Printable View
There's still many ways to get around it and it seems proxy owners will go to great lengths to advertise their proxies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keldorn
Also if you're saying leave it up to the programmers like me to do then you will get nothing as I know of no ways that would make it fair at all.
I'm into programming too, I know its difficult to develop an bullet proof way to insure that no one is submitting more then their fair share of the proxies, but that would stop web proxies from being used. Since they all respond on port 80.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan
The only way around that is for the person who runs hte proxy to do a routing with IPtables and use a different IP for outgoing traffic with port 80 firewalled.
Of course that is not common.
You can also check things like their Adsense pub on their page, the IP their website is hosted on. Their DNS server. You could lock the submissions by their account to some amount everday, have accounts require email validation, Dont allow account to be created from the same email, dont allow account tobe created from the same IP withint 7 days, (You can store a time() in the db and compare it)
So to create new accounts, they would have to create email after email to make new account, while still trying to avoid the other barriers such as the IP. It becomes a lot of hoops to jump threw.
If someone manages to get threw all that, then they would pretty anonymous anyways in the list and you wouldn't know.;)
I think that it would definitely would end up being a complicated algorithm, so it definitely put your programming skills to test to create it. :P
Sure you could code all this and that's great but I still can't even understand limiting to one proxy a day? What good is it for the user? It means there is less for them to choose from that aren't blocked.
The only benefit I see is for the owner - who will get more traffic.
I never said anything about how many, But I would say maby 2 or so, yeah.
I think if you want to avoid any complicated programming, why not just raise the barrier to entry? The bar of entry is so low there,
My understanding here is that tech-faq created the $1 submission fee to raise the bar of entry a bit, but they undo it by allowing free domains, its counter intuitive, its doesn't make sense. Stop allowing co.cc.
I guess Will could always charge $2 for non-TLD listings to level the playing field. It would be in their interest to buy .info's as it would essentially cost them the same as using a free domain.
Though that would probably hurt me as currently I had to go the free domain route myself due to a financial crisis caused by my server being under attack and then my wife had a series of heart attacks so our day job is on hold as we work together.
Anyway, anything that makes it fair for everyone is fine with me.
Aus
Sure there appear to be plenty of choices for the observer. But more choices doesn't always make for a better user experience. Try as a user and you come across many proxies (Especially co.cc proxies because mass production often causes compromises in quality) thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Nathan
1] Redirect to other non-proxy sites (Could be GeoIP though)
2] Ask to complete surveys before proxies can be used
3] Are suspended by .cc or hinder users severely in some way
4] Are parked or suspended by host
and other issues
So often, you have to visit a few proxies and get frustrated before finding a good one. After the one you use gets blocked, this process has to be repeated.
Anyone from US or Canada (To get around GeoIP) can check out 10-20 proxies and see the user friendliness of some tech-faq proxies for themselves.