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

10 days ago
55 in steemit-police

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
47
  ·  10 days ago

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..

·
64
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
·
56
  ·  8 days ago

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

·
·
·
64
  ·  8 days ago

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 😇

·
·
·
·
56
  ·  8 days ago

I'm happy to do what I can.

·
·
·
·
50
  ·  6 days ago

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.

·
·
·
·
·
42
  ·  2 days ago

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

·
·
·
·
·
·
50
  ·  2 days ago

"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 :)

·
72
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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!

·
·
53
  ·  9 days ago

Sherlock take a look at these welcome bots + proxy self vote abusers :
https://steemit.com/steemit/@simoneighties/welcome-bot-proxy-self-vote-abuse-in-introduceyourself

·
·
·
55
  ·  9 days ago

Saved for later! Sorry my desk is cluttered already!

·
52
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
36
  ·  2 days ago

sooo true

64
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
55
  ·  10 days ago

Thank you for the support!

46
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
·
75
  ·  8 days ago

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

·
·
·
42
  ·  2 days ago

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.

57
  ·  10 days ago

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?

·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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!

·
·
57
  ·  10 days ago

Excellent news! Is @sadkitten your pet?

·
·
·
64
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
·
·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
·
·
52
  ·  10 days ago

Lol cute

61
  ·  10 days ago

Incredible find @sherlockholmes! Resteemed for visibility!

43
  ·  10 days ago

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?

·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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!

·
·
62
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
·
·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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!

·
·
·
·
62
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
·
·
·
·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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!

·
·
·
·
·
·
62
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·
55
  ·  9 days ago

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!

·
·
·
·
60
  ·  8 days ago

This is most crucial, kill spam at the source.

·
·
·
·
·
55
  ·  7 days ago

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

·
·
·
·
·
·
60
  ·  6 days ago

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.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·
55
  ·  6 days ago

Yes, that account has been making the rounds now.

·
·
64
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
·
·
55
  ·  9 days ago

This sounds like good news!

·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
·
56
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
·
·
55
  ·  9 days ago

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

·
·
·
68
  ·  10 days ago

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.

66
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

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.

·
53
  ·  8 days ago

Wow, that account was really milking the system.

54
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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

43
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

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!

56
  ·  8 days ago

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

·
52
  ·  8 days ago

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.

·
55
  ·  7 days ago

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

53
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
65
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

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

·
·
53
  ·  9 days ago

:/! 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....

·
·
·
55
  ·  9 days ago

It's never too late!

·
·
·
·
53
  ·  9 days ago


Does markdown count? :P

·
·
·
·
·
55
  ·  9 days ago

It's a good start I guess !

·
·
·
·
·
·
53
  ·  7 days ago

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).

·
·
·
·
·
·
·
55
  ·  6 days ago

Good catch, this one has some interesting traces.

I will investigate this one further.

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

47
  ·  7 days ago

Thanks for your vigilance in uncovering these troublesome behaviors.

54
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

A spaminator-trail, not a bad idea.

53
  ·  8 days ago

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?

·
55
  ·  7 days ago

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.

·
·
53
  ·  6 days ago

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

·
·
·
55
  ·  6 days ago

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

·
·
·
·
53
  ·  6 days ago

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

·
·
·
·
·
55
  ·  6 days ago

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.

·
·
·
·
·
·
53
  ·  5 days ago

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

52
  ·  10 days ago

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

63
  ·  10 days ago

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

72
  ·  10 days ago

Bots fighting bots. The future is weird.

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

What a time to be alive!

54
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

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

·
·
54
  ·  9 days ago

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

·
·
·
55
  ·  7 days ago

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.

56
  ·  6 days ago

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

56
  ·  10 days ago

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!

58
  ·  4 days ago

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.

47
  ·  4 days ago

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

·
55
  ·  3 days ago

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

61
  ·  4 days ago

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

47
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
55
  ·  10 days ago

you must have a good cloaking device!

·
·
47
  ·  10 days ago

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

works just fine, trust me

40
  ·  4 days ago

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.

46
  ·  4 days ago

thank you for your amazing work!!!

46
  ·  8 days ago

Thanks for your work!

·
55
  ·  5 days ago

have you reported this to @steemcleaners, yet?

·
·
55
  ·  5 days ago

Nope, but will do. Thanks :)

·
·
·
55
  ·  5 days ago

Blunt plagiarism is well handled by @steemcleaners.

Also if this was a single incident, try contacting them directly and see if it can be managed.

If you see signs of systemic abuse, feel free to contact me again.

·
·
·
·
55
  ·  5 days ago

Thanks so much :) I tried contacting the user but no reply :(
Thanks, I have reported it to @steemcleaners who has sorted it out :)

52
  ·  6 days ago

very interesting, thanks for sharing and I like to see how it will go ahead here.

65
  ·  6 days ago

I looked at a couple of these and it seems like they're not actually taking much out of the reward pool. Do you have any numbers on how much STEEM/SBD is actually being taken?

·
55
  ·  6 days ago

Reading the OP often helps.

Anyway, at the time of writing the op it had been ard 200SBD from 2 weeks of operation, in the past days, the operation was largely stopped by flagging from @sadkitten. Previous pending rewards have already accumulated to another 150SBD since, and have been extracted from the platform.

Those numbers are not too significant, but keep in mind that the operation itself has also grown in the according volume of SP and if it hadn't been stopped early on, it would continue and experience exponential growth.

·
·
65
  ·  5 days ago

Reading the OP often helps.

Indeed. Sorry, I thought I had.

And in any case I didn't mean to imply that this sort of sleuthing shouldn't be done. Thanks for your efforts!

50
  ·  6 days ago

nice job sher-lock...lock them down , resteeming

45
  ·  6 days ago

Wow! how do you get that amount of information sherlockholmes? great research you did this time! my respects to you! upvoted and resteemed and of course following you!

·
55
  ·  6 days ago

I usually start with handy tools like steemd.com, steemreports.com, etc...

For advanced analysis I use the mongoDB interface via steemdata.com.

47
  ·  6 days ago

Question please! How does a poster only 5-6 days since starting on steemit reach a ranking of 46 when he only has 24 folowers, 94 posts, and does not follow anyone? Also transfers 0.010 SBD TO @null and 1.000SBD TO@randowhale after every post. Is there something going on ? Also he never replies to any comments. How can this be right?

·
55
  ·  6 days ago

With ranking I assume you meant "reputation"?

Enough upvotes will do that quicky.

The transfer to @null is a "promotion".

Hiring @randowhale is nothing wrong.

The pattern may point to something, but in itself it is nothing wrong.

Care to let me know which account you are referring to?

·
·
47
  ·  6 days ago

The acct. is @prepper. We are all aware that in order to grow there is to be dialogue, comments, participation, replys, posts etc, what I can't understand is there is not any of that taking place. The only thing that is occurring is the pushing of products. I cannot understand how a reputation can climb that quickly, there are hundreds even thousands who strive to abide by the rules. For what? So that some on line store can start up and within a week of product pushing climb at a rate that I havn't seen before unless there is some collusion going on. You have most likely checked my acct, if so you are aware of who I am. I admit I'm not the brightest light in the cave, but I try to live by the rules. I have said in my posts and in comments I am not a good egg shell walker, I believe in fairness. Steem it's money means sweet...all to me, that has nothing to do with why I have asked you to check this out.. if I am wrong here than I am quite willing to apologize, for at least I'll know the rest of the platform isn't being taken advantage of. Thank you for your time and your quick response...............billytwohearts

·
·
·
55
  ·  5 days ago

While the activity might look disheartening at first, I want to point out that the practice would be a normal way to operate a business on steemit.

Nothing speaks against buying a stake in voting power and/or SBD to employ voting services. If a brand or business wanted to advertise themselves on this platform, this would be a legitimate way.

But everything deserves a closer look, if it smells fishy, there may be a rotten tail on it. I've briefly looked at the account's connection network, and it does raise some questions, but nothing immediately conclusive here.

·
·
·
·
47
  ·  5 days ago

Again I thank you for your interest. You are a 54, you work your butt off attempting to keep things legitimate and I do appreciate what you do. However it truly saddens me when I compare your number to a person who does nothing for Steemit an if all stays the same will climb past you in another week or so. You have more dialogue in just one post than he has in 99. I can't help saying something is not right here. Thanks again Sherlock, you have my total respect for what you do, and what you have accomplished................billytwohearts
Upvoted and resteemed

25
  ·  6 days ago

Just upvoted you brother!

·
55
  ·  6 days ago

Indeed! Thank You!

62
  ·  6 days ago

There's a hole in our rewards bucket and @sherlockholmes is on the case! I feel incredibly thankful that you are here sir. I found you from @stellabelle and will be moving on to read on @sadkitten too. Just wanted to add my vote, resteem and support even that this is a days old post man of us are playing catch up to the spam epidemic and wish to assist in any ways we can!

Will be sharing to our group and watching out for new updates.

56
  ·  7 days ago

I don't often resteem, but this has got to stop. Steemit is allowing itself to be pimped out. I like the concept of live and let live, but this type of activity needs to be driven out. To build the defense structure of this platform off the voting power of community minded members doesn't strike me as the answer.

It's our community, but why should so many have to waste their votes on flags? It deprives the community as a whole from strong curators. This needs to be addressed and a platform wide solution needs to be achieved.

·
55
  ·  7 days ago

In a decentralized Utopia, we need to stop asking for centralized solutions!

I agree, in the case above, the vulnerability lies with the centralized site steemit.com signing up these accounts. But looking at the problem more generally, the community does need to dedicate some of it's VP to protecting the system.

47
  ·  7 days ago

unbelievable! shocking!

55
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

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!

59
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

It's sad, but it's true!

45
  ·  10 days ago

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

43
  ·  10 days ago

Resteemed. This needs to spread.

38
  ·  10 days ago

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

66
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

Everytime I call him, he never picks up!

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

·
52
  ·  8 days ago

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.

42
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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!

56
  ·  10 days ago

Really excellent work exposing these parasites. Resteemed and upvoted!

40
  ·  10 days ago

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

34
  ·  10 days ago

crazy :/

46
  ·  10 days ago

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..

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

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.

37
  ·  10 days ago

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 ^_^

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

tips hat

55
  ·  10 days ago

Unbelievable.

Thanks for all of your hard work.

49
  ·  10 days ago

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.

46
  ·  10 days ago

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

68
  ·  10 days ago

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

55
  ·  10 days ago

@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.

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

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

·
·
55
  ·  8 days ago

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

·
·
·
55
  ·  7 days ago

You're welcome!

45
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

Yes sir!

55
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
55
  ·  10 days ago

That's indeed very interesting.

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

·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
·
·
59
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
·
·
·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
·
·
55
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
·
·
·
55
  ·  10 days ago

Yawp.

72
  ·  10 days ago

Good work. Keep it up. Following, and will shoot an occasional up vote your way when I notice posts like this.

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

Thanks kindly for your support!

64
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

tips hat

63
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

Absolutely! Thank you for the support!

51
  ·  10 days ago

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

44
  ·  10 days ago

Thank you for your hard work.

48
  ·  10 days ago

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

·
52
  ·  9 days ago

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.

·
·
48
  ·  9 days ago

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.

·
·
·
52
  ·  9 days ago

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.

·
·
·
·
48
  ·  8 days ago

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

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

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

41
  ·  10 days ago

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

50
  ·  10 days ago

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.

·
55
  ·  9 days ago

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.