The argument isn't that it's difficult for them to circumvent - it's not - but that it adds enough friction to force them to rethink how they're scraping at scale and/or self-throttle.

I personally don't care about the act of scraping itself, but the volume of scraping traffic has forced administrators' hands here. I suspect we'd be seeing far fewer deployments if the scrapers behaved themselves to begin with.

▲

davidclark 7 days ago | parent [-]

The OP author shows that the cost to scrape an Anubis site is essentially zero since it is a fairly simple PoW algorithm that the scraper can easily solve. It adds basically no compute time or cost for a crawler run out of a data center. How does that force rethinking?

▲

Philpax 7 days ago | parent | next [-]

The cookie will be invalidated if shared between IPs, and it's my understanding that most Anubis deployments are paired with per-IP rate limits, which should reduce the amount of overall volume by limiting how many independent requests can be made at any given time.

That being said, I agree with you that there are ways around this for a dedicated adversary, and that it's unlikely to be a long-term solution as-is. My hope is that the act of having to circumvent Anubis at scale will prompt some introspection (do you really need to be rescraping every website constantly?), but that's hopeful thinking.

	▲	yborg 6 days ago \| parent [-]
		>do you really need to be rescraping every website constantly Yes, because if you believe you out-resource your competition, by doing this you deny them training material.

▲

hooverd 7 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The problem with crawlers if that they're functionally indistinguishable from your average malware botnet in behavior. If you saw a bunch of traffic from residential IPs using the same token that's a big tell.