Bots on the SM

A site isn't one thing, it has many component parts. Blocking of transaction-related information can be done at account level even while other content is being served by a caching service like CloudFlare. If transaction-related details like amount available are currently displayed without login there's no requirement for it to remain that way if that is what it takes to prevent issues.

CloudFlare is perhaps the best known of the services that is marketed for preventing disruption from large-scale denial of service attacks. It's also useful for dealing with transient bursts of normal high traffic. You'll find it sitting in front of lots of government or other politically exposed sites that could be subject to DoS. Blocking is not normally done at only one place or level in the connection hierarchy. At a global top 100 site I did it at anything from IP address to account level and also sometimes based on content. That sometimes included things like modifying the site software to help.

It's all old news to people who've done this sort of thing.

This stuff is easy, not hard. Your thoughts on how to circumvent blocking are completely ineffective against well designed blocks in an environment of strong identity checking for account creation. To block relies on nothing more than knowing what a bot is trying to do, which is react faster than humans, so the bot has to make more requests for the key information than a human can credibly make. So you can block bots effective by capping, rate limiting, short term banning, prohibiting purchase of more investments and on through complete account closure if the activity continues after repeated instructions to cease. Tougher cases would involve coordinated teams using multiple accounts to synthesize high rates overall with lower per-account rates.

The key issues aren't the technical ones of how to do it but the decision that something should be done, followed by the decision on whether to try to do queues or other allocations systems as well as or instead of bot blocking.

That looks a heck of a lot like blackmail from here...

You seem to be obsessed with creating either a premium cost for secondary market sales, (well I'll think you'll find you are in a minority of one, for that daft idea), or an allocation system, (again, you won't convince many others on that one either)

The answer is simple, as most answers are. All SS have to do, is place a simple sentence within their terms and conditions banning the use of automated software on their website. Anyone using such software will have their account closed and all monies returned to them and their loan parts placed back on the SM.

This would immediately stop 99% of all bots, as most people would not like to take the risk of getting caught and being banned from using SS.

Currently, SS is the golden goose, which those who are intent on using bots, are slowly killing off. If people struggle to purchase loan parts, or the ability to build up a decent diversified portfolio, they will go elsewhere. 

It seems that those people who are apparently intelligent enough to create a bot, don't have a similar dose of common sense when it comes to the looking at the results of their actions.   

Yep, I voted for 'banning' too if you recall .. not that that is awfully easy to legislate for, or police .. I also pointed out that the problem is lack of supply .. bots or no bots, if there isn't anything to buy then people can't get invested in any reasonable time. Bots are a symptom, not the cause.

The premium/discount point is to allow the market to get balanced, when needed - an alternative suggestion is welcome, since 'ban bots' won't improve the SM supply at all (so far today I have seen less than £1k offered in total). There's not going to be a huge glut when the next loan goes live either, assuming it's the small one currently at state2. We currently have a huge imbalance between would-be lenders and borrowers, or sellers of existing holdings.

agree and disagree!

>>>>The answer is simple, as most answers are. All SS have to do, is place a simple sentence within their terms and conditions banning the use of automated software on their website. Anyone using such software will have their account closed and all monies returned to them and their loan parts placed back on the SM. This would immediately stop 99% of all bots, as most people would not like to take the risk of getting caught and being banned from using SS.

Yes! Such a clear signal would put a stop to systematic bots - and any institutional bots that come in future months.....


>>>It seems that those people who are apparently intelligent enough to create a bot, don't have a similar dose of common sense when it comes to the looking at the results of their actions.   [/quote]

But here i disagree - i think it is an entirely rational response - and indeed common sense - to work within the (flawed) rules. I don't have the wherewithal to use bots myself and i'd consider it immoral to be the first to use bots but once it's clear that there's widespread use of bots then it's unsurprising people are embracing the flawed system.


Jack P 

You were making incorrect claims about blocks and I addressed the inaccuracies in your claims based on my experience of actually doing it.

I believe that you were looking to dispel falsehood. I also believe that you were trying to explain why you thought that SavingStream hadn't done it already.

But the fact is, you did not dispel falsehoods, you perpetuated them with your claims that blocks MUST be based on IP address and that account-based blocking couldn't be used, even though I believe your assertions about your intent. Sometimes intent isn't matched by results even when the attempt was done with good intent. Nothing wrong with trying.