<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Bad Behavior / Bad Behaviour</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us</link>
	<description>The Web&#039;s premier link spam killer.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 04:48:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on WordPress brute-force login attacks stepped up by The Brute-Force Password Attack on WordPress Sites &#171; Lorelle on WordPress</title>
		<link>http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/2013/04/10/wordpress-brute-force-login-attacks-stepped-up/#comment-1230</link>
		<dc:creator>The Brute-Force Password Attack on WordPress Sites &#171; Lorelle on WordPress</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2013 04:48:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/?p=189#comment-1230</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] I first learned about the recent attacks on April 10, 2013, when my friend, Michael Hampton of Bad Behavior fame (the WordPress Plugin and other PHP-based publishing platforms add-on determined to prevent comment spam and evil) noted brute-force login attacks were increasing against WordPress sites: [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I first learned about the recent attacks on April 10, 2013, when my friend, Michael Hampton of Bad Behavior fame (the WordPress Plugin and other PHP-based publishing platforms add-on determined to prevent comment spam and evil) noted brute-force login attacks were increasing against WordPress sites: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on WordPress brute-force login attacks stepped up by How To Protect Your WordPress Security</title>
		<link>http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/2013/04/10/wordpress-brute-force-login-attacks-stepped-up/#comment-1226</link>
		<dc:creator>How To Protect Your WordPress Security</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:19:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/?p=189#comment-1226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] WordPress Brute Force Login Attempts Stepped Up [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] WordPress Brute Force Login Attempts Stepped Up [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on FeedBurner blocked in Project Honey Pot again by RSS Feed Fixed (I think) &#124; Kestrel&#039;s Aerie</title>
		<link>http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/2013/03/30/feedburner-blocked-in-project-honey-pot-again/#comment-1224</link>
		<dc:creator>RSS Feed Fixed (I think) &#124; Kestrel&#039;s Aerie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:58:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/?p=170#comment-1224</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] However, I discovered that FeedBurner didn&#8217;t propagate the new article. After a bit of sleuthing, I tracked down the culprit: It seems that Google (which owns FeedBurner) keeps changing stuff, and as a result, one of my anti-spam plugins, Bad Behavior, starts rejecting FeedBurner queries. You can read about that problem here. [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] However, I discovered that FeedBurner didn&#8217;t propagate the new article. After a bit of sleuthing, I tracked down the culprit: It seems that Google (which owns FeedBurner) keeps changing stuff, and as a result, one of my anti-spam plugins, Bad Behavior, starts rejecting FeedBurner queries. You can read about that problem here. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bad Behavior 2.2.13 by Bad Behavior / Bad Behaviour &#124; Bad Behavior 2.2.14</title>
		<link>http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/2012/12/10/bad-behavior-2-2-13/#comment-1223</link>
		<dc:creator>Bad Behavior / Bad Behaviour &#124; Bad Behavior 2.2.14</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Apr 2013 01:03:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/?p=154#comment-1223</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] The following changes have been made since 2.2.13: [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The following changes have been made since 2.2.13: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bad Behavior 2.2.12 by Bad Behavior / Bad Behaviour &#8211; Bad Behavior 2.2.13</title>
		<link>http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/2012/12/08/bad-behavior-2-2-12/#comment-1221</link>
		<dc:creator>Bad Behavior / Bad Behaviour &#8211; Bad Behavior 2.2.13</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2012 18:15:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/?p=147#comment-1221</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] The following changes have been made since 2.2.12: [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The following changes have been made since 2.2.12: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Disaster Recovery Update by Bad Behavior / Bad Behaviour &#8211; Bad Behavior 2.2.8</title>
		<link>http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/2012/06/13/disaster-recovery-update/#comment-1220</link>
		<dc:creator>Bad Behavior / Bad Behaviour &#8211; Bad Behavior 2.2.8</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2012 13:57:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/?p=72#comment-1220</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] kind words, offers of technical assistance and of course donations during this very stressful disaster recovery. If you haven&#8217;t contributed lately, or at all, please help me keep Bad Behavior going by [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] kind words, offers of technical assistance and of course donations during this very stressful disaster recovery. If you haven&#8217;t contributed lately, or at all, please help me keep Bad Behavior going by [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on PHP Fatal error in Bad Behavior 2.2.11? by Waco</title>
		<link>http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/2012/10/11/php-fatal-error-in-bad-behavior-2-2-11/#comment-1176</link>
		<dc:creator>Waco</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2012 03:16:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/?p=134#comment-1176</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for pointing out. I threw an email to my site support team about HTTP 500 error from my homepage and they just pointed me that something went wrong with Bad Behavior plugin. I followed your instruction and my site was back to normal few minutes ago.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for pointing out. I threw an email to my site support team about HTTP 500 error from my homepage and they just pointed me that something went wrong with Bad Behavior plugin. I followed your instruction and my site was back to normal few minutes ago.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bad Behavior 2.2.10 by Brad H</title>
		<link>http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/2012/09/02/bad-behavior-2-2-10/#comment-1136</link>
		<dc:creator>Brad H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2012 21:33:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/?p=122#comment-1136</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for the reply. I guess that also explains why it logs a key of 00000000. Because it&#039;s logging that it DIDN&#039;T block it but it was later identified as spam.

Have you thought about adding these &quot;false negatives&quot; as another test for future bad behavior tests? In other words, if headers, and agent and IP pass all the other tests, but the IP and/or user agent and/or other post attributes consistently gets caught by other spam plugins, then also include it in the black list?

If I wanted to make some mods to Bad Behavior to handle this, it looks like the workhorse function is bb2_screen() and you have nice design pattern going in there of a serial list of screening tests. Thoughts on adding a callback or plugin mechanism to extend Bad Behavior to integrate with other systems?

FWIW, I&#039;ve been running BB on a test system that averages about 60 spam comments a day. Most of them get caught by our content filters ~80%, the other 20% end up in moderation. Since running BB, I&#039;ve seen about 20% get cut out right away by BB2. I see now that when I test the IPs manually against various black lists (Projecthoneypot, Spamhaus, SpamCop, etc)... these IPs are not yet identified as &quot;comment spam sources&quot;. But on inspection, that&#039;s clearly what they are.

Anyway... even though it isn&#039;t a silver bullet for the spam I am seeing, it&#039;s still a great tool. So thanks for your great work! I totally appreciate it!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the reply. I guess that also explains why it logs a key of 00000000. Because it&#8217;s logging that it DIDN&#8217;T block it but it was later identified as spam.</p>
<p>Have you thought about adding these &#8220;false negatives&#8221; as another test for future bad behavior tests? In other words, if headers, and agent and IP pass all the other tests, but the IP and/or user agent and/or other post attributes consistently gets caught by other spam plugins, then also include it in the black list?</p>
<p>If I wanted to make some mods to Bad Behavior to handle this, it looks like the workhorse function is bb2_screen() and you have nice design pattern going in there of a serial list of screening tests. Thoughts on adding a callback or plugin mechanism to extend Bad Behavior to integrate with other systems?</p>
<p>FWIW, I&#8217;ve been running BB on a test system that averages about 60 spam comments a day. Most of them get caught by our content filters ~80%, the other 20% end up in moderation. Since running BB, I&#8217;ve seen about 20% get cut out right away by BB2. I see now that when I test the IPs manually against various black lists (Projecthoneypot, Spamhaus, SpamCop, etc)&#8230; these IPs are not yet identified as &#8220;comment spam sources&#8221;. But on inspection, that&#8217;s clearly what they are.</p>
<p>Anyway&#8230; even though it isn&#8217;t a silver bullet for the spam I am seeing, it&#8217;s still a great tool. So thanks for your great work! I totally appreciate it!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bad Behavior 2.2.10 by Michael Hampton</title>
		<link>http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/2012/09/02/bad-behavior-2-2-10/#comment-1133</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Hampton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2012 07:15:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/?p=122#comment-1133</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Brad,

At the moment we do &lt;em&gt;not&lt;/em&gt; submit to Project Honey Pot. They don&#039;t accept submissions except through their own code, the last time I looked.

The code you are looking at logs spam in Bad Behavior&#039;s log if any other plugin on the system marked it as spam. This helps us get a copy of any spam that Bad Behavior missed without having to enable verbose logging, which can slow down a busy server.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brad,</p>
<p>At the moment we do <em>not</em> submit to Project Honey Pot. They don&#8217;t accept submissions except through their own code, the last time I looked.</p>
<p>The code you are looking at logs spam in Bad Behavior&#8217;s log if any other plugin on the system marked it as spam. This helps us get a copy of any spam that Bad Behavior missed without having to enable verbose logging, which can slow down a busy server.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Bad Behavior 2.2.10 by Brad H</title>
		<link>http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/2012/09/02/bad-behavior-2-2-10/#comment-1132</link>
		<dc:creator>Brad H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2012 07:07:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bad-behavior.ioerror.us/?p=122#comment-1132</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m looking through the wordpress specific code, and I see a hook for the wp_insert_comment action. I was wondering, does Bad Behavior submit spammers to projecthoneypot.org? Namely if my other spam plugins detect that a comment is a spam comment, does bad behavior noticed the wp_insert_comment hook and submit the spammers IP to project honey pot. I don&#039;t see anything in the code that appears to be doing that, but I didn&#039;t read through all of it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m looking through the wordpress specific code, and I see a hook for the wp_insert_comment action. I was wondering, does Bad Behavior submit spammers to projecthoneypot.org? Namely if my other spam plugins detect that a comment is a spam comment, does bad behavior noticed the wp_insert_comment hook and submit the spammers IP to project honey pot. I don&#8217;t see anything in the code that appears to be doing that, but I didn&#8217;t read through all of it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
