Case 7: raping the reward pool with 1700+ accounts - things are getting serious!

2 months ago

Sherlock Holmes Header

Accusation:

Randomly scanning the blockchain for suspicious activities, a chain of votes on a seemingly innocent spam comment caught my eye. 19 votes from accounts with random-syllable usernames on a days old comment on a month old post.

Someone's clearly spamming for profit. I really did not expect this to lead to such an extend as it did, though!

The Findings

Observing the activities over the past few days I was able to connect a huge network of more than 1700 accounts involved in this industrially scaled farming operation! And the number is still growing!

It will be impossible and boring to describe how I dug into this chronologically, so I shall describe the situation structurally:

There are hundreds and hundreds of accounts doing exactly what I had witnessed in my "Accusation" above. These accounts transfer their rewards over to a few hub-accounts, these accounts then function as an extraction point for the ill-gotten gains, transferring the accumulated money out of the platform.

These are the "extraction points" of the network:

@imenosblis; @ramoxingfruc; @unbuinibel; @malmbertdorla; @fawealmati; @simphifinking; @findtigeharg; @pidarlambnews

A look at their wallets will show the vast array of accounts sending in money, and it shows they have already successfully extracted 198 SBD.

That doesn't sound like much, but consider this has only been running for roughly 3 weeks, all the gains are only the SBD share of 2 weeks of farming, and with every vote, the SP behind this network grows, exponentially strengthening this operation!

If this is not stopped, it will cause major damage!!!

And no, we can't just mute and ignore this - flags are needed to protect the reward pool from rape!!!

Luckily initiatives like @spaminator and @sadkitten have also started picking up on these, and in fact, the @sadkitten AI has already started flagging comments in this farm automatically!

Give @sadkitten a round of applause please!

What's worrying, all these accounts have been registered though steemit, so they should have been checked!

Now you know why the signup process has slowed down and where all these new users are coming from. I think something needs to be done about this at the mothership!

yours,
Sherlock

P.S.: just to give you an impression on the extend of this network, here are 95% of the accounts identified, sorry if it's breaking your scroll-wheel!

The other 5% will remain undisclosed but under monitoring to check the growth of the network as it continues operating!

@brilboanihearth; @fifzeilime; @sfulfimari; @stinunkdotaf; @lieremysdand; @esouttadep; @plorcomqudoll; @racalvoroo; @tingreaclover; @pursunete; @beltideccheapf; @adrepreros; @promearlasque; @blacanhortue; @cirdystpanqui; @ricwhiquartund; @tfulovnuero; @joitoucara; @ranicuslo; @handwenhoma; @cieperero; @padviotere; @singtungvesme; @torsbubgapam; @pimanbacktu; @neiquikurwea; @exeznapubb; @zingmarmate; @linkbetumy; @sweettilrama; @costvirantai; @itmorake; @libcutumlo; @nihelpile; @thmatacetseo; @vernicamu; @volkduscompcard; @ninghasleni; @vernilyri; @reacmoosefor; @conlibuckhand; @neypackrigast; @enelarin; @tisubkewi; @retenfeme; @kedelolof; @lequasaltsmal; @naeblooddisga; @liledimy; @reefureafi; @dianutoficl; @consdeschyde; @pracmorrsquanpon; @asprespiolow; @cutthstarulan; @haikaremo; @vairecmemat; @tongditheso; @prefortirroks; @itgadocro; @gihudawbia; @tronlutetab; @pabloposi; @imunlego; @baytisyrga; @exsaulinpart; @apoutpronrel; @refervoilcan; @findditraithe; @churchbarksysri; @dersterssasvi; @ysnarichli; @fuddbrunemem; @decmirado; @netpirica; @sofdebtvanvent; @skatvovitu; @timasepho; @lipelpergslim; @raicatepitt; @sweatimhotsio; @coupvegobters; @scurotenin; @projofaser; @gieponwordsas; @nessdecomppres; @wetvamacmins; @sebuviry; @sweependitho; @beuminspuffscen; @ulverdiuprer; @worktechowste; @gistteducreapp; @specdufquoje; @athlequri; @orrserofprof; @acnilbatchmac; @naubitinfsand; @siocacusvo; @baytrophedim; @kaysuntiovi; @sinelosno; @mendynanza; @icrennife; @lektrofootsi; @gehelcoland; @reumsikeluc; @dahhaboudi; @cobtaconney; @lighmogadedp; @glasmenigre; @thanklandcarvo; @wampterframlei; @grecanwelcho; @grafsuneti; @renoliroo; @tailictflowneo; @backninpersres; @rusverires; @loijacksubsa; @pierusaddrep; @gerengrori; @cluterresverb; @fimosise; @skyjenevcas; @blinimritel; @threadrantener; @hynoseares; @hinansucu; @neymesujub; @restsofulbio; @esmarnitic; @emmasheare; @hurtcomptuther; @backrojona; @prolterpseto; @reacurdticwtons; @sobcbangsporach; @tofenscyre; @pinsviglessspin; @plemeloutsa; @synchcampneban; @enwhatremu; @feedrogilto; @fuddgervestpy; @tylalacme; @epjazmigist; @sparevimis; @rokabelzy; @incondimar; @lierirealwinn; @guiquedextpe; @fulbobelbe; @menscatara; @nforcandako; @synchbustatec; @ponlibicart; @xiekingjackdoc; @leaureapuki; @mostchansiti; @imesaduk; @femcjackmarfe; @reautranelchlor; @gaythetitib; @alurvolbo; @spacobalsor; @preapovaser; @ratoolzato; @promgarcite; @seateservbo; @hardpornewsclub; @atchiphybus; @rucacapa; @haamandescdun; @docolude; @fragachenoth; @tramuszanma; @nicuthocu; @pywforala; @cratagophad; @bravongifsank; @tockmantangmbit; @liarealhaisi; @anubtifen; @tacknalalas; @olacesit; @trosextronla; @brotinacec; @tanktinghelpra; @girepedtoo; @peddtoocendi; @terebusbui; @liawehamsi; @taisopiter; @dlinkoguhis; @dilingloma; @proborunbar; @alonsigma; @alerecuv; @colfernvemi; @icevsacsi; @sunasanchot; @projiphminvest; @izocsatma; @mengariratt; @laisatessea; @distrepani; @tuptoconneu; @softlighmedan; @rugliterkell; @javrebirdcon; @golfheathcdilec; @peosweettasent; @gioteticna; @stosdelisound; @erparcamphea; @inaretas; @slatinacme; @mindugimhigh; @breasaltiamo; @tawhiplorisk; @vuedirufer; @procakerin; @acascipbunk; @chaelicosre; @quisquatruistyl; @tisicoleexp; @jangsublinglan; @riapalirest; @wadsconggete; @ethinunneu; @diacuedreadlom; @scalselchana; @tiomengoldta; @tranunmefe; @ewinvieder; @rarikepli; @prescetuver; @meysolemon; @crypvolbullstal; @teikehrtersnal; @bitttalulters; @propbeaghdismist; @pauconthefchick; @basulbewhe; @lighhochtube; @nisabarwnuc; @kerfetsrollto; @centtimppistloo; @ununadzon; @atacworfa; @paigehrsige; @tiefipermai; @listoulitwhee; @rilpbookmore; @candupostcont; @weperlangland; @countfigeho; @pebunapli; @clipcongranylch; @unsovala; @itzerlongca; @aprarmauta; @amonsysrai; @panpostriva; @ketfnannlegen; @chlorypsnifha; @inenroze; @focislohea; @trastiaconli; @camptinacfi; @mistvillaso; @tranapnaren; @rivderotu; @unirerzu; @enfreemlogti; @pismiwindten; @blasinrager; @roeplacinat; @badccepusi; @heartbeconmyo; @learnmesizi; @mandmosurea; @stoplangrende; @holdpaperbsearch; @rioomirenno; @julardielo; @scatinenthe; @thambsecentkos; @tradidunde; @litleisenli; @thegimiro; @sucasensapp; @taucenfibar; @centbobsprofer; @carpafealif; @riddcilriri; @mepolconkqi; @feidevasse; @atpretajon; @toinietabso; @tcomanjatemb; @ndolihiner; @unarkatpost; @bavomali; @cegatendins; @troselalor; @virbbinnomen; @siachendonin; @erepmula; @tubattiaseu; @pavesmaumet; @popdakoli; @stelcobotca; @wrinsucpaisur; @predacmemro; @gecarhanddip; @turnmonthflatim; @netttremraito; @apsubfebbsys; @soldogscotic; @fanitbiro; @titacgemis; @inradismo; @retcitingring; @paycakirkbrut; @taicintlaro; @tireslapin; @ranrifibru; @getuluata; @ruikavdeode; @melsirodob; @megourkingtel; @thaidunsmorca; @cucererep; @retnaireipeo; @zinnuromo; @jeppdelanbi; @eabglarpathpho; @uninmehy; @carjawindkbed; @counsiltcentni; @boadevilri; @hamnotiladb; @belavehor; @ticknachtprenan; @laymaquabmi; @tramenkedna; @inabansoa; @gogidercy; @eneakmarli; @wecktantfiles; @matttebecot; @birthtournetu; @chrysecenop; @imexoupad; @temabfiku; @waylebore; @sickmiggistwhir; @trovakscoton; @ballgimthemspip; @noumoccapi; @chanworksubfo; @nzennorrcochan; @lanrovecna; @alexacclen; @sangmiddveti; @lowkettphosour; @signsibeasof; @batachreepe; @aseturto; @kerpevsdingvi; @knobtharsongcomp; @conttholaro; @layvepeebee; @postcenciepen; @dekomprasy; @lesthoopschunbe; @litakase; @crowagprinun; @terpoubuzztu; @constermema; @vinficorrods; @ceiconzedu; @ciebrysalci; @tirehealo; @keabmentborrta; @rockpassmane; @etertafo; @sinfmocata; @analefloc; @teinogubi; @renmeamasra; @msonendisto; @permebarcamp; @nethenahaw; @triganinef; @thiamemdoorsbing; @terttourbootsta; @erutmacop; @warddottedab; @lumacodi; @osteevire; @poiroslehand; @bymensulea; @lutegacu; @givernamas; @lighhudddani; @nylloukibbgi; @grafthetdersfen; @cresnacohump; @bicavepi; @wainestprowef; @ecicfulma; @outracalti; @onpoorcasett; @tninsalzvoden; @bossiularmo; @gistvastoser; @bovireahok; @depminestlows; @caltivoha; @widondownfes; @premertanfo; @atkilase; @pomaluweb; @burgcatopdia; @kinmynethin; @kacoterba; @helligiwild; @tiapercurdca; @licimasve; @mapancbsersour; @quigserimab; @xaelikati; @precodwalbo; @tricisadal; @keyjourriru; @maustoresbren; @quipoeriatoi; @benarupsa; @pehocarge; @alrereco; @presjencesy; @gavitarmogg; @petemmophy; @liasimpsarfai; @fecmanalbblog; @steafrandelok; @pinensiras; @gastmicsandming; @parttiderich; @trepunjikma; @salastuto; @termiworlvers; @riduhgyzstel; @cusodocre; @tiegeboli; @diffmohaskarn; @ventioleme; @riehalcimys; @inchiedistfea; @izlogkaunbik; @avgoabroxsu; @vicudida; @marosenti; @denirasa; @orsonjackpitch; @eariginti; @carbchaftuma; @trelermekin; @sertartgarzhong; @beohuntyima; @idatifex; @outalthesmo; @gasarlese; @framenapun; @melheartretom; @anolpenperg; @sennemezca; @verfinktisma; @emuciteb; @mughmenanzo; @owerotin; @stinopsiwee; @spelovcambard; @diohertepa; @isevennu; @aptucrono; @taibackmallce; @restsistesem; @esmeifimark; @diagraphhydbi; @excasfana; @discbuschrestbin; @cosumtingde; @wistbequmas; @tertlicehar; @trouvgarrobu; @ovupunet; @unjoselbma; @ensetwypu; @presigburi; @waitabpazoo; @marnewstaro; @dalnessbere; @tenlavende; @hencvabreto; @buibronsolmi; @armeoblogis; @hicassotis; @lerolihar; @hidiscreper; @alamappo; @procanalul; @baunenobe; @psychaddexmyo; @learolhapswha; @sidelkener; @nieswimxiti; @sneakalines; @turnpirorop; @naraconsmo; @credbamiva; @nespoultslavic; @tabrothoharg; @kettmanlire; @conhafibel; @balseniwea; @ourhilawbgrib; @atepxyboon; @contqahcabill; @scenwecondo; @centphytucomp; @ponsestforde; @scholnikkpowor; @ragdevenrows; @tiwesttwinza; @pencontplifmer; @rucroharous; @theaujohputa; @thusxadinthi; @ranwellcomse; @monsbubizpcor; @lonvertdrumbes; @laschofidiff; @sylabenho; @cardrethogla; @arsiliqan; @natnanuche; @vanamicbi; @hypcompminspu; @crettiburfea; @jetrutumu; @provimatub; @flabunelat; @inablecra; @heartfibrewelt; @alvelibook; @speccossupi; @roilantereal; @tiabloghotwi; @orbetira; @leubecvalgsi; @forscontderme; @crochagentrud; @siladino; @idpidinow; @mibatalo; @fiperdescpric; @litorfhartqa; @vuiwaigusol; @downthistternre; @stattolspamak; @changapabar; @tepsadisfpart; @ransderehe; @liafrothichto; @gritolimga; @memembtesy; @teofranares; @licaphepor; @dentmericont; @czynonrige; @lanthbellcogtong; @planphotasa; @crisvibite; @cafjudgtydisc; @hurdfunniconf; @radxiberto; @tenethomen; @sufchabouto; @helpmuscrama; @lpuralenan; @instalaful; @dasamena; @wrontertele; @weafeeljuggsil; @paccalogou; @uqabhiga; @hamcagentue; @nighgirtgamsi; @dingtinghuksred; @krylachgicosn; @supaddloro; @jantdanmeback; @exschenraftmi; @nelfwarmnicma; @mitmatico; @fulradeci; @tiodervorsto; @flamonlafon; @alupgautu; @freechcokabfo; @pernonpgiran; @tochantova; @retaketti; @conbonsnarthke; @mimulormo; @millwartele; @gistrulite; @cisphaddeza; @retimjatel; @cabtalema; @chiochenriti; @thatechkbouna; @sonaneta; @tucomgiftwi; @giscentmelvi; @oftansewe; @kegemarmo; @sichtfredunsil; @loapendalo; @terrairiaza; @lavswindcilge; @wagevholmsand; @retarimis; @burgprojtirot; @ecganabal; @probiziptab; @niastoptenpho; @sisynmuligh; @spypuninun; @marjarscresnoa; @docknolinkgal; @letzesurtda; @planoninve; @riabachacon; @tiosimadif; @clasarprodsoft; @thernwebscallo; @unreawebba; @heaterphowga; @piegardbuzzcoun; @tromatbranad; @tranalforlang; @backfatufa; @creekepadfi; @chootyvoxti; @analunmar; @pronunvome; @teomareadi; @luocontide; @skorbohubee; @rotomogva; @webcontnipo; @icsaiqate; @exsysxelog; @ropozbanghis; @rausonreja; @quipresrentdi; @runasulgeo; @secjacknitors; @tephytemse; @enalsefec; @swearmanrasi; @cethinrito; @ovmoceba; @dertiohighroll; @tranconliomeo; @vianokonan; @rebemenga; @cheakalbeire; @workcambiwor; @vesfvitido; @vavisembsi; @reobracipca; @mulchadilo; @dazzhatendfec; @nextleanewpfmaw; @voinighterha; @geneandpaco; @prepcasenbui; @porttandemer; @derwphehurhand; @peanolugly; @clerricoubi; @corknarneci; @disthuchilu; @nessjicuflie; @abimrolball; @moraforto; @lauretupe; @parcitimat; @hackflimobpi; @setrapora; @ecineajla; @derlibarnsent; @mocorendie; @loasenfoundbadc; @bonffeterra; @waunewabo; @meedujapar; @imfesbackwebt; @webwoodsfacke; @perdtatuasen; @indonjuter; @ophchitorchlins; @wealphotacfa; @sormindnarsysp; @eranambie; @soundradeta; @chesongmicre; @viepobargu; @artoimienan; @sonarcecomp; @bracertacnosc; @corlerpthumtu; @eedmauronswoodc; @ntanterfmyna; @zeilyjecmai; @westderspopa; @ciajevima; @joigimedli; @egannepgast; @pieprerdoli; @bosrorapool; @tanbmobullbikd; @mutsatingma; @sphermelozoo; @acriviwa; @tanmentbacre; @fauchexsave; @zoothingcartu; @cingcourgolfbwah; @altanechal; @aposinym; @uasgahearhealth; @carssleepanig; @reatotuduc; @leebetbimus; @eatalerse; @lomcoldcorma; @tifoobibjunc; @imsecadis; @morpaadabu; @codoubpana; @attainifa; @kospemulcha; @menihydbe; @dunclitpensppos; @hangmalivers; @ozerdogang; @temapilbing; @siocuviswarc; @ovrasinit; @comthilabso; @weldchitechlung; @verbtownmonan; @opocticbo; @sanlidesi; @porxireasuc; @sustracocur; @friginansvet; @creambumenke; @palicocur; @carddiffcysla; @ciapeebulink; @infipafu; @fruchguistunun; @progranglandvalr; @feijouecatchbur; @barlaujuiver; @platnatosva; @perwheesusanc; @finlewase; @legpoultribi; @drizseybeworh; @lithocontask; @azexeval; @pechildgranun; @consmontctasfo; @ructiniders; @tiogravtera; @detiphaphy; @cogymheartpref; @powscusidis; @cauclinilbur; @predovletol; @sporelviebo; @gespeobafirs; @wabotiback; @welrasedla; @resjetsranspat; @guicalpogoog; @analicrat; @recacongau; @writemfannai; @cimareworl; @ofsicourli; @rateacycte; @menmvicale; @matisamde; @siretephi; @houtenlime; @fredtanafas; @nytibirchlac; @naisapacho; @heihofoper; @quithocede; @childhurquila; @flatdekare; @critjournnepuzz; @coherecnau; @sietraninli; @beautotifo; @exlajecti; @tarchalfspokes; @anexpides; @halfzeljretba; @bietackflavun; @clawimdehri; @tafnepenti; @baresegfi; @zsolcycboopitt; @crevbakotbump; @cattduckpatve; @versinope; @piatlivirel; @redsimitem; @cesnicounmo; @handtempphenpka; @facadiphi; @tranacdeve; @tiipormobin; @nanberocu; @facragami; @queretrogi; @comhaphyges; @bossforsimpri; @suorenguinas; @ninglearnrighcom; @denilaslu; @hobbquacambuck; @feidisgecen; @cyrmillrealdio; @rapancstaroph; @abartoavis; @sufnewsbangthe; @hurdbeckterde; @brigunapmi; @enaralan; @studcardcroslan; @probbaltubourf; @verncorvaca; @presormali; @poelative; @klipigkibo; @prinaterflow; @meocompmeni; @leupasgehou; @fabcerpkenba; @hilltaperge; @highverbume; @retlistruffkac; @fesymvilo; @tilojamring; @imeraccfin; @linkcobata; @rebkooforness; @undipresi; @windcomgaure; @planacuabtran; @ennapita; @nessgiguci; @anhiterpe; @garestater; @ovinmade; @specitormai; @lefunddartwall; @terpmapesac; @synnistsapen; @roscrafarsemb; @isdrudacprot; @carfibiten; @peobrokanat; @puchandmemen; @loapalsala; @propunnvesav; @plunexdivpi; @ivreispamab; @chhalnahula; @tsubecovnie; @ronerkeedisc; @viarticenwal; @sandconpouka; @arfanloavo; @waxtirassi; @phrasetalil; @saltrensrenti; @sampzomadist; @liatiamora; @surrothylpei; @raarahesra; @foundnuhari; @hertotosub; @edommasing; @pluninelcho; @blacatsefur; @neudepbullmag; @toistatyscu; @egapablo; @peccentbasssund; @smoothemdela; @orpivejam; @hydnighdetsio; @favitcila; @kingborothe; @arremreypor; @tiorecahyd; @sumiverfe; @bacsigaco; @fincemuslo; @maptevefir; @marefasco; @concimara; @ketpcentcochild; @providunfreet; @aninovis; @relafootptib; @lighmitreri; @througesburlu; @voyswaltiocon; @agdezykme; @jusamajoc; @quanroyloppond; @nonthcomhori; @dyouquochildve; @ernaltide; @mociteberg; @olatrede; @loolimarsai; @poifetzcalta; @ningdezesub; @exrecvingdown; @halhurlperte; @lofhearttropnis; @quiselimi; @tilbackcahar; @veloptide; @jackransdogen; @satztralanes; @nighcountili; @whelveterte; @veadecose; @tragtivemor; @rebiscamer; @bridirplicti; @sirantetu; @dayfaveter; @ferchelisoft; @atfilhiran; @liehoecophi; @quivingverna; @staplightwinec; @telgemsgraphnond; @inazmiexe; @repkpercepe; @protlighganving; @cielagridots; @artecapo; @hornnresbencei; @cyssehaldu; @corgensswapmyo; @procarerat; @extatmaluc; @itsimotcont; @webpgomorming; @imtomofont; @seytecountjber; @oswatage; @bartbravunel; @nordilini; @vienaceter; @laufreemosca; @bunrestdersber; @raipregalme; @reosisbuytick; @ormentiko; @petsocalta; @funcsovidir; @veydacero; @beclitalctheast; @alannoepua; @stylentedgio; @decomliper; @terdistkechec; @lingsuppwinla; @diafertioli; @cocurodi; @bidicellmop; @riracocor; @dolzatife; @chiakrugacep; @neysiotanksend; @kendtherearque; @johndingvolre; @terprotenmill; @harlicansetz; @sitdacewa; @downletcote; @flattexletzzu; @tribexannoe; @ulinovci; @megicerfast; @surmothele; @eqinimga; @blunricomplead; @elgranermi; @vaynursimptrom; @jaffningmoce; @liwebquede; @stelvestnalri; @wachtoufofit; @carhighgokeab; @railotare; @terfweckruthsea; @wittnelewa; @ulerindue; @utsinlalur; @azcrewusto; @schafamacaf; @greslausumatt; @chalkfaweenda; @echnabesvie; @exfredzirnpon; @esterjoycal; @ramibuci; @bestsuppmansvul; @niskafeta; @norefulnei; @nistsubsclusic; @inmulthirsbren; @esadgunrass; @rathougastse; @almaliguan; @lodewimso; @aciwalpleas; @ganebiro; @squalanonev; @gailerncarboa; @mizaceve; @aligapstil; @hendlastkolkcon; @perssidecoun; @dongbajusti; @inharfehlcas; @substhamdata; @sotovunta; @lulogeabco; @critekanro; @toggrenmywind; @twinfacwooowa; @probcalare; @curliregu; @lesumagha; @tadiscpropid; @zeekinrili; @crofutkiader; @inlejunon; @rilifabro; @inpoetrasar; @chronmitili; @ginlittworkza; @dinglittzillco; @tisothankbes; @millcutenru; @tolichurchflav; @menmyetipak; @sweetalmleral; @rapislebo; @onenitem; @viecilinew; @procrowhili; @teabcasaro; @weifotnaco; @elpigpahan; @gadecpersce; @iglodunre; @coidiarasu; @keydisimar; @pickcontrisell; @peberseson; @rachmumiwol; @acdabtoscrnav; @knociniqob; @riconmipi; @prolmicuaper; @platesviamen; @whittmittecon; @biofronrise; @tilitersrea; @lavelbixo; @pretoutispe; @ifextensa; @svilterpricsti; @nierasare; @jackbagesu; @earilerre; @sulfucona; @blogelamog; @lulicagve; @leilististru; @pharsyncstapna; @countthumero; @conphebiti; @radesptogbi; @poprafthardcab; @spinsubfiltriv; @ciabrazevba; @flicenasnor; @tradununne; @iseluner; @mauterglahpe; @lidasowe; @deyrentjubas; @ebpamangret; @escontahis; @sepasamjturn; @bigbdekengo; @elpacalde; @ndoorucgala; @emnifuhda; @psychinnicoun; @trusidquaiti; @nonsconmaibreaf; @spacviahighbe; @visjacklato; @renlezaza; @depceptmano; @minglamanpu; @riasteprupa; @mismenscori; @atlopormya; @layflinupte; @siosernisys; @drivqueaconcerp; @afmibalme; @beantsidodpu; @ssavcontverbva; @fisufcompdep; @sneakesapsan; @callsearbayman; @latodere; @tiogherenmoon; @quitorcopet; @trabunicek; @glasdensuppnul; @busrentskinfigh; @trathenlyre; @leibankgicont; @windcontsuneg; @eteerdepsigh; @idopthecu; @tangketvele; @stermecosdy; @urateres; @maumariten; @veisadeha; @adrabnewsnon; @fawealmati; @techraigedcont; @biomisrime; @cinasiju; @cirwistperla; @belgcadesess; @belgcadesess; @montvirivi; @opneydifi; @provputriebled; @soybrymxyune; @dittiweven; @rarlighvingsi; @exertelche; @gitabacksuc; @sipcheckdephe; @rytlessxapve; @poiniconcomp; @skellecttricterr; @limoparfa; @gaythelilo; @daiberlisys; @johnsiddnessbud; @nareptybi; @gaicortamem; @flipaldacons; @lacktisysroo; @rendtovifa; @piddrincharnge; @slimenurex; @epbenebe; @arscatrissu; @raisurtyni; @weblofetab; @backfibisa; @waytetomu; @withddestsicomp; @anefprakan; @signneagzeili; @gimodave; @meddamarnoe; @geotamtycor; @maureenapab; @progcheckphilkai; @beauprisabvec; @huddfarmtoda; @voificommi; @blasenpenneo; @deobestcize; @rebinsrinan; @critsolerog; @sonnmompcrible; @lesgsibruges; @lijurcosur; @vapergeharm; @progelimpet; @talksimorri; @propanimbi; @senquisagou; @reireefulva; @alsaristgreat; @sitestercpass; @siutiltile; @blazunocid; @meckningralresp; @neiclatapte; @checklasdage; @lonatinma; @tranaminaf; @enubertrep; @craposglobme; @nilremeguns; @petdavemu; @rempcechartcas; @telenonli; @tireboonkdo; @kannsubcaighaz; @egefexew; @silifpotour; @mulwaycircbar; @logpavabol; @metehenin; @kochquimipep; @webreparkgrad; @raytrifhapbi; @tincrirote; @chesttipalef; @premlearsohol; @fecttoglingwi; @rampocomma; @steperdoitual; @repartentgok; @jostbatowan; @morrtripvetend; @tilgasehos; @ewfovestworl; @gerrucompmar; @viedenraithrow; @galhaphilud; @thornchenola; @prenleromu; @vilkenssuppvet; @montvirivi; @carvielimen; @provputriebled; @boytasourmo; @bronesunmler; @bifipheca; @ourkobermall; @tosrecisubs; @painiytalre; @sloperunac; @drexatferleo; @prapmidsdisig; @treppenscarding; @utinitten; @nighreappravers; @flourguvenho; @ettothene; @seiplantersbe; @easschoolbuivert; @mingcostsebe; @pheopramopear; @telfarase; @sutubungge; @kecoldispsymp; @maulutbeiwoll; @siewesandcrim; @pennjdederad; @blacdanalbe; @actiecrimdie; @minnussrefpi; @myrtticugo; @ewfovestworl; @plotgorsicfwest; @recceyrodis; @minnussrefpi; @socbeteterp; @idatefix; @giagalenso; @sighrodeftou; @garmobiti; @bevicliosis; @ciebrowotpoc; @tomatiri; @ingichotick; @wordfelsfire; @delagenta; @silinices; @lawralobund; @amximabes; @eplasidca; @reiriojosu; @leslessmendi; @vilsyberco; @vesconcbosu; @missleftkofunc; @swaharapmer; @venpihungcoll; @plosreaurire; @vsersuvibte; @leibeancpore; @vetherciconk; @bueretoval; @cobaristvi; @blazoutunak; @ziboraba; @nieesmakulaf; @joicrucasbai; @apounopsi; @teatsembfrapem; @trothinrotge; @neytintsigqui; @dangthechipdio; @nehoskaper; @profnelecbo; @staphelbookta; @excanerca; @speedisurlap; @granpubguamo; @starevemmil; @tiobumtextlu; @quilatanal; @tightrouburlan; @mumtensgasgcor; @vilsyberco; @acserijo; @inderneupos; @unsenpowrver; @nelpcinoco; @niepleclidol; @dingmalenond; @dominciocis; @enwygebu; @nyarudeking; @secvitacoun; @kwoodedtilaw; @clubafiltio; @dismiroree; @arylgranti; @thinworkconsgar; @madwachece; @tiopolocomp; @eatgedefe; @nextvepober; @ercocurha; @sporfiatalong; @senimaghbigg; @torapyrva; @progliboulen; @highmorrape; @seatttersellcros; @postchrisefbac; @sponsursynthbu; @stifitespa; @tatittorsssur; @amvilapel; @ventehinse; @alelomis; @liotencena; @blowtinglires; @bubbvalonipp; @mothgotithou; @atercage; @goldnibasun; @goiripati; @musscouresre; @niagemitding; @nimliharhy; @tervisure; @crenatuner; @dipedima; @prommulrepil; @rolarkbeatsmag; @surliaswames; @emrobeber; @cuannerenpo; @toolthickpassma; @dazzbaparlie; @thernalanna; @reudiaxyloo; @holbplenovon; @nesstwigasic; @adutetrup; @cycvetipic; @ypzaidepen; @dfonbistzentman; @papovepi; @todeckriri; @inemtopon; @tiadomobste; @cogalica; @komourntarva; @unarathnei; @nephisancbank; @ciohagawelt; @gluceramad; @dawdgoldtowli; @helpbrumbicu; @backtumblili; @simpvorstidiv; @tingmeebtoness; @venciareupenn; @tcomtheemcatchci; @islecurdsu; @lafecpeavic; @suiponesso; @mopobota; @colonglawy; @taicremfazut; @ceuninglami; @starinorgi; @leaporota; @tipogaform; @diaglasanme; @polcningtandte; @arilterquae; @markaonasi; @porreamaril; @volvbranesin; @sacardanel; @missfimisav; @tabdakape; @desclobsvoti; @deimaichiehop; @buipalbtaly; @cievarraha; @greszidefsu; @omnetiwhi; @reiwarcontma; @cecompphoso; @socbeteterp; @tiocrittogun; @feipsychrari; @newsthreadinor; @pratunlali; @lemsretoti; @anbeddispto; @clubatnetself; @boypresindi; @plotgorsicfwest; @atdihypvy; @longlesssembma; @nuitentthershill; @bausimulless; @atbrougconra; @blanalcorso; @riddpatephe; @hambtaserjo; @highmorrape; @dinnirembging; @reiwarcontma; @utinitten; @dicbuwealthgols; @downhandgune; @enicinbig; @kurseparouss; @montnfulpecmei; @pitchwizsodi; @lionawickpost; @exrecroter; @stoutbapami; @hosdericont; @fibliddbersfun; @ronvopacki; @srivmuljuiprof; @glycsenbaser; @tiopolongdrak; @junglivicom; @teosiarione; @mokaderaf; @fettblescanting; @quirescoumat; @soypertapound; @guarfacheckpen; @purragergiu; @lighlilobee; @rimomoto; @timafoxmoutht; @travahinsnow; @swathesnarro; @speakleldame; @eragosun; @lorbageasi; @exponhodgfun; @blunnariper; @riglagadvi; @gedderete; @tenmerale; @mavesesva; @taffdiposo; @vorcbopyre; @bahorribi; @saracite; @tricilurto; @snowfeeeterre; @lankitakcu; @solespile; @nachslinghighmen; @imenitpa; @octrowarva; @tiocammedo; @speedanforlo; @bigwhydoto; @molzebufer; @sisaceboh; @dartintcigo; @tonepoti; @tercmetaread; @vuiferteren; @ryopresmera; @unabemor; @ohmoispinex; @tasebirog; @tingtrowsota; @erfecaces; @ovanuner; @proccheeverfe; @deozatucu; @skyrisspooktinc; @compdrywrala; @reacfangfronim; @eqermabe; @gentwinbrope; @tuirafapo; @fastpankeyda; @repbubbpickdand; @libercgalda; @refalcuura; @labolttoplei; @credinforri; @schooldilofhu; @apmovase; @cawikasra; @iscenciva; @derwjakgatok; @tromtispauti; @vivinessme; @tinscredowhat; @inelomre; @seonoprisenb; @enicinbig; @segoljoytrib; @tainarvathe; @nisensaccchi; @vagiternu; @leatashauning; @consdwelhardso; @obinsnoozex; @imbasworkna; @trabzongcocyn; @geitanutsa; @fuzdederge; @vendmulwasy; @lentsoservnor; @tentdovsraci; @diesmakalson; @unspitawva; @oxessenri; @roytrivadnon; @ehanjave; @semivede; @saubalrere; @tertejaper; @liotiasapa; @viiscufurrol; @ghosmowismi; @hightabuli; @gratsubtgistge; @downhandgune; @downsipasgua; @staransubphe; @sipebblaka; @dieribraco; @roundcensalod; @progranglandvalr; @backtumblili; @daruslave; @crumadomdoor; @emapvilrest; @rinthernlidos; @sporfiatalong; @labolttoplei; @beantsidodpu; @anbeddispto; @burjuncmangui; @sonnmompcrible; @surliaswames; @blasenpenneo; @maureenapab; @quiniggnalga; @niagemitding; @drizseybeworh; @consmontctasfo; @terpoubuzztu; @urateres; @clapopgede; @piorimagfist; @thiamemdoorsbing; @terttourbootsta; @lithocontask; @pechildgranun; @finlewase; @osteevire; @biaphicument; @triganinef; @pancomeate; @creambumenke; @tiovrouwverfci; @proccheeverfe; @vagiternu; @snowfeeeterre; @cupepleja; @distkocensi

SHOCKING, I know!


Have you witnessed similar things yourself?

Don't just ignore it and move on... do something, orlet me know!

I believe this post includes enough information to be convincing, if you have ANY doubts, do not hesitate to question me!

Resteem This For Visibility!

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  trending

Thinking about making a bot or program so I can flag these guys in mass... Comment spam is seriously getting ridiculous and steemit will die if this doesn't get taken care of now before they gain more SP to upvote themselves..

·

If you trail @sadkitten 's flags it will have the same effect as we're already doing this

·
·

Just because I'm not afraid to look stupid, how do I "trail" @sadkitten 's flags?

·
·
·

You'd need a bot of some kind. I don't have any solution for this, sorry. I know others much have but I do not know of an open source solution.

Probably better would be to delegate some SP to the @sadkitten account which will help us have enough SP to counter all that we come across. It's very dynamic and as we find more spam accounts we will probably need more.

But I see you don't have a large amount of SP anyway, so just resharing posts and getting involved in the discussion might be the best for now.

Thank you 😇

·
·
·
·

I'm happy to do what I can.

·
·
·
·

Here's another stupid question - at what point do people have enough sp to start delegating it? I would give some if it helped. It's really important to me as a content creator to see this place looking good.

Obviously this is a big organized effort with the"Mystery 1700" and now you are on it, but if there is anything I can do as a minnow - I want to help.

I answer my own individual spam comments and try to set people right if they are new, but if they are bots, I don't think I am accomplishing anything by replying.

·
·
·
·
·

Hi @fitinfun, I just joined here and this spam problem is exactly the first thing than concerned me about this platform. While there are bots doing a decent job, and downvotes do help....it's not enough. New accounts can be created . Kill one head and three more appear. I love the ideas here, but I'm concerned it could lead to nothing. A lot of big users are powering down their steem power which has me concerned Steemit could be showing signs of self-destructing? Although users are growing, how many of these are quality users as opposed to spam accounts? You can read my thoughts on this here https://steemit.com/steemit/@joannajablonka/steemit-is-in-danger-of-self-destruction-why-reddcoin-could-win

·
·
·
·
·
·

"A lot of big users are powering down their steem power which has me concerned Steemit could be showing signs of self-destructing?"

I am on your page exactly. "Kill one head and three more appear" ergh...

Going over to check out your post :)

·

The idea they had awhile back to make two reward pools one for comments, one for posts is starting to look more attractive. It will not FIX the problem but it will limit its potential damage.

·

Yes, we need to be on top of this trend asap!

There are a few bots picking this up already, but any new approach can only strengthen the efforts!

·
·
·
·
·

Saved for later! Sorry my desk is cluttered already!

·

That is a splendid idea! It would really help us all. Thank u.

·

sooo true

Hello @sherlockholmes

I want to commend you for the great work you are doing. It is activities like this that muddies the reputation of this platform.

This is robbery of the highest order, while well meaning steemians are out there trying to grow their blog some people have taken it upon themselves to rape the reward pool.

Keep up the good work, the community is solidly behind you. We are tired of this.

Resteemed

@ogochukwu

·

please be aware the reward pool is not being sexually tortured.

The danger of an incentivized community like Steemit is that the rewards are real and direct. On Reddit, in contrast, someone might do this with the hope of driving traffic to a landing page (or for useless karma...), but that requires users to trust the domain they're being redirected to etc.

How well we protect Steemit from this will likely decide if it's going to be around long-term or not.

·

Agreed, and due to the nature of things, the community needs to be actively protecting this growing Utopia!

·
·

yes, and we have big plans for bringing this to light and getting all involved in protecting steemit.

·
·
·

Ooooh I would be so curious to know @stellabelle! I'm new to Steemit and my first post was on the future longevity of Steemit if this spam issue doesn' get under conrol (https://steemit.com/steemit/@joannajablonka/steemit-is-in-danger-of-self-destruction-why-reddcoin-could-win). It seems it struck a cord with the community so it is very much on the top of everyone's mind. I read your post about creating a good reputation and I think that is what all of us need to strive for when creating. We just need a better filtering mechanism that doesn't reward the spammers.

Sherlock you have been working hard, very commendable.

Ok so what happens next? We split up into teams and flag like crazy? Or await the signal from upstream?

·

I think @sadkitten is being highly effective in this case, however, if you find comments that have still pending rewards, any flag that reduces the income of this network helps!

·
·

Excellent news! Is @sadkitten your pet?

·
·
·

I am the caretaker of @sadkitten :) Just created a post about it

·
·
·

While I'd like to pet her, no, we are not affiliated, but I am submitting the account list to them.

Incredible find @sherlockholmes! Resteemed for visibility!

WHOOOOOA.... That is so many accounts! I can see how the structure would allow for incremental gains to become exponential in a relatively quick way.... What happens next?

·

We need to keep the income down by flagging where needed, @sadkitten is doing a good job but has limited SP.

And stay vigilante, there will be ever more of these operations popping up until we stop their success, I am afraid!

·
·

I'm afraid that something on this scale requires more than flagging. The Steem team need to do something.

·
·
·

I absolutely agree!

I have learned (from a different yet unreleased case) that users are able to sign up chains of accounts with numbered email addresses under a private mail domain (like 1 - 999@myprivatedomain.com) . This should be more than obvious to the account creation process at steemit.com!

·
·
·
·

This has to be dealt with at a programming level. Are the Steem team aware of this, are they even going to take action? They seem so slow to make other changes on Steemit.

·
·
·
·
·

Yes, I am clueless as to how these accounts get through a "manual verification" process.

They seem to not pay very much attention at the mothership!

·
·
·
·
·
·

Sigh... there are a few things around here...

Well, think about it. I cannot possibly be a manual verification process. Steemit would have to hire an army of people to vet the sign ups. So I call BS. It is obviously automated.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Yeah, and not even reasonably so.

In a related case (to be released soon) someone signed up with numbered email addresses on a private domain.

It's no question where the vulnerability lies, but that's nothing we can fix ourselves. So until someone at the mothership wakes up, we'll have to be vigilante!

·
·
·
·

This is most crucial, kill spam at the source.

·
·
·
·
·

I see you found a spammy flag-friend? Any particular reason @thepunisherr is following you?

·
·
·
·
·
·

I tagged you in my previous post actually, I believe he is tailing me. He sent me over 140 messages for .14 SBD and flagged two of my posts for around -160. It's because he offered me an upvote and resteem to his 6000+ followers and I called him out.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Yes, that account has been making the rounds now.

·
·

We will make sure not to run out of SP on this task. There are several whales who recognize their responsibility to their investment and are willing to help, and Steemit Inc. delegation may also be an option.

·
·
·

This sounds like good news!

·

Yes, that's from that whole ongoing noganoo drama. Let's not get into that sigh

·
·

This is the one thing that worries me about the value of the steem coin.

If the market believes that too many individuals are gaming the system, the perceived value of the currency will drop.

·
·
·

That's one of the reasons why we need to try and combat these cheats!

·
·
·

Which is precisely why Steemit needs to ACTIVELY PURSUE building a reputation (especially among the "penny miners" of the web) as a platform that is RUTHLESS about any kind of automated (and other) gaming of the system. If we can build a reputation as being "not profitable" for that kind of activity... then perhaps we CAN have a true game changer here.

I came across a post yesterday 271 thousand votes for comments, payout 540 Dollars

Have a look at the votes in the comments

https://steemit.com/ecology/@ecoworld/1942-2016-72-years-of-nuclear-part-1

·

This is absolutely insane!

Thanks for bringing it to my attention, this needs a closer look!

P.S.: A similar case with numbered comments happened a while ago before I opened this account, Might have been around the same time... I'll keep you posted if I find anything.

·

Wow, that account was really milking the system.

Yikes! Once again great detective work, I'm amazed and horrified at the scale of this operation. I'm glad there's already a bunch of anti spam accounts, but it's clear we still need more power to fight this bullshit.

·

We do, and it's an uphill battle... but it is showing some signs of success!

Well well well... "Elementary my dear watson".
Nicely done @sherlockholmes i see this as the work of well programmed and synchronized bots.

Its crazy whats going on here... It could be the programmer has seen a flaw in the steemit structure and is all out to exploit it.

Truly, if this is left unchecked, the puppeteer behind this racket will be raking in hundreds of thousands of SBDs....

From analysing a few of the accounts you posted, it is obvious the puppeteer is still experimenting this technique as he carefully picks very old posts, which attracted no votes or comments or interest during their 7 days payout period, and this of course was purposely done with the intention that his activities will go unnoticed by the steemit enforcement units, at least until a time that they build up sufficient SBDs (whale status) in particular accounts which are probably still undiscovered by @sherlockholmes, and then they can begin to cause real havoc on the system to their advantage when they start flexing their whale muscles.

·

you're quite correct, and the network I've been able to identify is not the only one, albeit, hopefully a particularly large one.

The pattern you correctly describe can be seen in numerous smaller operations. That's why it's so important to get AI recognition on this like @sadkitten is attempting.

More importantly though, the guys at the steemit HQ need to work on the account verification, essentially they are sponsoring operations like these by not vetting their signups properly!

This is happening in every scale on this Platform. I have slowly lost fait a few days at a time for that reason. It all sounded amazing in theory until you throw in the human mind and its corruptive nature. Back to Youtube it is lol

·

While there are various problems with the Steemit beta platform, including susceptibility to rewards pool mining and technical issues with the code, these problems are yet to be addressed.

Youtube is deliberately creating problems with the content, suppressing various channels, and even simply removing content and creators from the platform. They are increasing the rate of this activity, and broadening it's application to content. Youtube is going to get worse, not better.

Steemit yet may solve these problems.

·

Unlike YouTube, here YOU can do something about the problems, too!

For those of you curious what one of these click farm operations look like in the flesh. As you can see, a unique telephone number is insufficient to guarantee unique users.

·

The caption on that video is "They make fake ratings for mobile apps"

They look like their pumping fake volume into certain apps on Google Play to make the games seem more popular than they actually are...

Interesting video, thanks for posting it.

·

What's worse: you can do all that on steemit with a single computer.

·
·

:/! Arg.... Good thing people like you are investigating this stuff, I hope Steemit can get that sort of abuse under control somehow. That people can do that on one computer is just ... disheartening somehow. The real superheroes today all seem to be computer guys with good morals, sigh, I should have learned programming....

·
·
·

It's never too late!

·
·
·
·


Does markdown count? :P

·
·
·
·
·

It's a good start I guess !

·
·
·
·
·
·

Don't know how you want people to report suspicious stuff, so will do it here - check out tinoe & tinoei, 2.3k followers, 35k following with 65 posts... might be nothing, but looks fishy to me (noob that I am).

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Good catch, this one has some interesting traces.

I will investigate this one further.

If you wanted to report anonymously:
steemit.chat @sherlockholmes

Thanks for your vigilance in uncovering these troublesome behaviors.

is the Steemit team working to solve this issue? can accounts be terminated? Or its a matter of downvoting each account which is very difficult?

·

Accounts can not be terminated, there is no central authority that could do this on the blockchain.

Yes, keeping these abuse-patterns under control is very difficult, flagging and removing support to those players is the only defense mechanism this community has.

Luckily some whales are starting to pay attention to protecting the reward-pool.

We should create a bot service that would flag any post or comment flagged by spaminator or sadkitten. Rather than delegate sp you could assign it one vote per day or more if you wanted which would only be used if needed as a downvote to erase any gains from the spam posts.

So it would be like the curation trails that currently exist only for downvoting instead of upvoting.

·

A spaminator-trail, not a bad idea.

Was the @tm888ph doing the same thing? I think they stopped last month, but who is to say that they won't start up again?

·

Good catch!

They didn't comment-farm. They simply extracted all the signup bonus money, probably moved it all to a proper main account by now.

·
·

I hope they stopped the bonus money, or at least reviewing it first before allowing this to happen again?

·
·
·

All accounts still have their signup delegation. Steemit inc isn't paying much attention to this I am afraid.

·
·
·
·

So it basically is already lost value, or at least "on the books" as already spent?

·
·
·
·
·

To-date only 0.5 Steem is actually given to sign-ups, the majority of initial voting power is only delegated to new accounts, it remains under ownership of @steem.

those were older accounts when the actually given Steem used to be more. That has all been taken, yes.

·
·
·
·
·
·

Thanks! I have only followed the signup method when I first started on Steemit, about a year ago.

·

I've just posted some Cookie Crumbs based on this lead.

Great work. I will be sure to post and flag anything that looks like spam especially from user names like these that have no meaning and look like bots. Nice try and I knew we would be vulnerable to this but we must fight it at all costs or else the content creation will be so far down the list that Steemit.com goes into the elephant graveyard. ReSteemed and Upvoted

Wow.. good work i must say old chap :)

This post received a 2.6% upvote from @randowhale thanks to @stefanmoe! For more information, click here!

Bots fighting bots. The future is weird.

·

What a time to be alive!

OMG... This is more serious than I thought. Is it even possible to catch these people?

·

Getting the actual people behind this may be close to impossible. What's important is putting a stop to it!

·
·

I agree with the first part. By am I wrong to say the the developers don't really give a shit what who win some or loses amongst ourselves

·
·
·

Intrinsically, one would think, they should have a lot of interest in fixing this. The reality of things appears differently, though, but that may be due to limited capacities.

Hi @sherlockholmes! You have just received a 2.0 SBD tip from @cardboard!

@tipU - send tips by writing tip! in the comment and get share in service profit :)
By upvoting this comment you support the service - thanks!

Great work finding all these 'sock puppets' I almost saw this too late to resteem.
Keep up the good work.
You got an upvote & resteem from me.
Steem on beyond the moon, who's in for the ride? Good luck to us all.

Thanks for sharing this. We need to put the rewards pool back in the hands of those who deserve it! :)

restreemed ..... great work thanks ...I have been annoyed with this sort of activity and think the bots should be killed off as well.... we have a discussion on bots going on here . a real steem guy that works hard to make steem what it is and should be .....https://steemit.com/steemit/@everittdmickey/bots-are-bad-for-steemit

·

I leave the ethical debate to others, one thing is clear to me, bots are inevitable and "part of the nature of this system".

why am I not in the list? =)
Top Spammer not caught yet? =)

·

you must have a good cloaking device!

·
·

oh yeah =)
this is the tiny model of the place I live in =)

works just fine, trust me

@sherlockholmes please reach out to me on steemit.chat. Thanks!

This is the biggest problem with the community. Thanks for raising this. I think that if the steemit developers put an end to it, the steem price will go up much more.

thank you for your amazing work!!!

Thanks for your work!

That's is completely shocking. I hope the Steemit devs do something about this as we are all getting raped really...

·

Indeed! But until they take action at the mothership, and it looks as that will take a while, we as the community need to be extra vigilante and active about this.

·
·

What do you suggest we do?

·
·
·

If you have enough reputation and SP, flag the spam you see.

If you see something too big, or if you are uncertain, be vocal and bring it to attention.

I welcome any leads via steemit.chat @sherlockholmes

·

you are not being sexually tortured in this instance ... nor are the rest of us

Great detective work. By the way, I noticed a typo and possible bug: one of the usernames above starts with "@@" and thus isn't a link, it's just normal text (it's @belgcadesess).

Last week I noticed a bug where (@libertyteeth) won't be made into a link, either.

(Note that the end of my first paragraph above does have a link, because it's the beginning parentheses that causes the issue, not the ending.)

·

Thanks! That was a typo from compiling the list with. It's fixed now.

Resteemed :) this is shocking!! They are just abusing a great platform for money!!! Thanks for sharing hopefully the problem is solved one way or another get rid of these twats!!

Wow, all the accounts have avatars too. I wonder where they scraped them from.

And I don't know that this is a problem, but do you know what all the badgers are that upvoted this post? https://steemit.com/creepycatman/@fingersik/re-ats-david-re-richardjuckes-re-ats-david-re-berniesanders-dan-is-so-fucking-pathetic-20170802t231431991z

I don't think @fingersik is doing anything wrong, but what's the deal with https://steemit.com/@badger3191/curation-rewards and the dozens of other badgers? They might not be doing anything wrong either, I just want to understand :P

·

That's indeed very interesting.

Thanks for the pointer, I will take a look at this asap!

·

Here are he accounts I found. They had from $780 - $850 SteemPower each. I didn't do much of a search to find another number sequence.
They are doing around $0.015 on average curation rewards for 3 posts per day or 0.687 STEEM POWER per week, according to one account.
At 70 accounts, that is about 48.09 STEEM POWER per week.
I didn't recheck, but it seems they were all created in June 2016 and have been doing this since then.

@badger
311 - 319
3101 - 3107
3111 - 3117
3121 - 3126
3131 - 3136
3141 - 3146
3151 - 3156
3161 - 3166
3171 - 3176
3181 - 3181
3191 - 3196

·
·

Weird. That hardly seems worth it. On the other hand, it flies low enough on the radar that no one's going to make much of a fuss.

·
·
·

Badger was one of the string of accounts mining Steem last year. You needed multiple accounts to mine on multiple PCs. Looks like they just set up a curation trail instead of taking the time to power down and consolidate on one account like I did. I don't see anything bad about this one.

·
·
·
·

Got it! Thanks for clarifying. There are lots of artifacts in the system, which is fine and fun for the curious, but since there are lots of conversations happening about what is and isn't "appropriate" or "flag-worthy" use, it muddies the water a bit when we come across them by chance.

·
·
·

Well, I'm not getting 48 STEEM Power a week for just upvoting random articles. Just sayin'.

·
·
·
·

Yawp.

Well well well... "Elementary my dear watson".
Nicely done @sherlockholmes i see this as the work of well programmed and synchronized bots.

Its crazy whats going on here... It could be the programmer has seen a flaw in the steemit structure and is all out to exploit it.

Truly, if this is left unchecked, the puppeteer behind this racket will be raking in hundreds of thousands of SBDs....

From analysing a few of the accounts you posted, it is obvious the puppeteer is still experimenting this technique as he carefully picks very old posts, which attracted no votes or comments or interest during their 7 days payout period, and this of course was purposely done with the intention that his activities will go unnoticed by the steemit enforcement units, at least until a time that they build up sufficient SBDs (whale status) in particular accounts which are probably still undiscovered by @sherlockholmes, and then they can begin to cause real havoc on the system to their advantage when they start flexing their whale muscles.

·

I think you accidentally posted this twice.

·
·

Yes an error of refreshing the page when it got stuck

·

Very salient analysis!

·
·

Thanks for taking the time to read my own observation. I appreciate it.

Even minnows can help stamp out bots before they get more steem power than us.

·

Absolutely! With these bots, when discovered at an early stage, even minnows can cripple their progress!

I had to scroll down for 3 hours on my phone to upvote this post.

·

Yes, I'm sorry I know, but at least that gave you a nice impression of the extend of this scheme!

Thanks for making it all the way down here!

Great detective work Sherlock! It occurs to me as I'm going through the list and throwing flags at all the comments I can to reduce their payout to zero, that these people are stealing the money twice!

The first time with their little bot army of bogus comment votes they steal from the curation reward pool. The second time as I waste voting power on flagging them to 0 rewards they are stealing rewards from the content creators I would have used that voting power to reward.

·

It's sad, but it's true!

Ou
Can someone do something about this?
Thanks for the investigation. J
Resteemed

Resteemed. This needs to spread.

I AGREE 100%. Wish there was a way to shut this crap down!

Good catch, just call @ned, he can and should withdraw the SP-Delegation to all of these 1700 accounts.

·

Everytime I call him, he never picks up!

But yes, they should withdraw that delegation, and more importantly, get the signup process vetted properly.

·

While I expect @ned withdrawing delegation from these accounts will solve this particular problem, I do not think this is a good use of his time, and will certainly prove unwieldy in the long run.

Having a unique phone number is apparently not an adequate bar to sock puppets. The more I think about it, the more the ability to have multiple accounts seems to merely potentiate abuse, and, while being useful for valid purposes, does not seem necessary.

Also, why can't a captcha be imposed? I have heard it said that because the network/blockchain is distributed captchas won't work, but I do not see why not.

Various code needs to run in order to make a post, comment, or vote, and requiring a captcha to be successfully challenged seems no different than any other code.

Can we all grow up and stop saying that the Reward Pool is being Sexually Tortured !!! Is that too much to ask?

The Reward Pool is Not Sexually Tortured

·

Before you criticize the use of a word, you may want to check on it's actual meaning.

Rape does not have an exclusively sexual context. The dictionary may list the sexual context first, but it does list several others next:

  • The act of seizing and carrying off by force; abduction:
    the rape of Europa by Zeus.
  • The act of pillaging or plundering:
    the rape of the city by the invaders.
  • Abusive or improper treatment; spoiling or abuse:
    the rape of the land by polluters.

And to make it more precise, the word "rape" is actually based on the latin "raptio", meaning "abduction". Such as in The Rape of the Sabine Women

Use of the word "rape" comes from the conventional translation of the Latin word used in the ancient accounts of the incident: raptio. Modern scholars tend to interpret the word as "abduction" as opposed to (sexual) violation.

So we cannot say that the word "rape" is inappropriate in my given context here. At most it may be with some slight controversy about the interpretation of the word "rape" in itself, but seeing that the actual subject of the title is "the reward pool", it is quite clearly non-sexual!

·
·

In context of today's world. It is inappropriate. Pretty sure the Old English, Medieval versions of the word are not the first impressions of today's audience. And, yes, we do seem to be repeating ourselves here. After I realized, I really was at my wits end with this, I went and made my own post. I'll be updating it to reflect this mindset as well. thank you for reminding me of this antique excuse.

Really excellent work exposing these parasites. Resteemed and upvoted!

Thank you for doing all the research. I am quite new here but still puzzled on what is going on.

This does not surprise me at all. Currently it's profitable to sell likes and followers on Facebook so it should come as no surprise the same people are doing the same on Steemit and they don't even have to find customers.. they can just endlessly upvote.

Its going to be impossible to fight almost.. Not sure how this can be solved..

·

Immediate countermeasures available to us are just flags.

This really needs to be tackled at the steemit HQ where these accounts are being created, but I am not too hopeful that this will come soon.

Holly Molly!!!!! I knew I was getting hit much to fast and hard by SBD scammers. You did a lot of hard work here. I hope the Steemit team gets a hold on this. You look like someone I DEFINITELY want to follow. Thanks for all the had work on this ^_^

Unbelievable.

Thanks for all of your hard work.

Goodness! You uncovered a LOT of accounts!! 1700?? ouch. Thank you for your work and highlighting this problem. I agree, this is not right and something needs to be done. Resteemed to help others understand.

Holy monkey! I am new here and not very tech savvy, I surely appreciate people like you keeping your eyes open.

Well done! Keep up the investigations. These types of sybil attacks are the bane of open platforms.

@sherlockholmes, thank you for discovering this. I am totally clueless to look at transactions on the blockchain. Will you be able to help me trace a transaction in which I transferred SBD but with the wrong address. Bittrex ask me a transaction number. If you will be able to help me I would be your forever grateful follower and supporter. Will resteem this post.

·

If it wasn't too long ago you should be able to find it easily on steemd:

https://steemd.com/@hope777

I found the tx of 87 SBD 17 days ago? If that's the one, then the tx_id is 0e816deec8a69231457fe03e4dda0d6dc2f36468

·
·

Thank you, thank you, yes that's the one. You are a star!

·
·
·

You're welcome!

Ready to wave the flag when needed...
We need to stay vigilant

·

Yes sir!

Thanks for what you did for the community.

Yes, this battle needs to be fought in the trenches, like @sherlockholmes is doing (nice job, btw. Wow!), but it needs to be won on the front end - the account creation process!. How the hell can this many shit accounts get approved through the creation process like this? That is the broken part that needs to get fixed, because otherwise the war will be lost.

It's not hard to figure that there are other people that have built their own "army" of thousands of accounts by now. And there is no legitimate reason for doing so - but only for bleeding out the rewards pool and/or exerting excessive control over other people.

There is a reason that each account is given one vote per post or comment. To level the playing field accordingly, imagine if each account were allowed to vote 1,000 times on something, while reducing voting power by 1 vote. Can you imagine? Steemit would quickly become unusable.

·

You are absolutely right, this needs to be addressed and fixed at the level of entry!

Until this happens, and that may be a while I suppose, we have to stay in the trenches!

Thanks a lot detective!

Thanks for mentioning the kitten! I've added the accounts that were new here to our list, thanks. Keep up the good work! 😸

·

tips hat

Thank you so much @sherlockholmes for pointing this out. I've been spending a lot of time in #steemitabuse and we've been finding more and more of these types of schemes. It's critical that we find these and flag them into oblivion.

·

Absolutely! Thank you for the support!

resteemed, this IS a BIG problem....I am glad you are onto it!

Thank you for your hard work.

FRAUD ALERT

Hi @sherlockholmes

I noticed suspicious activity by a user named warren.buffett (0) and his minion road.runner (56) - on my post linked below warren came by after 30 min. and upvoted a "beep beep" comment for a buck and some change. I checked out Mr. Buffet's account and he appears to have created thousands of dummy accounts and collected on the signup bonus by transferring it all to the warren.buffett account to the tune of $16,000 plus. I'm new here but looking into his wallet I see hundreds of different users all transferring the same exact amount of 3 and then 6 Steem which may have been a signup bonus when this occurred 4 months back. Maybe he is already known but just to let you know he is still active and paying himself with swindled Steem Power.

This is the post where I first noticed warren.buffett

https://steemit.com/photography/@otage/brooklyn-by-night-4-2017731t95354632z

FYI @sadkitten @spaminator

·

I am curious how such obvious mechanisms as this you report, and that exposed in @sherlockholmes' post itself, were not precluded by design.

The potential for all these shenanigans is inherent in weighting VP with SP, and the prevention of them is simply to not weight VP with money.

My concern for the platform increases every day, and the recent failure of every exchange for Steem I am aware of people using forbodes darkly danger for Steemit.

I use no exchanges, and xfer no Steem, so I only hear the statements of those that do, and attempt to understand the issues.

·
·

Yes it's surprising that better technology isn't already in place. In July I had to wait a day to be verified by Steemit. WB's account goes back at least 4 or 5 months so maybe the process was different. But you are right, if voting power was tied to reputation than WB would have zero power as his rep is (0). But then again Craig Grant who is more charming and oblique with his scams has a rep of (75) so there is always a way to beat the system. I don't have any experience trading Steem but would hope we can contain the breaches to allow for market confidence in our underlying value. Otherwise these occurrences will continue to shake confidence similar to the effects that hacks have had on BTC.

·
·
·

While higher rep would potentiate higher rewards for @craiggrant than @wb were VP so weighted, rep isn't something you can just buy. Being able to mount a Sybil attack on the platform simply by throwing money at it is about as easy as a Sybil attack can be.

A fact about structuring Sybil attacks in that way is that those with significant holdings of SP are bought out in the prosecution of such an attack, both locking in their profits, exchanging their SP for another currency, and also thereby ending their personal vulnerability to the consequences of the attack. It can be difficult to not hold devs accountable for this 'golden parachute' device that pays them for their mined stake in Steem when the attackers set out to take over the rewards, witnesses, or the platform. It's a profit motive to permit Sybil attacks, and I don't like it.

Rep comes from being upvoted by the community, and that takes time, and attracting upvotes.

I have seen examples of several scams today that rely on hordes of bots to upvote content, and thereby generate rewards. This would still be possible were SP no longer the weighting mechanism, and rep were instead. There are other scams that would no longer be possible, though, and any victory is a good thing, in preventing scams.

There are other solutions that can take care of bots curating, including persistent community flagging. That is the reason that flagging was created (to prevent financial manipulation), according to the white paper.

One of the more important reasons to weight VP with rep rather than SP, is that rewards for authors would be far more fairly distributed. Various other mitigation efforts that seek to broaden distribution by compensating for SP concentration in but a few accounts would also no longer be necessary, decreasing the burden on the blockchain, making the witnesses job easier, and greatly simplifying the mechanism of curation, by reducing the calculation of rewards to simple addition, eliminating the need to time upvotes to maximize curation rewards (and thus eliminating one means of scamming the rewards pool), and others as well.

I reckon the most valuable benefit of ending the weighting of VP with SP would be the perception of users that the voting system was fair. There is broad understanding that, presently, Steemit represents an oligarchy, and people see enough of that in RL politics, TBQH.

·
·
·
·

Yes, I agree with your sentiments. Any victory against these dangers is worthwhile. The oligarchy does keep control with the current vp system. Change is necessary for the health of the platform and you make good points. Hopefully you can lobby your ideas through the proper channels. This channel is a good start for creating awareness @sherlockholmes

·

Yes, I stumbled upon buffet, too. There so many more. sigh

Resteemed. Thank you @sherlockholmes. If people used their brains for GOOD, we would all be better off!

GOOD WORK, SHERLOCK! How do ya' fig, Newton?!?! You definitely have too much time on your hands - but thank you very much for bringing this B.S. to everyone's attention. Hopefully, the whales will now come in to handle the situation. How long did this research take you to complete???
Upvoted and Resteemed.

·

I've watched it expand and followed a false lead to a known scammer profile initially (funny sidetrack, I'll post about it soon).

Finding the stuff is rather easy, making sure you have everything you can get and then vetting that you don't make false accusations, that's what actually takes time.