[TAC] Fool Bot Honey Pot

[TAC] Fool Bot Honey Pot [Paid] 3.0.32

No permission to buy ($29.00)
Overview Updates (79) Reviews (28) History Discussion
1.4 introduces core honey pots, there is little point in also using FBHP with 1.4. There is an option in FBHP to use legacy mode (this avoids using template modifications and uses it's own template for registration), but I have no idea if this will correlate with the server side code (turn on fbhp legacy and try to register)... Or, try the honey pots using the core.

FBHP is unlikely to be updated to support XF > 1.4, since there will be very little need for it if you configure the core honey pots
 
tenants said:
1.4 introduces core honey pots, there is little point in also using FBHP with 1.4. There is an option in FBHP to use legacy mode (this avoids using template modifications and uses it's own template for registration), but I have no idea if this will correlate with the server side code (turn on fbhp legacy and try to register)... Or, try the honey pots using the core.
Click to expand...
I've disabled FBHP for the time being to see how well the new core features work.
 
tenants said:
1.4 introduces core honey pots, there is little point in also using FBHP with 1.4. There is an option in FBHP to use legacy mode (this avoids using template modifications and uses it's own template for registration), but I have no idea if this will correlate with the server side code (turn on fbhp legacy and try to register)... Or, try the honey pots using the core.

FBHP is unlikely to be updated to support XF > 1.4, since there will be very little need for it if you configure the core honey pots
Click to expand...
:( :cry::oops:
 
Oh noooooo!!! This add-on has been an absolute life-saver on all my forums ... if the 1.4 core honey pots aren't as good will you consider giving it an update? :whistle: (y)
 
I'm hoping that 1.4 Beta will allow me to completely remove this. For no other reason that being able to rely on one less add-on. It has been a life saver for XenForo.
 
MattW said:
2 days after removing this add-on while using XF 1.4, I'm getting spammers come through. Didn't have a single one with this installed.
Click to expand...

This is a problem with many add-ons being added to core.
The add-ons have years of experience being developed to a perfect level.

Since XF usually does not take any look at those add-ons before adding it to the core, it starts from scratch and the result is usually and sadly not as perfect as with the add-on.
 
It's the same with @cclaerhout s QuoteMe add-on. The add-on is supersimple and intuitive and the core implementation is very bloated and unintuitive.

But nevertheless you have to go with the core and hope that someone may rethink the implementations some day...
 
HWS said:
But nevertheless you have to go with the core and hope that someone may rethink the implementations some day...
Click to expand...

Ideally we should be able to disable core features if we want to use an add-on instead. Some add-ons are more powerful or have a preferred implementation to some of the new core features.
 
@Mike has been through the access logs I've sent him for the 2 spammer I've had sign up. Both appear to be human, who would have probably got around FBHP. One came in through Google, which Mike is going to look into. Most likely case of poor timing and coincidence with the change to 1.4 and removing FBHP.
 
Clickfinity said:
Ideally we should be able to disable core features if we want to use an add-on instead. Some add-ons are more powerful or have a preferred implementation to some of the new core features.
Click to expand...

Ideally XF should buy the rights of the add-ons from the initial developers and use the code as the basis for their code.
Most developers would even give XF the rights for free.

As it is right now the hard work done by add-on developers is rendered useless once a similar feature gets implemented into the core. This is some kind of bad treatment of add-on developers imho.

Also, if XF would adopt code from external developers the core product would get mature more quickly.
 
MattW said:
2 days after removing this add-on while using XF 1.4, I'm getting spammers come through. Didn't have a single one with this installed.
Click to expand...

As you ended up finding out, occasionally you will get human or possibly human spam registrations. They exist!

Scared myself about how well 1.4+ will do with only using the core feature.
 
Just looking at the 1.4 beta implementation of this. Do all the hidden fields have this after them?

Code: 
<p class="explain">Please leave this field blank.</p>

Doesn't that make it pretty easy for a bot to work out which ones to miss?
 
I have had to disable the add on for the time being. It stops bots but it also stops legitimate members from signing up as it gives them a server error message. This is with version 2.4.05.
 
Case said:
Just looking at the 1.4 beta implementation of this. Do all the hidden fields have this after them?

Code: 
<p class="explain">Please leave this field blank.</p>

Doesn't that make it pretty easy for a bot to work out which ones to miss?
Click to expand...

tenants said:
1.4 introduces core honey pots, there is little point in also using FBHP with 1.4. There is an option in FBHP to use legacy mode (this avoids using template modifications and uses it's own template for registration), but I have no idea if this will correlate with the server side code (turn on fbhp legacy and try to register)... Or, try the honey pots using the core.

FBHP is unlikely to be updated to support XF > 1.4, since there will be very little need for it if you configure the core honey pots
Click to expand...
 
I just tested registration (first time in ages) and I get this:
upload_2014-8-17_8-19-53.webp
Note the duplicated name field visible under the main window. I inspected the element with Firebug, deleted some elements around it to identify it and it has a z-index of -10.
upload_2014-8-17_8-31-48.webp
Is this a css bug with FBHP?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom