For Consideration: Block hot linking...

[froglips]

Hello gang.

As I'm working on SSL and learning this web junk, I have found something that might be of interest to us.

Hot Linking blocking. For those who love to know trivia from WikiAnswers....

Inline linking (also known as hotlinking, leeching, piggy-backing, direct linking, offsite image grabs and bandwidth theft)​

Any other site on the planet could be using our resources (images, css files, javascript, etc) and we are paying for it in terms of our bandwidth.

I tested ncwoodworker.net and was able to hot link to it.

What I don't know is whats out there and if stopping hotlinking would hurt things in place.

I do have it enabled on the test site, for fun.

Any thoughts?

Jim

 

[b4man]

This raises a question I didn't even know I had:eusa_thin

Do we pay per unit of something, like whatever bandwidth is measured in? In other words do we not have a consistent cost every month?


259

 

[TracyP]

If someone can link to us and use our bandwidth, then I think if it does not affect site performance, then we should block it.

 

[DaveO]

I like hot linking, and use it often...from other sites. I would not want to see that ability to go away. But if we can block hot linking from NCWW by other users out in the world wide web, and it can save us some bandwidth, cost or future cost of expansion I am all for it.
Another thing to consider is how it might affect our site's search-ability and/or exposure. Many new members have found us through Google searches or linkings on other sites. In order for us to keep growing/maintaining we need a constant influx of new members. I wouldn't want to hamper that good thing.
Knowing Steve as I do, I feel confident that we have the bandwidth to handle a lot of growth right now but there might come a time where we could get maxed out.
We are classified as a "Big Site" on our server, meaning we have a very large amount of hits to the site from folks searching, and a great amount of activity. Which is very impressive for our relative small size.
I think that we are doing well, for now.

Dave

 

[ScottM]

By allowing hot links are we leaving ourself open to viruses or spam?:dontknow:

 

[toolman]

I need a little help? :help: Jim when you say "Hot Linking" do you mean other sites use our bandwidth to link too another web site? I thank you are not talking about a link one clicks on and it takes you to Woodcraft or someone clicking a link to our site, or the Google spiders. Is this right? :slap: :confused_

 

[froglips]

Sorry if I was confusing, its a gift

Hot linking is when someone in Nigeria has a website, say lotteryscam.com.

They notice ncwoodworkers.net has all these great pics they want to use.

So, they write their webpages with hotlink image references that point to ncwoodworker.net.

Their page looks all nifty with this great content, which is being supplied and paid for by ncwoodworker.net, at no cost to them.

This abuse can expand beyond just images. Things such mp3's and videos come to mind. The proliferation of blogs has made this a growing problem.

This shouldn't impact anyone's ability to link to our site, ala google searches.

Thanks,
Jim

PS. Here is an example of how Hot Linking looks in HTML.

This is a normal IMG tag:

<img src="/forums/icon_motorcycle.jpg" />​

A hotlink would look like this:

<img src="http://ncwoodworker.net/forums/icon_motorcycle.jpg" />​

 

[SteveColes]

First and foremost we already have "unlimited" bandwidth, so that is not an issue. If enough sites were actually leetching from us, I suppose it could slow us down. But it is not something that is really an issue.

Finally, the most import aspect of this discussion is the ability of our users to display a picture from their photo gallery in a post in another site. If we stop that, then why have a gallery.

 

[McRabbet]

I used a linked thumbnail from my Gallery in a post on another woodworking website yesterday. I agree that we need to keep this feature, but is there any way to monitor hot links to be sure we are protected from "heavy" impact? For example, is there a way to see how many external "hot links" are in existence and if a site had more than might be expected, then perhaps action could be taken against that specific site. JMTCW...

 

[froglips]

Gotcha.

FWIW, you can create a filter that allows some, denies others, but that could get to be a load of maintenence. Unless we pulled homepages from profiles. Again, probably more pain than gain.

I'll explore some measures to monitor hot link abuse. That might be a useful log.

I'd say a seed is planted if this ever becomes an issue, someone might say "didn't jim whine about something or other?".

Thanks,
Jim

First and foremost we already have "unlimited" bandwidth, so that is not an issue. If enough sites were actually leetching from us, I suppose it could slow us down. But it is not something that is really an issue.

Finally, the most import aspect of this discussion is the ability of our users to display a picture from their photo gallery in a post in another site. If we stop that, then why have a gallery.

 

[sapwood]

Good point and discussion, Jim.
I don't understand the mysterious workings of all this stuff :dontknow:
However, I've known instances where bulletin boards or special interest websites have been usurped by others. Their content is hosted as if it belongs to the "usurper". :eusa_naug

Roger

 

[SteveColes]

Everyone, this is NOT a real issue for us. If in the future, it becomes one, we can always deal with the site that is causing us a problem on a one on one basis.

With all the techical issues that need to be dealt with, I suggest this would be very low on our current priority list