Talk:80legs

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Software Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).

I wonder why if this is a bad bot (DDOSing my site as we speak) do we give coveted high PR links to them from Wikipedia? This just gives these guys a leg up (maybe they should be called 81legs.com now.

Page-rank ist the least of the problems. You're from the US, contact GoDaddy, do something! If a european company behaved like that, it would be closed now. Greetings from Europe.--Sajoch (talk) 21:38, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article is rather useless as it not even explains what this company is actually doing and who is buying their services. Yes, it claims to somehow allow to let anybody run their "own" crawler, but what does this crawler look for? Does it build a full text index? Why would anyone buy a commercial service for that? Does it check C++ code for bugs? Does it do data warehousing to steal private data? Is it a service to search for security weaknesseses in the competitor's website to allow fradulent actions? 85.177.91.165 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:32, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Webadmins search for "80legs" after they discover their server ddosed by this bot. Therefore it's fundamental to give those visitors the information they search: elucidation about how this crawler works, the damage it can make and how to defend oneself. Criticism should be allowed and not removed. If the refs do not please, any editor is welcome to find better refs. But deleting a fundamental information is vandalism.--Sajoch (talk) 15:10, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]