Yeah, I think this is trolling. I think the easiest and most efficient way to solve the problems he's facing is to block all IPs that match the 0.0.0.0 mask, and also blacklist all user agents that have length > 0. Should work like a charm.
Sudhir On Apr 7, 4:42 am, JH <jamesthop...@gmail.com> wrote: > trolling? > > On Apr 6, 3:51 am, Álvaro Degives-Más <adegives...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > In my case, I have both; the API isn't one particularly apt for user > > authentication (i.e. I'm not looking at limiting users to a somehow > > pre-accredited group) but more for *validation*, in a more or less trivial > > sense. The thing is, as I'm essentially seeing that "trivial" doesn't exist, > > the API is going to be axed, even though I was trying to avoid that. > > > As to the scraping issue, you're quite right; the solution is a walled > > garden. Even so, the "big three" are fingerprinted so as to exclude non-SE > > access, as well as access to unauthorized bits (fortunately, the "big three" > > are quite tolerant now toward getting smacked with a 403). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appengine@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
