this somewhat, as the number space is multiple orders of magnitude larger. That's only security through obscurity, though, and it's certain the bots will still find you eventually. Plus, if you have a doman name the attackers already know where you are — they can just look up your DNS record, which is what DNS records are for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Servers which are meant to be secure usually are configured to not react to pings and do not give out failure responses to unauthenticated requests. This should be viable for a authenticated only walled garden type website op is suggesting, no?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    There are several things you could do in that regard, I'm sure. Configure your services to listen only on weird ports, disable ICMP pings, jigger your scripts to return timeouts instead of error messages... Many of which might make your own life difficult, as well.

    All of these are also completely counterproductive if you want your hosted service, whatever it is, to be accessible to others. Or maybe not, if you don't. The point is, the bots don't have to find every single web service and site with 100% accuracy. The hackers only have to get lucky once and stumble their way into e.g. someone's unsecured web host where they can push more malware, or a pile of files they can encrypt and demand a ransom, or personal information they can steal, or content they can scrape with their dumb AI, or whatever. But they can keep on trying until the sun burns out basically for free, and you have to stay lucky and under the radar forever.

    In my case just to name an example I kind of need my site to be accessible to the public at large if I want to, er, actually make any sales.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    I have suggested a couple of times now that ActivityPub should implement an encryption layer for user authentication of requests and pings. It already has a system for instances vauching for each other. The situation is that users of "walled garden" instances in ActivityPub lack means of interfacing with public facing instances that doesnt leave the network open for scraping. I believe a pivot towards default registered users only content service built on encrypted handshakes, with the ability for servers to opt-in to serving content to unregistered users would make the whole network much more robust and less dependent on third party contingencies like CloudFlare.

    Then again, maybe I should just be looking for a different network, I'm sure there are services in the blockchain/cryptosphere that take that approach, I just would rather participate in a network built on commons rather than financialization at it's core. Where is the protocol doing both hardened network and distributed volunteer instances?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago

    It's not as simple as "only security through obscurity". You could say the same thing for an encryption key of a certain length. The private key to a public key is still technically just an obscurity, but it's still impractical to actually go through the entire range

    IPv6 is big enough where this obscurity becomes impractical to sweep. But of course, as you said, there may be other methods of finding your address

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    I love your "multiple orders of magnitude". I don't think you appreciate or realise how much larger ipv6 address space is :)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    I wasn't going to type that many commas for the sake of brevity, but it's 340,282,366,920,938,463,463,374,607,431,768,211,456 possible addresses. I.e. 2^128^. So yes, I do.

    I consider 96 orders (in binary, anyway) as "multiple." Wouldn't you?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago

    No need to be defensive. I'm not insulting, I just find it funny :) usually people call that "dozens". But dozens of orders of magnitude really doesn't give the sense of scale.

    You could have 8 billion in habitants in every 10^24 stars in the universe and everyone could still have 42k addresses.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 7 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Do you know how they find it? Is it just random input of address over and over?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Almost certainly. There are only 4,294,967,296 possible IPv4 addresses, i.e. 4.3ish billion, which sounds like a lot but in computer terms really isn't. You can scan them in parallel, and if you're an advanced script kiddie you could even exclude ranges that you know belong to unexciting organizations like Google and Microsoft, which are probably not worth spending your time messing with.

    If you had a botnet of 8,000 or so devices and employed a probably unrealistically generous timeout of 15 seconds, i.e. four attempts per minute per device, you could scan the entire IPv4 range in just a hair over 93 days and that's before excluding any known pointless address blocks. If you only spent a second on each ping you could do it in about six days.

    For the sake of argument, cybercriminals are already operating botnets with upwards of 100,000 compromised machines doing their bidding. That bidding could well be (and probably is) probing random web servers for vulnerabilities. The largest confirmed botnet was the 911 S5 which contained about 19 million devices.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    I have a DDNS setup. Pretty random site name. Nonetheless, it’s been found and constantly probed. Lots of stuff from Russia, China, a few countries in Africa, and India. A smattering of others, but those are the constant IPs that are probing or attempting logins.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    DNS only translate a string address (www.mywebsite.com) to its IP address (xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx) so that it is easier to remember.

    Bots just try a range of address and they don't need to know your domain name. You could have the most unintelligible domain name in the world, bots would still ping your website because they use direct IP addresses.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 48 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Fabulous insight. I think that would make me very happy. Bring back the forests! Burn down the Nazi trees!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 31 points 11 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 27 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Cyberpunk as a literary genre, and the Cyberpunk TTRPG in specific, are incredibly prophetic. In the Cyberpunk TTRPG (which predates the WWW), "the net" is eventually condemned (as in boarded up) because of AI and ia replaced by silo'd networks (think extended intranets).

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 11 months ago

    And of course in Cyberpunk the ttrpg setting much of the o0en internet was rendered useless by self replicating AI malware hijacking storage, processing, and bandwidth due to a zero day exploit discovered by one egomaniacal hacker.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Well I mean that's kind of what Lemmy is like since it's far more niche than something like reddit, but AI crawlers will find it anyway.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 11 months ago* (2 children)

    AI crawlers don’t even need to crawl individual instances. If someone wanted to scrape Lemmy, it would be way more efficient to simply spin up their own instance and let federation do its thing. Federation is literally a built in way to mass distribute content to a bunch of different servers. So just spin up an instance, set it to not respect delete requests, (so you still get the deleted posts and comments), and scrape it locally. The entire thing could be set up in like 20 minutes, and it would allow for passive data collection instead of requiring active scrapers that run constantly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 13 points 11 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 11 points 11 months ago

    Back in the days of dial up and bbs this was a problem but you would still get robots trying to connect to modems by dialing every phone number possible.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    shhh they'll hear you!

    FUCK WE'RE TOO LATE, YOU ACTIVATED THE BOTS! YOU DOOMED US!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    It's almost time, we're almost back to web-rings.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Isn't that what TOR-based .onion sites are for?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago

    Morpheus, that you?

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Ah a fellow spacetime enjoyer

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Do you think there will be safe places on the internet?

    If it's connected, it's accessible. Won't matter what human level security we put in place when the datacenters these clankers run on have enough GPUs to brute force their way through.

    Offline communication will make a resurgence, and will become indespensible when the resource wars the billionaires are funding reach the rest of the world.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    If i had to guess, maybe everything would become invite-only

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    So like past torrent search providers, ike demoniod?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    You know, maybe that's not so bad, there would be real world links between users rather than the random collection of absolute strangers you get now. Oh wait no that's just facebook again

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago

    I was thinking the other week about how it's getting to a point that I would consider a membership fee to access something like lemmy but guaranteed no AI or bots or bullshit advertising.

    I know it isn't possible, but if it was, I'd pay a small fee to have it.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    I would prefer a smaller HUMAN internet, over a bigger AI internet.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    peaks out from behind tree

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    How is Gemini fairing in the existing bot landscape? Usenet?

  • source
  • [+] 4 points 11 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] [S] 2 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Paid subs is no good but invite only is a good idea but how do you distinguish invite to a person compared to invite to a bot

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    This is something I'm very curious about. It seems like a really necessary utility in the future.

    A way for people to validate other people but not totally blow away all privacy. Large group chats, email providers, etc already try to solve it. It would be cool to see some powerful open source tooling. Like what Signal is to E2E encrypted chats.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    There are plenty of alternative Internets. And even just skipping the HTTP protocol is a start. IRC is a great example.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    The last reduct of mankind against the machines? Let's call it Sion

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago
    [–] 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Already happened, but the AI companies will try their best to kill that off too.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    They don't want to kill it...they're just incapable of invention and innovation, so they push and crowd like parasite universes on the edge of humanity. Like the sea trying to warm itself around a candle.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    I'm ready for the return to webrings.

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago

    Some sort of F2F network like Retroshare would solve the problem.

  • source