Slashdot Mirror
Meet Cyveillancebot
gulker writes "A rant about making a new 'acquaintance'... Googlebot is like the UPS driver who comes to the door in a uniform, and will happily show you his ID and business card: Cyveillancebot is like a coarse, unshaven, itchy guy with his hat pulled down lurking near your half-open bedroom window. This after Cyveillance defeats a 'protection mechanism' - robots.txt - and grabs 155 copyrighted files from my Web server, which files it will presumably share with others, for a profit..."
And in any case, Cyveillancebot is hardly a real threat to security, compared to script kiddies and the like. If you're trying to keep your private information private, you should be thinking in terms of passwords and encryption, not robot.txt files!
Oh well, those who can, do. Those who can't, write columns.
This guy is a moron, right?
/. discourages spiders in the dynamically generated views.) Yes, in theory he's right, but reality beckons.
Anyone that has *anything* on a public web server that isn't protected with a username and password (and that isn't very difficult, now, is it?) and they want it kept private is some kind moron.
I mean, I could easily spider his site using wget ignoring his robots.txt.. (For the record, his robots.txt is disalow everyone).
It is, in fact a mechanism for safeguarding content that owners wish to keep private from crawlers. WRONG! It is a mechanism for discouraging crawlers from downloading vast hunks of your site. (Good example: Crawling all of slashdot would be much larger than slashdot itself because of all the different views of comments you can have. That's why the robots.txt of
Robots.txt is not like locking your door with a weak latch. It's like leaving the door unlocked with a "please behave while inside" sign on it.
Oddly enough, I don't think the police would have much sympathy for anyone who's house got burgled like this...
Cyveillance runs a web robot. That web robot has one purpose, and one purpose only: to scour the web looking for "copyrighted material" owned by its clients. What happens when such material is found, I don't know; it's probably reported back to the Mother Ship for C&D processing.
The reason they're widely hated is that their bot misbehaves. Badly. Not only does it send bogus User-Agent headers and disregard the robots.txt file, it'll literally hammer a site. It's one of the most aggressive bots I've ever come across, and it seems its operators don't care. I've seen a server go down because a spider in Cyveillance's IP space was hitting a MySQL-based message board thousands of times per minute.
Most spiders either ignore URLs with query strings in them, recognize them as potentially resource-intensive and avoid fetching more than once or twice per minute, or are at least smart enough to avoid getting caught in a recursive loop. Not Cyveillance; the damned thing would fetch the forum index, then fetch a thread, then follow the link from that thread right back to the forum index, ad nauseum.
Cyveillance doesn't just crawl the IP space of webhosting and colo companies, either. They hit my cablemodem all the time - I'm not sure whether they scan all cable modems, or whether they've just grown fond of me because I'm running a web server (which serves nothing externally, save for a tiny index page that shows my uptime).
Drop 63.148.99.0/24 into the bit bucket and save your server some strain.
(By the way, why the fuck do I have to logout to post as AC now? Are registered users only allowed one AC post per month or something?)
I used SAMSPADE to reference their owned IP block (off the wonderful article) this is most definitely not their ONLY ip block, but if anyone does have more, it would be great to compile a whole list of "mean" IPS.
I do not care for this kind of intrusion (I equate this to exactly what spammers do to harvest your email...) then you can block these ips (route em to never never land.)
Take a look at one guy's experiences with blocking rude bots and spiders. Mark is a buddy of mine and this got him pretty steamed.
--Paul
I totally agree...but...
This is classic American business practices.
We are a good, upstanding corporation.
We want to protect our turf.
We employ a company to help us.
We don't ask about that companies means or, more likely, turn a blind eye.
Dell would never agree that applications on the Internet should, in general, act the way that Cyveillancebox does.
I believe that the author understands your point. He's not whining.
He is, however, pointing out the hypocrisy, which I think is valuable. I'll think twice about buying another Dell.
A speech...
The point isn't that I'm shocked to see material downloaded from a public Web site... the point is that Cyveillance brags about how it protects copyright: their PR placed a Businesweek piece about how they had forced a site that was using Washington Post content to pay up.
Cyveillance is basically reselling content from thousands of Web sites - original thinking, research and writing, that is not theirs... they are exactly what they claim to protect the corporate copyright owners from - they basically rip off work, including copyrighted material, and resell it.
Good scam, they make a ton of money according to their press releases, but a scam, nevertheless.
Rules? We have no rules. We're trying to accomplish something. - Thomas Edsion
C EVIL BOT CAN LYE