Comment by Barbing
1 day 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…?
1 day 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.