jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (11 posts)


  1. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 5 years ago

    Other forums ban repeated openers of sockpuppet accounts by their IP address.  Can this not be done here?

    1. theherbivorehippi profile image79
      theherbivorehippiposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I  think this is a brilliant idea.

    2. BeatsMe profile image66
      BeatsMeposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      You see, IP addresses are really unreliable.  All you have to do is switch to another internet provider and you get a different IP address.  I'm not an expert on this but I think banning by IP addresses are not workable.

    3. jacharless profile image80
      jacharlessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, in theory, it works.

      Issue A. Floating IPA or changing of machines changes IPA information. If the server has a schedule of rotating hubs {not articles, but central locations for signals} then IPA can vary. This can be parsed for machine locations but is a big pain and brings with it security issues. Plus I found out changing browsers allows one to sign in to HP regardless if you sign in from another or sign out on another. Seems each browser has a specific cookie/session instance rather than a universal cookie set timeout or session destroy function.

      Issue A. IPA Captcha could hinder Multiple Accounts, which HP encourages, to some degree, for publishing multiple styles. A limit of no more than 3 Accounts could be set per IP versus email.

      Resolution #492.1 :
      -Record timestamps of account creation.
      -Delay access to forum, q&a, hub comments until at least one clean hub is published.
      -Check timestamps of forum creation. If one or more threads are spawned within x-time, kill account and threads by sock puppet.

      if (account_creator==sockpuppet) { die ("Enjoy Your Spam Sandwich"); header(location: http://spam.com); }
      elseif (forum_creator==sock_puppet *2) { die ("You Shall Not Pass ~ Gandolph has spoken"); }



      1. Rosie2010 profile image76
        Rosie2010posted 5 years agoin reply to this

        James, that is hilarious.  I agree with what you are saying about IP banning.  These sockpuppets are very resourceful, but at least make it a little harder for them to come back.  I second Resolution #492.1.  smile

        1. jacharless profile image80
          jacharlessposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Resolution 492.1 is on the floor with two votes. All in favor, say, "Aye". All opposed say, "Nah".


    4. John Holden profile image60
      John Holdenposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I used to belong to a local history forum run by the worlds biggest ego who could not stand criticism.
      Another forum contributor and me were on his case so to speak and one day this charlie spotted that we were posting from the same IP address.

      He went ahead and banned the address thus cutting off access from the whole of Manchester's public library system and several other Manchester systems as well.

      I'm also banned from editing Wikipedia on the same basis - somebody using the same IP address . . .

  2. relache profile image87
    relacheposted 5 years ago

    IP banning only works in a limited fashion.  If people have a static IP, it does work to ban that one address which the banned person can circumvent pretty easily just by getting a new IP adress.

    And if you have dynamic IPs, then you wind up banning random humans who get assigned the banned IP address by chance.  We see that here sometimes when people suddenly report to admin that their account has been blocked from making any new Hubs.

    What might be more effective is if HubPages reported people who repeatedly circumvent forum bans repeatedly to that person's email provider or ISP for harassment, which would result in that service banning that person.  That tends to get people's attention...

  3. WriteAngled profile image83
    WriteAngledposted 5 years ago

    My IP address changes each time I connect.

    People can also use proxies if they are intent on an activity they know could get their IP address banned.

  4. MickiS profile image82
    MickiSposted 5 years ago

    Thanks for the suggestion, psycheskinner.

    We do, in fact, do some things on the backend to try to prevent this type of behavior. However, as folks have accurately pointed out, IP addresses are not a useful means.

  5. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 5 years ago

    I know it is not a panacea, but I've used this method myself on other forums.  It can be used some of the time.  Actually, quite a lot of the time.

    Another solution would be to have a moderator on duty more often so they don't get to rampage for ours with a new sock.