I have been using the http:BL to block bad IP's from accessing my site.
If a malicious IP (comment spammer) trys to hit the site I just
exit the web script which implicitly returns a
200 OK response.
Other responses I could return:
404 - Not found?
If I return a 404 maybe the robots will think "this is a waste of time, lets move on to attack another site" which would reduce the load on the site (I currently get about 2 spam-hits per second).
- I'm reluctant to return 404's on urls that, under normal circumstances, can be found.
- I'm not sure if spam robots can 'waste time'. i.e Why would a bot writer be bothered to code for 404's when they just blitz the web anyway?
Blocking a bad IP is not quite the same as "resource requires user authentication 1) which has not yet been provided or 2) which has been provided but failed authorization tests"
In general I feel that 'responding to the bad-bots according to proper http protocol' gives the bad guys the upper hand. In the sense that I play by the rules while they do not (a bit like Britain in the EU - ha, ha). On some days I feel like I should do something clever to divert these bot's away. On other days I just think that I should not take it personally and just ignore them. Accepting it as par for the course of running a web site.
I dunno - what are your thoughts? How do you respond when you know its a bad IP?