Comment by Barbing
21 hours ago
30/s is preposterous. Are these loser companies who don’t want to cache on their end or are they getting unique info per request or could it really be that many different origins or…?
21 hours ago
30/s is preposterous. Are these loser companies who don’t want to cache on their end or are they getting unique info per request or could it really be that many different origins or…?
> Are these loser companies who don’t want to cache on their end
Google couldn't be bothered to cache; I would guess this before anything else.
https://drewdevault.com/blog/Google-has-been-DDoSing-sourceh...
> each IP address still clones the same repositories 8-10 times per hour.
Dumb! When was this fixed and don’t say never :)
That just sounds like a CI system. Surely almost every one of us is responsible for at least one CI process that doesn't cache dependencies.
There are a lot of urls for the bots to follow. Yesterday's logs had 2.2M unique URLs out of 2.7M requests (more unique than I was expecting!)
Typical traffic:
(I've moved and kept the fuzz corpus now, but other viewvc repos were suffering similarly)
I have compiled a list of vibecoders who have impressed me with their consideration for other people. Here it is:
None of the above. They're just really retarded bots. Nobody knows why they exist or what they gain from really stupid scraping.