On 01/23/2016 03:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> On 01/23/2016 03:35 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> I doubt it would help much unless we required a 2FA auth cycle for
>>> every single edit, which I for one wouldn't stand for. Reasonably
>>> user-friendly policies like one auth a day would still be plenty
>>> easy for spammers too. (They've got phones too ya know.)
>
>> Bummer, o.k. Although it seems that spammers only go after easy targets.
>
> I dunno. I was astonished that they came back a second time after we'd
> once thrown them off and cleaned up the mess; you'd think they'd realize
> that that would just happen again. I think it may have been an
> intentional attack on the PG project as such, not just drive-by spamming.
> (If so, and if the goal was to complicate our lives, they succeeded.)
>
> Or maybe I'm just too paranoid.
Hrm, do we have the IPs that they were coming from? Were they from a
specific block? Or GEO region? I hate the idea of blocking login from a
region but it may be an unfortunate reality.
Sincerely,
JD
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--
Command Prompt, Inc. http://the.postgres.company/ +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
