this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2025
940 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

61227 readers
5022 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A pseudonymous coder has created and released an open source “tar pit” to indefinitely trap AI training web crawlers in an infinitely, randomly-generating series of pages to waste their time and computing power. The program, called Nepenthes after the genus of carnivorous pitcher plants which trap and consume their prey, can be deployed by webpage owners to protect their own content from being scraped or can be deployed “offensively” as a honeypot trap to waste AI companies’ resources.

“It's less like flypaper and more an infinite maze holding a minotaur, except the crawler is the minotaur that cannot get out. The typical web crawler doesn't appear to have a lot of logic. It downloads a URL, and if it sees links to other URLs, it downloads those too. Nepenthes generates random links that always point back to itself - the crawler downloads those new links. Nepenthes happily just returns more and more lists of links pointing back to itself,” Aaron B, the creator of Nepenthes, told 404 Media.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BurnedDonutHole@ani.social 224 points 1 week ago (22 children)

My new favorite is asking if it's cheating to look at your opponent's pieces in chess.

[–] lemmeBe@sh.itjust.works 42 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

When I ask the same in Perplexity, I get this: 1000083824

[–] WolfLink@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I’ve always been taught if you say “I adjust” before touching a piece then it’s ok to touch it (specifically so you can move an off-center piece into the center of its square)

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Valmond@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago
[–] x00z@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

For anybody who ever had this happen, ChatGPT has some solutions to remedy the situation:

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] patrick@lemmy.bestiver.se 148 points 1 week ago (4 children)

This showed up on HN recently. Several people who wrote web crawlers pointed out that this won’t even come close to working except on terribly written crawlers. Most just limit the number of pages crawled per domain based on popularity of the domain. So they’ll index all of Wikipedia but they definitely won’t crawl all 1 million pages of your unranked website expecting to find quality content.

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 79 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

Can confirm, I have a website (https://2009scape.org/) with tonnes of legacy forum posts (100k+). No crawlers ever go there.

It's a shame that 404media didn't do any due diligence when writing this

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 40 points 1 week ago

No crawlers ever go there.

if it makes you feel any better, i would go there if i was a web crawler.

[–] Luvs2Spuj@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

2009scape!? If it's what I think it is that is amazing. Legend

[–] OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 week ago

It is what you think it is, come join ^^. It's a small niche world

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 53 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Did you read the article? (There is a link to a non walled version.)

Since they made and deployed a proof-of-concept, Aaron B said their pages have been hit millions of times by internet-scraping bots. On a Hacker News thread, someone claiming to be an AI company CEO said a tarpit like this is easy to avoid; Aaron B told 404 Media “If that’s, true, I’ve several million lines of access log that says even Google Almighty didn’t graduate” to avoiding the trap.

[–] realharo@lemm.ee 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Millions of hits may sound like a lot, but you need to view that in context.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ShadowWalker@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

If it is linked to the Internet then it'll be hit by crawlers. Their "trap" isn't any how many show up but how long each bot stays on their individual site.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago (8 children)

Then that's a where we hide the good stuff

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 1 points 6 days ago

An even easier way to hide stuff is to not put it online in the first place.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Reminds me of burying folders in folders in folders to hide naughty content as a youth.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Jordan117@lemmy.world 67 points 1 week ago (9 children)

More accurately, it traps any web crawler, including regular search engines and benign projects like the Internet Archive. This should not be used without an allowlist for known trusted crawlers at least.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 34 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Just put the trap in a space roped off by robots.txt - any crawler that ventures there deserves being roasted.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

More accurately, it traps any web crawler

More accurately, it does not trap any competent crawlers, which have per domain limits on how many pages they crawl.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] akilou@sh.itjust.works 62 points 1 week ago (3 children)

But does running this cost the AI bot at least as much as it costs you to run?

[–] doylio@lemmy.ca 57 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Picking words at random from a dictionary would not be very compute intensive, the content doesn't need to be sensical

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yes, the scraper is going to mindlessly gobble up information. At best they'd expend more resources later to try and determine the value of the content but how do you do that really? Mostly I think they're hoping the good will outweigh the bad.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] meyotch@slrpnk.net 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I would think yes. The compute needed to make a hyperlink maze is low, compared to the AI processing of the random content, which costs nearly nothing to make, but still costs the same to process as genuine content.

Am I missing something?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 47 points 1 week ago

This sort of thing has been a strategy for dealing with unwanted web crawlers since web crawlers were a thing. It's an arms race, though; crawlers do things to detect these "mazes" and so the maze-makers keep needing to up their game as well.

As we enter an age where AI is effectively passing the Turing Test, it's going to be tricky making traps for them that don't also ensnare the actual humans you're trying to serve pages to.

[–] count_dongulus@lemmy.world 40 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This won't work against commercial crawlers. They check page contents with something similar to a simhash and don't recrawl these pages. They also have limiters like for depth to avoid getting stuck in circular links.

You could generate random content for each new page, but you'll still eventually hit the depth limit. There are probably other rules related to content quality to limit crawling too.

[–] meyotch@slrpnk.net 37 points 1 week ago (1 children)

True, this is an arms race situation after all. The real benefit of this is creating garbage training data that makes garbage models. So it’s not just increasing the cost of crawling, it increases the cost of stealing everybody’s shit because you need extra data quality checks. Poisoning the well.

[–] anarchrist@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 week ago (4 children)

You could theoretically use the shittiest local llm you can find to dynamically create slop for the piggies

[–] Thrashy@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

Say it with me now: model collapse! I think this approach is especially insidious in that rather than dumping obvious nonsense into the training corpus that can then be scrubbed, it pushes the downstream LLM invisibly towards spontaneously imploding.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 34 points 1 week ago (10 children)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] renzev@lemmy.world 34 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This reminds me of that one time a guy figured out how to make "gzip bombs" that bricked automated vuln scanners.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 35 points 1 week ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (7 children)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Yeah, that has like 0 chances for working. At most it would annoy bots for web search, at least it has a proper robots.txt.

But any agent trying to process data for AI is not going to go to random websites. It's going to use a curated list of sites with valuable content.

At this point text generation datasets can be achieved with open data, and data sold by companies like reddit or Microsoft, they don't need to "pirate" your blog posts.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

True to a limited extent. Anyone can post a link to somebody's blog on a site like reddit without the blogger's permission, where a web crawler scanning through posts and comments would find it. But I agree with you that a thing like Nepehthes probably wouldn't work. Infinite loop detection is an important part of many types of software and there are well-known techniques for it, which as a developer I would assume a well written AI web crawler would have (although I've never personally made one).

[–] ShortFuse@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

LOL wow, this is probably the most elegant way to say what I just said to somebody else. Well written web crawlers aren't like sci-fi robots that rock back and forth smoking when they hear something illogical.

[–] brb@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What's stopping the sites with valuable content from using this?

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

A bot that's ignoring robots.txt is likely going to be pretending to be human. If your site has valuable content that you want to show to humans, how do you distinguish them from the bots?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mayhair@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 1 week ago
[–] tal@lemmy.today 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I suspect that there are many websites that already dynamically generate an unbounded number of pages based on the links one clicks, and that Web spiders will have needed to deal with those for as long as there have been people spidering the Web, which is going to be no later than the first Web search engines.

I'd guess that if nothing else, they cap how far they spider a site. Probably a lot more sophisticated, use heuristics to figure out which sites are more worth spending indexing resources on, as it's not just whether to spider but also the frequency with which to do so. Some parts of a site are more "valuable" than others -- for a search engine, a more desirable target for users clicking on results -- and some will update more frequently and are more-useful to re-spider at higher frequency. Google will return current news articles, yet still indexes a large portion of the content out there. They won't be doing that by simply sending GoogleBot at everything that they've indexed at a fixed frequency.

[–] nepenthes@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

What a great name!

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 week ago

This genus named genius game is sending pain to these previous devious data devourors

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 9 points 1 week ago (3 children)

The modern equivalent of making a page that loads in two frames, left and right, which each load in two frames, top and bottom, which each load in two frames, left and right ...

As I recall, this was five lines of HTML.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›