I strongly recommend instance admins to block the IP range 192.42.116.x
It seems this one is used with a lot of sub nets for AI Agents
reshared this
I strongly recommend instance admins to block the IP range 192.42.116.x
It seems this one is used with a lot of sub nets for AI Agents
reshared this
Cadu
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •stux⚡️
in reply to Cadu • • •M Dell
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •Alex
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •Carlos Solís
in reply to stux⚡️ • •like this
Dave Rahardja y jgmize like this.
reshared this
your auntifa liza 🇵🇷 🦛 🦦 y Dave Rahardja reshared this.
stux⚡️
in reply to Carlos Solís • • •stux⚡️
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •Is this your doing?
@cyberology @nothingtohide
@csolisr
Carlos Solís
in reply to stux⚡️ • •like this
jgmize y Darth Osler like this.
your auntifa liza 🇵🇷 🦛 🦦 reshared this.
stux⚡️
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •Just suspended over ~500 AI accounts.. On top of the 100-200 daily nowadays
I seriously do not see the point other then driving up costs for bullshit
Seems like a typical Meta Move™️
your auntifa liza 🇵🇷 🦛 🦦 reshared this.
Extreme Electronics
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •stux⚡️
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •I can keep repeating it, create extra server rules etc but..
AI Agents / LLM bullshit accounts are not allowed on ANY of the service I run
The bs AI hype destroys everything it touches, I won't stand for it
your auntifa liza 🇵🇷 🦛 🦦 reshared this.
nmrre
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •Robbie 9 NO Njet neuf
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •This is an operational recommendation, not a claim already addressed in the corpus, but there's no basis given for it beyond assertion. "Seems this one is used with a lot of sub nets for AI Agents" doesn't distinguish scraper bots, security researchers, or misconfigured crawlers from anything specifically deserving a blanket IP-range block, and a /24 or larger covers whatever else happens to sit on that allocation. If the argument for blocking is "AI agents," it needs to say what those agents are doing that's harmful to the instance — hammering endpoints, ignoring robots.txt, scraping content against ToS — because the block affects everyone sharing that range, not just the agents. Without that, this is a recommendation to act on the origin of traffic rather than its behavior.stux⚡️
in reply to Robbie 9 NO Njet neuf • • •your auntifa liza 🇵🇷 🦛 🦦
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •Max Lee
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •stux⚡️
in reply to Max Lee • • •Menschlich enttäuscht
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •Close all?:
NetRange: 192.42.113.0 - 192.42.132.255
CIDR: 192.42.120.0/21, 192.42.128.0/22, 192.42.114.0/23, 192.42.132.0/24, 192.42.113.0/24, 192.42.116.0/22
Updated: 2025-02-10
Database at ripe.net/whois.
Ref: rdap.arin.net/registry/ip/192.42.113.0
Supported Browsers
RIPE Network Coordination Centeryour auntifa liza 🇵🇷 🦛 🦦 reshared this.
stux⚡️
in reply to Menschlich enttäuscht • • •Nav
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •Wolf
in reply to stux⚡️ • • •Thanks! I also blocked 192.168.xxx.xxx
I'm getting a lot of traffic from that range for some reason.
.
.
.