XMPP Service Operators - 2026-03-15

There have been almost 1000 reported spam stanzas from xmpp.earth in the past 30 days. Considering the relatively small number of servers contributing reports, I think it's safe to say that server does have a spam problem.

But obviously it has legitimate users too, most of the servers on the spam list also have legitimate users (otherwise it would be preferable to just block them completely, instead of the "soft" blocking that mod_anti_spam implements)

So false positives are always going to occur

No xmpp.earth does have a spam problem

is it possible to have a public server and be spam free?

> Someone with a xmpp.earth account was blocked by mod_anti_spam from being able to message me. I only have it subscribed to xmppbl.org and don't have it set to block any strings. I don't think xmpp.earth has been a significant source of spam. Have people run into false positives with it before? i did

and they were bots

Being easy to register aside, did anyone experienced instability with xmpp.earth 9-10 UTC almost every day that lasts several minutes

> is it possible to have a public server and be spam free? Disable in-app register and take registers from an external webpage preferably with captcha ↺

Nice, I wasn't aware of DANCE.

>> is it possible to have a public server and be spam free? > > Disable in-app register and take registers from an external webpage preferably with captcha that does work but some retard still made an account to spam

Is that language really appropriate for this room?

In case someone is using Debian's official ejabberd package, this update allows for accepting those new Let's Encrypt certificates via s2s: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1128568#23

> There have been almost 1000 reported spam stanzas from xmpp.earth in the past 30 days. Considering the relatively small number of servers contributing reports, I think it's safe to say that server does have a spam problem. Ah, I didn't see the server on the stats page, so I assumed they werent ↺

based.pt, watch your language please (as much as we all despise spammers). ✏

sorry yall

>> is it possible to have a public server and be spam free? > > Disable in-app register and take registers from an external webpage preferably with captcha it's 2026, captchas only slow down humans, not bots ↺

I am open to any other idea on how to border check a public service

border check?

I have it so people have to provide a sentence or two why they want an account on queer-spark.org and I, or another sysadmin, has to approve it

yeah that works surprisingly well. you would think spammers would be able to write a few comprehensive sentences to get around a human review, but most seem to be unable or unwilling to do so.

and luckily LLM writing is still relatively easy to spot if you know what to look for. ✏

Lilith, thats a smarth method tbh

but that does mean you gota have a list of pre-requisites and stuff right?

like what if someone just writes "cuz i want an xmpp account"

I do require people to agree to following our code of conduct. I probably would deny someone throwing out a nothing answer like that but it hasn't happened so far

the website is actually so confusing to navigate

gatekeeping ig

XD

It seems to work well enough for people. Though, I'd happily take help on the website. It's mostly been me writing it an I'm not exactly a site designer or the most eloquent

and that TLDR does NOT resume well the whole coc

the coc is very detailed

even tho its not that big

well, doesnt matter it really is an interesting registration method

its cool to see that people com up with their own solutions

That's kind of what queer spark is. Trying to take open software and use them as solutions to facilitate communities for marginalized people. It's a constant work in progress. I still have hardware I'm planning to incorporate this week

> border check? I think keeping a public service like xmpp as similar to a border check. You typically check peoples passports etc in real borders, for digital borders you check if they are not a bot, want to use the service without breaking a law, and any other rules that are violated or not. ↺

> I have it so people have to provide a sentence or two why they want an account on queer-spark.org and I, or another sysadmin, has to approve it Kinda similar to how Disroot handles it ↺

> That's kind of what queer spark is. Trying to take open software and use them as solutions to facilitate communities for marginalized people. It's a constant work in progress. I still have hardware I'm planning to incorporate this week and scanning people's social media to find reasons to ban them for, but i digress ↺

sunglocto (sunglocto.net): Yes, please avoid that kind of unnecessary digression

> yeah that works surprisingly well. you would think spammers would be able to write a few comprehensive sentences to get around a human review, but most seem to be unable or unwilling to do so. imo its kinda the ol logic of i dont have to outrun the bear i only have to outrun someone else also running from the bear. The server doesnt have to be so hard to register for that the spammer cant, it just has to be harder enough than other servers that they go elsewhere to spam ↺

yeah, probably