are scrapers attackers?

I get they're DDoS; but take the mask off, and arn't they just the AI monied interests that fund the FSF? and a lot of them are just active inference, eg, the user is trying to ask about something and the AI monied interests setup a web scraper to go and get that data.

Just seems like no one wants to call out the hand that feeds them in a human centipede that's best described as the torment nexus.

> We placed our regular expressions in fail2ban, and found that we were hitting the maximum rules that could be added to UFW firewall rules on our systems which showed degradation around 65,000 rules

Firewalld had a similar issue up until recently as well.

> This software is gay, trans and anticolonialist. If you're uncomfortable with that, please don't use it

Weird message to include in AGPLv3 licensed software (which explicitly allows people to use software however they like, regardless of their beliefs or feelings).

My preference is to 'ip route add blackhole ${net}' as it has the lowest CPU overhead and I can add hundreds of thousands of CIDR blocks with no noticeable impact. The only downside is that it won't stop UDP packets from getting to a UDP listener. There will not be a response but the application will still see it. For my TCP daemons it's great.

    grep -m1 -E ^Tot /proc/net/fib_triestat ;ip route | grep -Fc blackhole
    Total size: 56735  kB
    426951

Those 426951 blackhole routes include data-centers, VPS providers, botnets, known bad residential nodes and much more. I still see a few residential proxy bots but the feds are playing whack-a-mole with them. The bots self report to my silly blog so I can block them elsewhere on systems I might care a little bit about.

It's somewhat interesting to see the FSF's approach to this. From what I understand they can't really use something like anubis since they want their websites to be accessible without javascript:

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/javascript-trap.html

Users can't consent to running a page's javascript the way they can consent to running a program they've intentionally downloaded, so it's effectively "non-free" regardless of license.