Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests for Airflow,
The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related content, but
they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some examples:

* https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
* https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
* https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854

All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and not much activity
before

There were quite a few more.

I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub - hopefully we
can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.

J.

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Abhishek Bhakat <ab...@astronomer.io.INVALID>]

A temporary block should be fine if people can still create discussions. On
which committers can help create issues if it's reasonable.

Avi

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:57 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>
> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar report
> for the last 4 hours or so.
>
> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are looking at
> the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I think we
> can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when something like this
> happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>
> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from interacting
> with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe temporarily - for a
> day or two initially - after reporting some initial reports? Does it sound
> reasonable?
>
> J.
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 from me.
> >
> > It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets when
> > new users starts testing those AI agents.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Pavan Kumar
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users" -
> > > created just an hour or so ago.
> > >
> > > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with the
> > repo
> > > for new users - see this screenshot:
> > >
> > > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
> > >
> > > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for
> > that,
> > > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe if
> > > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket for
> > > that.
> > >
> > > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
> > testing
> > > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) -
> and
> > > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
> temporarily
> > we
> > > might want to ask INFRA to help.
> > >
> > > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will
> open
> > a
> > > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours think
> as
> > > well :)
> > >
> > >
> > > J.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the
> > > same
> > > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very.
> ....
> > > > strange
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
> > > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
> > > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
> > > >>
> > > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
> > > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some
> > > minor
> > > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials,
> where
> > > >> someone
> > > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo
> > > would".
> > > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> fokko@apache.org>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
> self-close
> > > the
> > > >> > issue
> > > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
> > Closed
> > > >> > after 1
> > > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> jarek@potiuk.com
> > >:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > > Example case:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> > > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except
> > > noise.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at
> > > their
> > > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
> > airflow
> > > >> > about
> > > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you
> > > >> think.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > J.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too
> many
> > -
> > > >> and
> > > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
> > > rudimentary
> > > >> > check
> > > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> > > >> > > .
> > > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
> hours.
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
> > > issues
> > > >> > that
> > > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they
> > are
> > > >> > > reported
> > > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
> > legitimate,
> > > >> but
> > > >> > > they
> > > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
> > > >> completely
> > > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem,
> that
> > it
> > > >> > takes
> > > >> > > a
> > > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or
> not -
> > > and
> > > >> > with
> > > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether
> they
> > > are
> > > >> > good
> > > >> > > or
> > > >> > > >> bad.
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> J.
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> > > fokko@apache.org
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk
> about
> > > >> > > flooding,
> > > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues
> > (eg,
> > > >> here
> > > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not
> > > many.
> > > >> I
> > > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional
> > > work,
> > > >> > and
> > > >> > > we
> > > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
> issues
> > > >> that
> > > >> > > don't
> > > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
> > > >> > > >>> Fokko
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> > > jarek@potiuk.com
> > > >> >:
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a
> > > number
> > > >> of
> > > >> > > >>> issues
> > > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
> generated
> > > and
> > > >> > make
> > > >> > > no
> > > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that
> > the
> > > >> > users
> > > >> > > >>> who
> > > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in
> > > Airflow
> > > >> > are
> > > >> > > >>> also
> > > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such
> > > >> issues
> > > >> > to
> > > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending
> > too
> > > >> much
> > > >> > > >>> time on
> > > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> > ```
> > > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that
> > > >> brings
> > > >> > no
> > > >> > > >>> value
> > > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that
> > > sends a
> > > >> > lot
> > > >> > > of
> > > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we
> > will
> > > >> > report
> > > >> > > >>> your
> > > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> > > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
> > > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> > > >> > > >>> > ```
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
> > > >> "agentic
> > > >> > AI"
> > > >> > > >>> that
> > > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents
> on
> > > >> their
> > > >> > > >>> behalf.
> > > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> > > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it
> to
> > > >> > Github -
> > > >> > > >>> and
> > > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
> > > involving
> > > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> > J.
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> > > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> > > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the
> > top
> > > >> and
> > > >> > > >>> "report
> > > >> > > >>> > content")
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> > > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> > > >> > > >>> >>
> > > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
> > > >> > > >>> >>
> > > >> > > >>> >>
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> > > >> > > >>> >>
> > > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> > > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> > > >> > > >>> >>
> > > >> > > >>> >>
> > > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
> > > >> eladkal@apache.org>
> > > >> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >> > > >>> >>
> > > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> > > >> > > >>> >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> > > >> > > >>> >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
> github.
> > > >> > > >>> >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
> > > Gopidesu
> > > >> ‏<
> > > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> > > >> > > >>> >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> > > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
> > > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> > > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> > > >> > > >>> >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests
> as
> > > >> well,
> > > >> > so
> > > >> > > >>> if any
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it
> > and
> > > >> > report
> > > >> > > >>> it.
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> > > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
> It
> > > >> > appears
> > > >> > > >>> to be
> > > >> > > >>> >> a
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> > > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> > > >> > > >>> with
> > > >> > > >>> >> > just
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> > > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
> > > account
> > > >> > > >>> recently.
> > > >> > > >>> >> If
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add
> a
> > > >> comment
> > > >> > > to
> > > >> > > >>> an
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a
> > new
> > > >> > ticket.
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> > > >> > > >>> >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
> > sending
> > > >> it.
> > > >> > > >>> There is
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope
> they
> > > >> will
> > > >> > > >>> manage
> > > >> > > >>> >> to do
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> > > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
> Potiuk <
> > > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
> > > >> feature
> > > >> > > >>> requests
> > > >> > > >>> >> > for
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
> > > >> somewhat
> > > >> > > >>> related
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you
> > read
> > > >> > them.
> > > >> > > >>> Some
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> > > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> > > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> > > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
> > > history
> > > >> in
> > > >> > GH
> > > >> > > >>> and
> > > >> > > >>> >> not
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > much
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report
> > > >> authors
> > > >> > to
> > > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
> traffic
> > > >> flood.
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >> > > >>> >> >
> > > >> > > >>> >>
> > > >> > > >>> >
> > > >> > > >>>
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Steve Loughran <st...@cloudera.com.INVALID>]

Are these issues being manually created?

maybe add a new checkbox

[ ] I am not participating in any AI training/experiment and if it turns
out that I am -I agree to compensate developers for the time wasted.

Or have something to specifically handle new posters., or at least
automatically flag them with a specific "new poster" label.

ThIs is just raising the game in JIRA spam.

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Piotr Findeisen <pi...@gmail.com>]

Extending the issue template is an option, but let's be aware of downsides
and let's make sure we believe it's net positive (also outside of current
situation).

Some people (and bots) will overlook the checkboxes. If "I am a human" is
not checked, do we auto-reject the issue?
Some people will notice the checkboxes, and spend extra time filling them
(and filling checkboxes in an issue template is non-trivial for beginners
with low markdown skills)
Some bots will check the checkbox (agents need to know how to fill issue
templates), voiding the gain.




On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 14:20, Steve Loughran <st...@cloudera.com.invalid>
wrote:

>
> What about extending the issue templates?
>
> Because of a growing problem with worthless LLM-generated issues, github
> MAY terminate any account doing this to our project
> [ ] I am a human being and am not creating AI generated issues.
> [ ] I accept that if I am posting AI-generated issues, my github account
> MAY be terminated
>
> note the use of "MAY", as per RFC-2117 -as SHALL is not used, it is
> technically correct
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 11:40, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> I am at FOSDEM now but I have some progress and more information about
>> the whole stuf:
>>
>> Some facts first (without any judgment from my side):
>>
>> * my posts in social media reached many, many people (thanks to you -
>> posting it and people from other foundations) - the reach out is amazing -
>> more than 200.000 views, and Outlier.ai and Scale.ai noticed
>> * Scale.ai reached out to me. They apologized for what they have done (in
>> private so far), and admitted it has been their fault entirely. They
>> admitted their instructions were poorly written and led the people they
>> hired to submit issues where they were never supposed to do it
>> * We had a call where we discussed why and how it happened and
>> they explained also that they changed those instructions with bright flashy
>> "do not submit issues" and added explicit instructions there
>> * they could not (would not) really explain (what exactly the project and
>> generating issues was for) - initially they mentioned training agents to
>> behave like humans do and create issues that will have higher probability
>> to be accepted but they backed out later - telling that it's only about
>> "assessing" issue
>> * they promised to come back to me with more details - and questions
>> about what was the extent of the project and what they want to achieve
>> * I was (and thanks to an unnamed ASF member who put me in contact with)
>> contacted by a journalist from The New Stack writing a story about it. I
>> had a call with her and I also contacted them with Scale.ai so that they
>> can share their part of the story as well)
>> * GitHub is - faster and faster it seems - reacting and blocking those
>> users based on our report - they got some understanding about the situation
>> and they started to see the patterns and block those users when reported.
>> Even today I got 3 confirmations about blocked accounts.
>>
>> My take (and this is speculation from my side not fact):
>> * they WERE training agent AI to be able to submit issues (even if now
>> they deny it)
>> * this is a VERY bad idea that will make our live harder when put in
>> practice - the probabilistic / hallucinating nature of that will make
>> counter-productive and make a lot of overhead for us, maintainers
>> * we should work with local AI "good" partners to build system to detect
>> and prevent those kind issues and "help" maintainers to battle with those -
>> there will be more and more of those cases happening
>> * we should continue reporting those cases to GitHub - this eventually
>> works as well
>>
>> This shows the power of the community! I will keep you posted.
>>
>> J.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 5:26 PM Ryan Hatter
>> <ry...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Here's a boilerplate response that I'm going to start using moving
>>> forward:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>> >
>>> > This Issue appears to be AI-generated spam. If this is a mistake,
>>> please
>>> > let us know—otherwise, any further spam Issues may lead us to report
>>> your
>>> > account to GitHub.
>>> >
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the "AI"
>>> space
>>> > - saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with
>>> Spam. I
>>> > hope they will be able to do something about it as well.
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
>>> you.
>>> > > Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
>>> > > unethical business practices.
>>> > >
>>> > > Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do
>>> nothing.
>>> > >
>>> > > Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they
>>> apply for
>>> > > Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a
>>> > "real-ish"
>>> > > history of contribution and they actually came back after our
>>> reaction
>>> > and
>>> > > apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions
>>> from
>>> > > Outlier.
>>> > >
>>> > > So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation.
>>> > That's
>>> > > already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction
>>> (which
>>> > > is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
>>> > > maintainers).
>>> > >
>>> > > And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting
>>> to
>>> > > it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and
>>> maybe
>>> > > even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is
>>> just
>>> > a
>>> > > beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to
>>> battle
>>> > the
>>> > > AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen,
>>> > absolutely
>>> > > no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make
>>> people
>>> > > aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
>>> > >
>>> > > We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they
>>> are
>>> > > great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months
>>> their AI
>>> > > is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and
>>> they
>>> > do
>>> > > a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I
>>> spoke
>>> > to
>>> > > the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those
>>> > issues
>>> > > and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact -
>>> their
>>> > > algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the "AI
>>> > spam"
>>> > > label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their
>>> AI
>>> > > will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be
>>> automatically
>>> > set.
>>> > >
>>> > > So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
>>> > > thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn
>>> how
>>> > to
>>> > > do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
>>> > >
>>> > > J.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <
>>> justin@classsoftware.com
>>> > >
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> Hi,
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
>>> you.
>>> > >> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
>>> > >> unethical business practices.
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Kind Regards,
>>> > >> Justin
>>> > >>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
>>> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>>
>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Steve Loughran <st...@cloudera.com.INVALID>]

What about extending the issue templates?

Because of a growing problem with worthless LLM-generated issues, github
MAY terminate any account doing this to our project
[ ] I am a human being and am not creating AI generated issues.
[ ] I accept that if I am posting AI-generated issues, my github account
MAY be terminated

note the use of "MAY", as per RFC-2117 -as SHALL is not used, it is
technically correct




On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 11:40, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Hey,
>
> I am at FOSDEM now but I have some progress and more information about the
> whole stuf:
>
> Some facts first (without any judgment from my side):
>
> * my posts in social media reached many, many people (thanks to you -
> posting it and people from other foundations) - the reach out is amazing -
> more than 200.000 views, and Outlier.ai and Scale.ai noticed
> * Scale.ai reached out to me. They apologized for what they have done (in
> private so far), and admitted it has been their fault entirely. They
> admitted their instructions were poorly written and led the people they
> hired to submit issues where they were never supposed to do it
> * We had a call where we discussed why and how it happened and
> they explained also that they changed those instructions with bright flashy
> "do not submit issues" and added explicit instructions there
> * they could not (would not) really explain (what exactly the project and
> generating issues was for) - initially they mentioned training agents to
> behave like humans do and create issues that will have higher probability
> to be accepted but they backed out later - telling that it's only about
> "assessing" issue
> * they promised to come back to me with more details - and questions about
> what was the extent of the project and what they want to achieve
> * I was (and thanks to an unnamed ASF member who put me in contact with)
> contacted by a journalist from The New Stack writing a story about it. I
> had a call with her and I also contacted them with Scale.ai so that they
> can share their part of the story as well)
> * GitHub is - faster and faster it seems - reacting and blocking those
> users based on our report - they got some understanding about the situation
> and they started to see the patterns and block those users when reported.
> Even today I got 3 confirmations about blocked accounts.
>
> My take (and this is speculation from my side not fact):
> * they WERE training agent AI to be able to submit issues (even if now
> they deny it)
> * this is a VERY bad idea that will make our live harder when put in
> practice - the probabilistic / hallucinating nature of that will make
> counter-productive and make a lot of overhead for us, maintainers
> * we should work with local AI "good" partners to build system to detect
> and prevent those kind issues and "help" maintainers to battle with those -
> there will be more and more of those cases happening
> * we should continue reporting those cases to GitHub - this eventually
> works as well
>
> This shows the power of the community! I will keep you posted.
>
> J.
>
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 5:26 PM Ryan Hatter
> <ry...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Here's a boilerplate response that I'm going to start using moving
>> forward:
>>
>> Hello,
>> >
>> > This Issue appears to be AI-generated spam. If this is a mistake, please
>> > let us know—otherwise, any further spam Issues may lead us to report
>> your
>> > account to GitHub.
>> >
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the "AI"
>> space
>> > - saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with
>> Spam. I
>> > hope they will be able to do something about it as well.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
>> you.
>> > > Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
>> > > unethical business practices.
>> > >
>> > > Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do
>> nothing.
>> > >
>> > > Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they apply
>> for
>> > > Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a
>> > "real-ish"
>> > > history of contribution and they actually came back after our reaction
>> > and
>> > > apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions from
>> > > Outlier.
>> > >
>> > > So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation.
>> > That's
>> > > already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction
>> (which
>> > > is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
>> > > maintainers).
>> > >
>> > > And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting
>> to
>> > > it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and
>> maybe
>> > > even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is
>> just
>> > a
>> > > beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to battle
>> > the
>> > > AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen,
>> > absolutely
>> > > no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make
>> people
>> > > aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
>> > >
>> > > We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they
>> are
>> > > great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months
>> their AI
>> > > is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and
>> they
>> > do
>> > > a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I
>> spoke
>> > to
>> > > the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those
>> > issues
>> > > and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact -
>> their
>> > > algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the "AI
>> > spam"
>> > > label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their
>> AI
>> > > will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be automatically
>> > set.
>> > >
>> > > So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
>> > > thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn
>> how
>> > to
>> > > do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
>> > >
>> > > J.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <
>> justin@classsoftware.com
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Hi,
>> > >>
>> > >> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
>> you.
>> > >> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
>> > >> unethical business practices.
>> > >>
>> > >> Kind Regards,
>> > >> Justin
>> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
>> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>]

Absolutely!

These foundations and a trustworthy group of people who we call the
community takes time to build
and everyone's time and effort is also very important.

Really blessed to be part of something like this :)


Thanks & Regards,
Amogh Desai


On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 4:09 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Thanks Amogh,
>
> Yes. The article is pretty good :).
>
> But I think that "kudos" is more for the community - ASF members, and
> various Foundation members I reached out to. IMHO what we saw in this case
> was pretty unprecedented unity and understanding how important the problem
> is and how dangerous it might be to the very foundations of the open-source
> idea. I spoke to many people and I have not seen a single voice in our
> community who would say "this is not important" or "why are you escalating
> this".
>
> The response was overwhelmingly positive, and I think the main reason was
> because it tapped very deeply into the core "foundations" of the
> Open-Source, where the sheer thought that someone is not accepting the
> volunteer work "as they decided it on their own" but apparently is trying
> to make use of volunteer's effort for their own commercial benefits (even
> if it is unintentional, which we will never find out).  That resonated very
> well with everyone who understands even a bit how open-source works.
>
> I have been amazed -  also similar to the "community involvement" in some
> of the things we do now for Airflow 3 -> the provider's move caught me a
> bit with a surprise - on how well people responded and helped there - about
> 20 people (!). And it only shows that an individual's values and work
> matter in Open Source, but it matters even more if that individual learns
> how they can amplify their work by a number of other people who share
> similar values and are part of the same community and follow up, learn and
> carry the "baton".
>
> We are all extremely lucky to be part of those communities of people.
>
> J.
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 9, 2025 at 5:44 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Nice!
> >
> > I like how well you have escalated and handled this, Jarek.
> > This is cool:
> >
> https://thenewstack.io/ai-is-spamming-open-source-repos-with-fake-issues/
> >
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Amogh Desai
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 8:07 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Here is the article in The New Stack:
> > >
> >
> https://thenewstack.io/ai-is-spamming-open-source-repos-with-fake-issues/
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 12:39 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey,
> > > >
> > > > I am at FOSDEM now but I have some progress and more information
> about
> > > the
> > > > whole stuf:
> > > >
> > > > Some facts first (without any judgment from my side):
> > > >
> > > > * my posts in social media reached many, many people (thanks to you -
> > > > posting it and people from other foundations) - the reach out is
> > amazing
> > > -
> > > > more than 200.000 views, and Outlier.ai and Scale.ai noticed
> > > > * Scale.ai reached out to me. They apologized for what they have done
> > (in
> > > > private so far), and admitted it has been their fault entirely. They
> > > > admitted their instructions were poorly written and led the people
> they
> > > > hired to submit issues where they were never supposed to do it
> > > > * We had a call where we discussed why and how it happened and
> > > > they explained also that they changed those instructions with bright
> > > flashy
> > > > "do not submit issues" and added explicit instructions there
> > > > * they could not (would not) really explain (what exactly the project
> > and
> > > > generating issues was for) - initially they mentioned training agents
> > to
> > > > behave like humans do and create issues that will have higher
> > probability
> > > > to be accepted but they backed out later - telling that it's only
> about
> > > > "assessing" issue
> > > > * they promised to come back to me with more details - and questions
> > > about
> > > > what was the extent of the project and what they want to achieve
> > > > * I was (and thanks to an unnamed ASF member who put me in contact
> > with)
> > > > contacted by a journalist from The New Stack writing a story about
> it.
> > I
> > > > had a call with her and I also contacted them with Scale.ai so that
> > they
> > > > can share their part of the story as well)
> > > > * GitHub is - faster and faster it seems - reacting and blocking
> those
> > > > users based on our report - they got some understanding about the
> > > situation
> > > > and they started to see the patterns and block those users when
> > reported.
> > > > Even today I got 3 confirmations about blocked accounts.
> > > >
> > > > My take (and this is speculation from my side not fact):
> > > > * they WERE training agent AI to be able to submit issues (even if
> now
> > > > they deny it)
> > > > * this is a VERY bad idea that will make our live harder when put in
> > > > practice - the probabilistic / hallucinating nature of that will make
> > > > counter-productive and make a lot of overhead for us, maintainers
> > > > * we should work with local AI "good" partners to build system to
> > detect
> > > > and prevent those kind issues and "help" maintainers to battle with
> > > those -
> > > > there will be more and more of those cases happening
> > > > * we should continue reporting those cases to GitHub - this
> eventually
> > > > works as well
> > > >
> > > > This shows the power of the community! I will keep you posted.
> > > >
> > > > J.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 5:26 PM Ryan Hatter
> > > > <ry...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Here's a boilerplate response that I'm going to start using moving
> > > >> forward:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hello,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > This Issue appears to be AI-generated spam. If this is a mistake,
> > > please
> > > >> > let us know—otherwise, any further spam Issues may lead us to
> report
> > > >> your
> > > >> > account to GitHub.
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the
> "AI"
> > > >> space
> > > >> > - saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with
> > > >> Spam. I
> > > >> > hope they will be able to do something about it as well.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely
> > ignore
> > > >> you.
> > > >> > > Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage
> > in
> > > >> > > unethical business practices.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do
> > > >> nothing.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they
> > > apply
> > > >> for
> > > >> > > Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a
> > > >> > "real-ish"
> > > >> > > history of contribution and they actually came back after our
> > > reaction
> > > >> > and
> > > >> > > apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the
> instructions
> > > from
> > > >> > > Outlier.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole
> > situation.
> > > >> > That's
> > > >> > > already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the
> reaction
> > > >> (which
> > > >> > > is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
> > > >> > > maintainers).
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub
> > reacting
> > > >> to
> > > >> > > it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people
> and
> > > >> maybe
> > > >> > > even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this
> > is
> > > >> just
> > > >> > a
> > > >> > > beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to
> > > battle
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > > AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen,
> > > >> > absolutely
> > > >> > > no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make
> > > >> people
> > > >> > > aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and
> > they
> > > >> are
> > > >> > > great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months
> > > >> their AI
> > > >> > > is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them
> > (and
> > > >> they
> > > >> > do
> > > >> > > a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus
> (and I
> > > >> spoke
> > > >> > to
> > > >> > > the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse
> > those
> > > >> > issues
> > > >> > > and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact
> -
> > > >> their
> > > >> > > algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with
> the
> > > "AI
> > > >> > spam"
> > > >> > > label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases,
> > their
> > > >> AI
> > > >> > > will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be
> > > automatically
> > > >> > set.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning
> > and
> > > >> > > thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should
> > learn
> > > >> how
> > > >> > to
> > > >> > > do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > J.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <
> > > >> justin@classsoftware.com
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >> Hi,
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely
> ignore
> > > >> you.
> > > >> > >> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to
> engage
> > in
> > > >> > >> unethical business practices.
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Kind Regards,
> > > >> > >> Justin
> > > >> > >>
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
> > > >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Thanks Amogh,

Yes. The article is pretty good :).

But I think that "kudos" is more for the community - ASF members, and
various Foundation members I reached out to. IMHO what we saw in this case
was pretty unprecedented unity and understanding how important the problem
is and how dangerous it might be to the very foundations of the open-source
idea. I spoke to many people and I have not seen a single voice in our
community who would say "this is not important" or "why are you escalating
this".

The response was overwhelmingly positive, and I think the main reason was
because it tapped very deeply into the core "foundations" of the
Open-Source, where the sheer thought that someone is not accepting the
volunteer work "as they decided it on their own" but apparently is trying
to make use of volunteer's effort for their own commercial benefits (even
if it is unintentional, which we will never find out).  That resonated very
well with everyone who understands even a bit how open-source works.

I have been amazed -  also similar to the "community involvement" in some
of the things we do now for Airflow 3 -> the provider's move caught me a
bit with a surprise - on how well people responded and helped there - about
20 people (!). And it only shows that an individual's values and work
matter in Open Source, but it matters even more if that individual learns
how they can amplify their work by a number of other people who share
similar values and are part of the same community and follow up, learn and
carry the "baton".

We are all extremely lucky to be part of those communities of people.

J.


On Sun, Feb 9, 2025 at 5:44 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Nice!
>
> I like how well you have escalated and handled this, Jarek.
> This is cool:
> https://thenewstack.io/ai-is-spamming-open-source-repos-with-fake-issues/
>
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amogh Desai
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 8:07 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > Here is the article in The New Stack:
> >
> https://thenewstack.io/ai-is-spamming-open-source-repos-with-fake-issues/
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 12:39 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > I am at FOSDEM now but I have some progress and more information about
> > the
> > > whole stuf:
> > >
> > > Some facts first (without any judgment from my side):
> > >
> > > * my posts in social media reached many, many people (thanks to you -
> > > posting it and people from other foundations) - the reach out is
> amazing
> > -
> > > more than 200.000 views, and Outlier.ai and Scale.ai noticed
> > > * Scale.ai reached out to me. They apologized for what they have done
> (in
> > > private so far), and admitted it has been their fault entirely. They
> > > admitted their instructions were poorly written and led the people they
> > > hired to submit issues where they were never supposed to do it
> > > * We had a call where we discussed why and how it happened and
> > > they explained also that they changed those instructions with bright
> > flashy
> > > "do not submit issues" and added explicit instructions there
> > > * they could not (would not) really explain (what exactly the project
> and
> > > generating issues was for) - initially they mentioned training agents
> to
> > > behave like humans do and create issues that will have higher
> probability
> > > to be accepted but they backed out later - telling that it's only about
> > > "assessing" issue
> > > * they promised to come back to me with more details - and questions
> > about
> > > what was the extent of the project and what they want to achieve
> > > * I was (and thanks to an unnamed ASF member who put me in contact
> with)
> > > contacted by a journalist from The New Stack writing a story about it.
> I
> > > had a call with her and I also contacted them with Scale.ai so that
> they
> > > can share their part of the story as well)
> > > * GitHub is - faster and faster it seems - reacting and blocking those
> > > users based on our report - they got some understanding about the
> > situation
> > > and they started to see the patterns and block those users when
> reported.
> > > Even today I got 3 confirmations about blocked accounts.
> > >
> > > My take (and this is speculation from my side not fact):
> > > * they WERE training agent AI to be able to submit issues (even if now
> > > they deny it)
> > > * this is a VERY bad idea that will make our live harder when put in
> > > practice - the probabilistic / hallucinating nature of that will make
> > > counter-productive and make a lot of overhead for us, maintainers
> > > * we should work with local AI "good" partners to build system to
> detect
> > > and prevent those kind issues and "help" maintainers to battle with
> > those -
> > > there will be more and more of those cases happening
> > > * we should continue reporting those cases to GitHub - this eventually
> > > works as well
> > >
> > > This shows the power of the community! I will keep you posted.
> > >
> > > J.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 5:26 PM Ryan Hatter
> > > <ry...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Here's a boilerplate response that I'm going to start using moving
> > >> forward:
> > >>
> > >> Hello,
> > >> >
> > >> > This Issue appears to be AI-generated spam. If this is a mistake,
> > please
> > >> > let us know—otherwise, any further spam Issues may lead us to report
> > >> your
> > >> > account to GitHub.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the "AI"
> > >> space
> > >> > - saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with
> > >> Spam. I
> > >> > hope they will be able to do something about it as well.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely
> ignore
> > >> you.
> > >> > > Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage
> in
> > >> > > unethical business practices.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do
> > >> nothing.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they
> > apply
> > >> for
> > >> > > Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a
> > >> > "real-ish"
> > >> > > history of contribution and they actually came back after our
> > reaction
> > >> > and
> > >> > > apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions
> > from
> > >> > > Outlier.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole
> situation.
> > >> > That's
> > >> > > already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction
> > >> (which
> > >> > > is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
> > >> > > maintainers).
> > >> > >
> > >> > > And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub
> reacting
> > >> to
> > >> > > it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and
> > >> maybe
> > >> > > even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this
> is
> > >> just
> > >> > a
> > >> > > beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to
> > battle
> > >> > the
> > >> > > AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen,
> > >> > absolutely
> > >> > > no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make
> > >> people
> > >> > > aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and
> they
> > >> are
> > >> > > great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months
> > >> their AI
> > >> > > is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them
> (and
> > >> they
> > >> > do
> > >> > > a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I
> > >> spoke
> > >> > to
> > >> > > the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse
> those
> > >> > issues
> > >> > > and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact -
> > >> their
> > >> > > algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the
> > "AI
> > >> > spam"
> > >> > > label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases,
> their
> > >> AI
> > >> > > will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be
> > automatically
> > >> > set.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning
> and
> > >> > > thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should
> learn
> > >> how
> > >> > to
> > >> > > do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > J.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <
> > >> justin@classsoftware.com
> > >> > >
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> Hi,
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
> > >> you.
> > >> > >> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage
> in
> > >> > >> unethical business practices.
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> Kind Regards,
> > >> > >> Justin
> > >> > >>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
> > >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>]

Nice!

I like how well you have escalated and handled this, Jarek.
This is cool:
https://thenewstack.io/ai-is-spamming-open-source-repos-with-fake-issues/


Thanks & Regards,
Amogh Desai


On Tue, Feb 4, 2025 at 8:07 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Here is the article in The New Stack:
> https://thenewstack.io/ai-is-spamming-open-source-repos-with-fake-issues/
>
> On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 12:39 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey,
> >
> > I am at FOSDEM now but I have some progress and more information about
> the
> > whole stuf:
> >
> > Some facts first (without any judgment from my side):
> >
> > * my posts in social media reached many, many people (thanks to you -
> > posting it and people from other foundations) - the reach out is amazing
> -
> > more than 200.000 views, and Outlier.ai and Scale.ai noticed
> > * Scale.ai reached out to me. They apologized for what they have done (in
> > private so far), and admitted it has been their fault entirely. They
> > admitted their instructions were poorly written and led the people they
> > hired to submit issues where they were never supposed to do it
> > * We had a call where we discussed why and how it happened and
> > they explained also that they changed those instructions with bright
> flashy
> > "do not submit issues" and added explicit instructions there
> > * they could not (would not) really explain (what exactly the project and
> > generating issues was for) - initially they mentioned training agents to
> > behave like humans do and create issues that will have higher probability
> > to be accepted but they backed out later - telling that it's only about
> > "assessing" issue
> > * they promised to come back to me with more details - and questions
> about
> > what was the extent of the project and what they want to achieve
> > * I was (and thanks to an unnamed ASF member who put me in contact with)
> > contacted by a journalist from The New Stack writing a story about it. I
> > had a call with her and I also contacted them with Scale.ai so that they
> > can share their part of the story as well)
> > * GitHub is - faster and faster it seems - reacting and blocking those
> > users based on our report - they got some understanding about the
> situation
> > and they started to see the patterns and block those users when reported.
> > Even today I got 3 confirmations about blocked accounts.
> >
> > My take (and this is speculation from my side not fact):
> > * they WERE training agent AI to be able to submit issues (even if now
> > they deny it)
> > * this is a VERY bad idea that will make our live harder when put in
> > practice - the probabilistic / hallucinating nature of that will make
> > counter-productive and make a lot of overhead for us, maintainers
> > * we should work with local AI "good" partners to build system to detect
> > and prevent those kind issues and "help" maintainers to battle with
> those -
> > there will be more and more of those cases happening
> > * we should continue reporting those cases to GitHub - this eventually
> > works as well
> >
> > This shows the power of the community! I will keep you posted.
> >
> > J.
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 5:26 PM Ryan Hatter
> > <ry...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> Here's a boilerplate response that I'm going to start using moving
> >> forward:
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >> >
> >> > This Issue appears to be AI-generated spam. If this is a mistake,
> please
> >> > let us know—otherwise, any further spam Issues may lead us to report
> >> your
> >> > account to GitHub.
> >> >
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the "AI"
> >> space
> >> > - saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with
> >> Spam. I
> >> > hope they will be able to do something about it as well.
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
> >> you.
> >> > > Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> >> > > unethical business practices.
> >> > >
> >> > > Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do
> >> nothing.
> >> > >
> >> > > Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they
> apply
> >> for
> >> > > Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a
> >> > "real-ish"
> >> > > history of contribution and they actually came back after our
> reaction
> >> > and
> >> > > apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions
> from
> >> > > Outlier.
> >> > >
> >> > > So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation.
> >> > That's
> >> > > already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction
> >> (which
> >> > > is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
> >> > > maintainers).
> >> > >
> >> > > And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting
> >> to
> >> > > it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and
> >> maybe
> >> > > even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is
> >> just
> >> > a
> >> > > beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to
> battle
> >> > the
> >> > > AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen,
> >> > absolutely
> >> > > no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make
> >> people
> >> > > aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
> >> > >
> >> > > We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they
> >> are
> >> > > great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months
> >> their AI
> >> > > is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and
> >> they
> >> > do
> >> > > a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I
> >> spoke
> >> > to
> >> > > the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those
> >> > issues
> >> > > and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact -
> >> their
> >> > > algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the
> "AI
> >> > spam"
> >> > > label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their
> >> AI
> >> > > will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be
> automatically
> >> > set.
> >> > >
> >> > > So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
> >> > > thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn
> >> how
> >> > to
> >> > > do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
> >> > >
> >> > > J.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <
> >> justin@classsoftware.com
> >> > >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> Hi,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
> >> you.
> >> > >> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> >> > >> unethical business practices.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Kind Regards,
> >> > >> Justin
> >> > >>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
> >> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Here is the article in The New Stack:
https://thenewstack.io/ai-is-spamming-open-source-repos-with-fake-issues/

On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 12:39 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Hey,
>
> I am at FOSDEM now but I have some progress and more information about the
> whole stuf:
>
> Some facts first (without any judgment from my side):
>
> * my posts in social media reached many, many people (thanks to you -
> posting it and people from other foundations) - the reach out is amazing -
> more than 200.000 views, and Outlier.ai and Scale.ai noticed
> * Scale.ai reached out to me. They apologized for what they have done (in
> private so far), and admitted it has been their fault entirely. They
> admitted their instructions were poorly written and led the people they
> hired to submit issues where they were never supposed to do it
> * We had a call where we discussed why and how it happened and
> they explained also that they changed those instructions with bright flashy
> "do not submit issues" and added explicit instructions there
> * they could not (would not) really explain (what exactly the project and
> generating issues was for) - initially they mentioned training agents to
> behave like humans do and create issues that will have higher probability
> to be accepted but they backed out later - telling that it's only about
> "assessing" issue
> * they promised to come back to me with more details - and questions about
> what was the extent of the project and what they want to achieve
> * I was (and thanks to an unnamed ASF member who put me in contact with)
> contacted by a journalist from The New Stack writing a story about it. I
> had a call with her and I also contacted them with Scale.ai so that they
> can share their part of the story as well)
> * GitHub is - faster and faster it seems - reacting and blocking those
> users based on our report - they got some understanding about the situation
> and they started to see the patterns and block those users when reported.
> Even today I got 3 confirmations about blocked accounts.
>
> My take (and this is speculation from my side not fact):
> * they WERE training agent AI to be able to submit issues (even if now
> they deny it)
> * this is a VERY bad idea that will make our live harder when put in
> practice - the probabilistic / hallucinating nature of that will make
> counter-productive and make a lot of overhead for us, maintainers
> * we should work with local AI "good" partners to build system to detect
> and prevent those kind issues and "help" maintainers to battle with those -
> there will be more and more of those cases happening
> * we should continue reporting those cases to GitHub - this eventually
> works as well
>
> This shows the power of the community! I will keep you posted.
>
> J.
>
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 5:26 PM Ryan Hatter
> <ry...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Here's a boilerplate response that I'm going to start using moving
>> forward:
>>
>> Hello,
>> >
>> > This Issue appears to be AI-generated spam. If this is a mistake, please
>> > let us know—otherwise, any further spam Issues may lead us to report
>> your
>> > account to GitHub.
>> >
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the "AI"
>> space
>> > - saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with
>> Spam. I
>> > hope they will be able to do something about it as well.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
>> you.
>> > > Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
>> > > unethical business practices.
>> > >
>> > > Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do
>> nothing.
>> > >
>> > > Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they apply
>> for
>> > > Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a
>> > "real-ish"
>> > > history of contribution and they actually came back after our reaction
>> > and
>> > > apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions from
>> > > Outlier.
>> > >
>> > > So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation.
>> > That's
>> > > already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction
>> (which
>> > > is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
>> > > maintainers).
>> > >
>> > > And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting
>> to
>> > > it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and
>> maybe
>> > > even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is
>> just
>> > a
>> > > beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to battle
>> > the
>> > > AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen,
>> > absolutely
>> > > no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make
>> people
>> > > aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
>> > >
>> > > We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they
>> are
>> > > great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months
>> their AI
>> > > is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and
>> they
>> > do
>> > > a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I
>> spoke
>> > to
>> > > the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those
>> > issues
>> > > and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact -
>> their
>> > > algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the "AI
>> > spam"
>> > > label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their
>> AI
>> > > will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be automatically
>> > set.
>> > >
>> > > So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
>> > > thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn
>> how
>> > to
>> > > do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
>> > >
>> > > J.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <
>> justin@classsoftware.com
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Hi,
>> > >>
>> > >> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
>> you.
>> > >> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
>> > >> unethical business practices.
>> > >>
>> > >> Kind Regards,
>> > >> Justin
>> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
>> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Here is the article in The New Stack:
https://thenewstack.io/ai-is-spamming-open-source-repos-with-fake-issues/

On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 12:39 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Hey,
>
> I am at FOSDEM now but I have some progress and more information about the
> whole stuf:
>
> Some facts first (without any judgment from my side):
>
> * my posts in social media reached many, many people (thanks to you -
> posting it and people from other foundations) - the reach out is amazing -
> more than 200.000 views, and Outlier.ai and Scale.ai noticed
> * Scale.ai reached out to me. They apologized for what they have done (in
> private so far), and admitted it has been their fault entirely. They
> admitted their instructions were poorly written and led the people they
> hired to submit issues where they were never supposed to do it
> * We had a call where we discussed why and how it happened and
> they explained also that they changed those instructions with bright flashy
> "do not submit issues" and added explicit instructions there
> * they could not (would not) really explain (what exactly the project and
> generating issues was for) - initially they mentioned training agents to
> behave like humans do and create issues that will have higher probability
> to be accepted but they backed out later - telling that it's only about
> "assessing" issue
> * they promised to come back to me with more details - and questions about
> what was the extent of the project and what they want to achieve
> * I was (and thanks to an unnamed ASF member who put me in contact with)
> contacted by a journalist from The New Stack writing a story about it. I
> had a call with her and I also contacted them with Scale.ai so that they
> can share their part of the story as well)
> * GitHub is - faster and faster it seems - reacting and blocking those
> users based on our report - they got some understanding about the situation
> and they started to see the patterns and block those users when reported.
> Even today I got 3 confirmations about blocked accounts.
>
> My take (and this is speculation from my side not fact):
> * they WERE training agent AI to be able to submit issues (even if now
> they deny it)
> * this is a VERY bad idea that will make our live harder when put in
> practice - the probabilistic / hallucinating nature of that will make
> counter-productive and make a lot of overhead for us, maintainers
> * we should work with local AI "good" partners to build system to detect
> and prevent those kind issues and "help" maintainers to battle with those -
> there will be more and more of those cases happening
> * we should continue reporting those cases to GitHub - this eventually
> works as well
>
> This shows the power of the community! I will keep you posted.
>
> J.
>
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 5:26 PM Ryan Hatter
> <ry...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Here's a boilerplate response that I'm going to start using moving
>> forward:
>>
>> Hello,
>> >
>> > This Issue appears to be AI-generated spam. If this is a mistake, please
>> > let us know—otherwise, any further spam Issues may lead us to report
>> your
>> > account to GitHub.
>> >
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the "AI"
>> space
>> > - saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with
>> Spam. I
>> > hope they will be able to do something about it as well.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
>> you.
>> > > Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
>> > > unethical business practices.
>> > >
>> > > Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do
>> nothing.
>> > >
>> > > Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they apply
>> for
>> > > Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a
>> > "real-ish"
>> > > history of contribution and they actually came back after our reaction
>> > and
>> > > apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions from
>> > > Outlier.
>> > >
>> > > So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation.
>> > That's
>> > > already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction
>> (which
>> > > is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
>> > > maintainers).
>> > >
>> > > And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting
>> to
>> > > it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and
>> maybe
>> > > even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is
>> just
>> > a
>> > > beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to battle
>> > the
>> > > AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen,
>> > absolutely
>> > > no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make
>> people
>> > > aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
>> > >
>> > > We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they
>> are
>> > > great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months
>> their AI
>> > > is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and
>> they
>> > do
>> > > a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I
>> spoke
>> > to
>> > > the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those
>> > issues
>> > > and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact -
>> their
>> > > algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the "AI
>> > spam"
>> > > label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their
>> AI
>> > > will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be automatically
>> > set.
>> > >
>> > > So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
>> > > thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn
>> how
>> > to
>> > > do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
>> > >
>> > > J.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <
>> justin@classsoftware.com
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Hi,
>> > >>
>> > >> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
>> you.
>> > >> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
>> > >> unethical business practices.
>> > >>
>> > >> Kind Regards,
>> > >> Justin
>> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
>> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Hey,

I am at FOSDEM now but I have some progress and more information about the
whole stuf:

Some facts first (without any judgment from my side):

* my posts in social media reached many, many people (thanks to you -
posting it and people from other foundations) - the reach out is amazing -
more than 200.000 views, and Outlier.ai and Scale.ai noticed
* Scale.ai reached out to me. They apologized for what they have done (in
private so far), and admitted it has been their fault entirely. They
admitted their instructions were poorly written and led the people they
hired to submit issues where they were never supposed to do it
* We had a call where we discussed why and how it happened and
they explained also that they changed those instructions with bright flashy
"do not submit issues" and added explicit instructions there
* they could not (would not) really explain (what exactly the project and
generating issues was for) - initially they mentioned training agents to
behave like humans do and create issues that will have higher probability
to be accepted but they backed out later - telling that it's only about
"assessing" issue
* they promised to come back to me with more details - and questions about
what was the extent of the project and what they want to achieve
* I was (and thanks to an unnamed ASF member who put me in contact with)
contacted by a journalist from The New Stack writing a story about it. I
had a call with her and I also contacted them with Scale.ai so that they
can share their part of the story as well)
* GitHub is - faster and faster it seems - reacting and blocking those
users based on our report - they got some understanding about the situation
and they started to see the patterns and block those users when reported.
Even today I got 3 confirmations about blocked accounts.

My take (and this is speculation from my side not fact):
* they WERE training agent AI to be able to submit issues (even if now they
deny it)
* this is a VERY bad idea that will make our live harder when put in
practice - the probabilistic / hallucinating nature of that will make
counter-productive and make a lot of overhead for us, maintainers
* we should work with local AI "good" partners to build system to detect
and prevent those kind issues and "help" maintainers to battle with those -
there will be more and more of those cases happening
* we should continue reporting those cases to GitHub - this eventually
works as well

This shows the power of the community! I will keep you posted.

J.

On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 5:26 PM Ryan Hatter
<ry...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:

> Here's a boilerplate response that I'm going to start using moving forward:
>
> Hello,
> >
> > This Issue appears to be AI-generated spam. If this is a mistake, please
> > let us know—otherwise, any further spam Issues may lead us to report your
> > account to GitHub.
> >
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the "AI"
> space
> > - saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with Spam.
> I
> > hope they will be able to do something about it as well.
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
> you.
> > > Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> > > unethical business practices.
> > >
> > > Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do nothing.
> > >
> > > Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they apply
> for
> > > Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a
> > "real-ish"
> > > history of contribution and they actually came back after our reaction
> > and
> > > apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions from
> > > Outlier.
> > >
> > > So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation.
> > That's
> > > already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction
> (which
> > > is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
> > > maintainers).
> > >
> > > And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting to
> > > it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and maybe
> > > even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is
> just
> > a
> > > beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to battle
> > the
> > > AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen,
> > absolutely
> > > no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make people
> > > aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
> > >
> > > We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they
> are
> > > great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months their
> AI
> > > is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and
> they
> > do
> > > a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I
> spoke
> > to
> > > the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those
> > issues
> > > and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact - their
> > > algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the "AI
> > spam"
> > > label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their AI
> > > will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be automatically
> > set.
> > >
> > > So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
> > > thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn how
> > to
> > > do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
> > >
> > > J.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <
> justin@classsoftware.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
> > >> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> > >> unethical business practices.
> > >>
> > >> Kind Regards,
> > >> Justin
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Hey,

I am at FOSDEM now but I have some progress and more information about the
whole stuf:

Some facts first (without any judgment from my side):

* my posts in social media reached many, many people (thanks to you -
posting it and people from other foundations) - the reach out is amazing -
more than 200.000 views, and Outlier.ai and Scale.ai noticed
* Scale.ai reached out to me. They apologized for what they have done (in
private so far), and admitted it has been their fault entirely. They
admitted their instructions were poorly written and led the people they
hired to submit issues where they were never supposed to do it
* We had a call where we discussed why and how it happened and
they explained also that they changed those instructions with bright flashy
"do not submit issues" and added explicit instructions there
* they could not (would not) really explain (what exactly the project and
generating issues was for) - initially they mentioned training agents to
behave like humans do and create issues that will have higher probability
to be accepted but they backed out later - telling that it's only about
"assessing" issue
* they promised to come back to me with more details - and questions about
what was the extent of the project and what they want to achieve
* I was (and thanks to an unnamed ASF member who put me in contact with)
contacted by a journalist from The New Stack writing a story about it. I
had a call with her and I also contacted them with Scale.ai so that they
can share their part of the story as well)
* GitHub is - faster and faster it seems - reacting and blocking those
users based on our report - they got some understanding about the situation
and they started to see the patterns and block those users when reported.
Even today I got 3 confirmations about blocked accounts.

My take (and this is speculation from my side not fact):
* they WERE training agent AI to be able to submit issues (even if now they
deny it)
* this is a VERY bad idea that will make our live harder when put in
practice - the probabilistic / hallucinating nature of that will make
counter-productive and make a lot of overhead for us, maintainers
* we should work with local AI "good" partners to build system to detect
and prevent those kind issues and "help" maintainers to battle with those -
there will be more and more of those cases happening
* we should continue reporting those cases to GitHub - this eventually
works as well

This shows the power of the community! I will keep you posted.

J.

On Thu, Jan 30, 2025 at 5:26 PM Ryan Hatter
<ry...@astronomer.io.invalid> wrote:

> Here's a boilerplate response that I'm going to start using moving forward:
>
> Hello,
> >
> > This Issue appears to be AI-generated spam. If this is a mistake, please
> > let us know—otherwise, any further spam Issues may lead us to report your
> > account to GitHub.
> >
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the "AI"
> space
> > - saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with Spam.
> I
> > hope they will be able to do something about it as well.
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore
> you.
> > > Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> > > unethical business practices.
> > >
> > > Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do nothing.
> > >
> > > Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they apply
> for
> > > Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a
> > "real-ish"
> > > history of contribution and they actually came back after our reaction
> > and
> > > apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions from
> > > Outlier.
> > >
> > > So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation.
> > That's
> > > already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction
> (which
> > > is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
> > > maintainers).
> > >
> > > And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting to
> > > it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and maybe
> > > even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is
> just
> > a
> > > beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to battle
> > the
> > > AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen,
> > absolutely
> > > no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make people
> > > aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
> > >
> > > We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they
> are
> > > great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months their
> AI
> > > is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and
> they
> > do
> > > a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I
> spoke
> > to
> > > the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those
> > issues
> > > and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact - their
> > > algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the "AI
> > spam"
> > > label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their AI
> > > will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be automatically
> > set.
> > >
> > > So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
> > > thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn how
> > to
> > > do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
> > >
> > > J.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <
> justin@classsoftware.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
> > >> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> > >> unethical business practices.
> > >>
> > >> Kind Regards,
> > >> Justin
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Ryan Hatter <ry...@astronomer.io.INVALID>]

Here's a boilerplate response that I'm going to start using moving forward:

Hello,
>
> This Issue appears to be AI-generated spam. If this is a mistake, please
> let us know—otherwise, any further spam Issues may lead us to report your
> account to GitHub.
>

On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 10:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the "AI" space
> - saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with Spam. I
> hope they will be able to do something about it as well.
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
> > Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> > unethical business practices.
> >
> > Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do nothing.
> >
> > Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they apply for
> > Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a
> "real-ish"
> > history of contribution and they actually came back after our reaction
> and
> > apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions from
> > Outlier.
> >
> > So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation.
> That's
> > already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction (which
> > is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
> > maintainers).
> >
> > And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting to
> > it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and maybe
> > even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is just
> a
> > beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to battle
> the
> > AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen,
> absolutely
> > no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make people
> > aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
> >
> > We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they are
> > great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months their AI
> > is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and they
> do
> > a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I spoke
> to
> > the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those
> issues
> > and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact - their
> > algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the "AI
> spam"
> > label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their AI
> > will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be automatically
> set.
> >
> > So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
> > thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn how
> to
> > do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
> >
> > J.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <justin@classsoftware.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
> >> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> >> unethical business practices.
> >>
> >> Kind Regards,
> >> Justin
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the "AI" space
- saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with Spam. I
hope they will be able to do something about it as well.

On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> unethical business practices.
>
> Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do nothing.
>
> Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they apply for
> Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a "real-ish"
> history of contribution and they actually came back after our reaction and
> apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions from
> Outlier.
>
> So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation. That's
> already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction (which
> is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
> maintainers).
>
> And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting to
> it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and maybe
> even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is just a
> beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to battle the
> AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen, absolutely
> no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make people
> aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
>
> We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they are
> great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months their AI
> is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and they do
> a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I spoke to
> the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those issues
> and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact - their
> algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the "AI spam"
> label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their AI
> will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be automatically set.
>
> So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
> thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn how to
> do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
>
> J.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
>> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
>> unethical business practices.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>> Justin
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
>>
>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

FYI. My friend - who is an engineering manager at GitHub in the "AI" space
- saw my post and reached out to their internal team fighting with Spam. I
hope they will be able to do something about it as well.

On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 8:21 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> > Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> unethical business practices.
>
> Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do nothing.
>
> Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they apply for
> Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a "real-ish"
> history of contribution and they actually came back after our reaction and
> apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions from
> Outlier.
>
> So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation. That's
> already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction (which
> is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
> maintainers).
>
> And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting to
> it) will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and maybe
> even detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is just a
> beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to battle the
> AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen, absolutely
> no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make people
> aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.
>
> We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they are
> great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months their AI
> is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and they do
> a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I spoke to
> the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those issues
> and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact - their
> algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the "AI spam"
> label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their AI
> will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be automatically set.
>
> So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
> thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn how to
> do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.
>
> J.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
>> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
>> unethical business practices.
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>> Justin
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
>>
>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
unethical business practices.

Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do nothing.

Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they apply for
Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a "real-ish"
history of contribution and they actually came back after our reaction and
apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions from
Outlier.

So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation. That's
already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction (which
is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
maintainers).

And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting to it)
will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and maybe even
detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is just a
beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to battle the
AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen, absolutely
no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make people
aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.

We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they are
great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months their AI
is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and they do
a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I spoke to
the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those issues
and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact - their
algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the "AI spam"
label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their AI
will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be automatically set.

So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn how to
do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.

J.




On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> unethical business practices.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Justin
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
unethical business practices.

Yeah, but it absolutely does not mean we should give up and do nothing.

Hopefully that will give at least some people a pause when they apply for
Outlier.ai jobs. There are a few people there who seem to have a "real-ish"
history of contribution and they actually came back after our reaction and
apologised as they were tricked into doing it by the instructions from
Outlier.

So at least we can make rounds on awareness of the whole situation. That's
already something. Even if they will shrug seeing all the reaction (which
is amazing - I did not know we have so many people caring about
maintainers).

And hopefully also GitHub (I have a few friends from GitHub reacting to it)
will take notice and will make it harder for "new" people and maybe even
detect such spam on their own. Eventually we are - and this is just a
beginning - in an arm's race where we will have to employ AI to battle the
AI created by "roque" players - it's inevitable. It will happen, absolutely
no doubts about it. So we have to strengthen our efforts to make people
aware of those dangers and prepare to react for them.

We already (and few other Apache projects) work with DoSu - and they are
great AI "open-source friendly" company - for quite a few months their AI
is classifying our issues and putting the right labels on them (and they do
a great job on that) - so it's only a matter of their focus (and I spoke to
the Devin - the creator of DoSu) on them being able to analyse those issues
and maybe even automatically marking them as "AI spam". In fact - their
algorithms already also learn from us marking the issues with the "AI spam"
label. and if they enable this label and we have enough cases, their AI
will likely automatically help with that "AI spam" to be automatically set.

So ... I think being active, sharing things like that, learning and
thinking how to battle those cases is something we all should learn how to
do. It will be needed. This is just a canary in the mine.

J.




On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 12:57 AM Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you.
> Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in
> unethical business practices.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Justin
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org
>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>]

Hi,

Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you. Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in unethical business practices.

Kind Regards,
Justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@airflow.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@airflow.apache.org

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>]

Hi,

Given what I read about the company, they will most likely ignore you. Some people think the company is a scam, and they seem to engage in unethical business practices.

Kind Regards,
Justin

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

BTW. Next escalation step if this does not help will be to go to all the
repos where those users created the issues and comment on them, explain the
situation and to ask them to react in similar ways. There are quite a
number of those repos now - react, Pinot, Typescript, .....

On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 2:53 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Starting at Linkedin. They don't seem to be on Mastodon or Bluesky, I quit
> X and don't care any more for content there.
>
>  -> if you would like to share it, feel free:
>
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jarekpotiuk_outlier-you-are-doing-it-wrong-please-activity-7289278690213990400-MOuC
>
>
> J.
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 2:43 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
>> Ok. The issue continues. I am raising to a bit higher level and start to
>> complain on https://outlier.ai/ in social media - they are driving those
>> issues.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 7:59 PM Russell Spitzer <
>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Obviously as an OSS Dev I don't mind folks profiting from the work I'm
>>> doing as
>>> long as they collaborate with the community in good faith. But this feels
>>> like well beyond
>>> the pale in creating additional work only in bad faith, but also not as a
>>> member
>>> of the community.
>>>
>>> Personally it's very upsetting to me to spend time helping someone on an
>>> issue only to realize
>>> that not only do they not care, but they also were paid to waste my time
>>> to
>>> make someone
>>> else money. Being welcoming to users who don't understand the project is
>>> difficult and time
>>> consuming and I'd hate it if we can't do that because there is too much
>>> risk that the user isn't
>>> even real.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 12:49 PM Piotr Findeisen <
>>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi
>>> >
>>> > This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
>>> > Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly
>>> -- by
>>> > observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
>>> > Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it
>>> economically
>>> > makes sense :(
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this
>>> is
>>> >> one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where
>>> they pay
>>> >> people for some AI tasks.
>>> >>
>>> >> Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training
>>> the
>>> >> AI by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable"
>>> >> repositories like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and
>>> >> people they pay are supposed to take existing issue reports and write
>>> >> "better versions of those issues".
>>> >> They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do
>>> it,
>>> >> and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow
>>> repo
>>> >> using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining
>>> what is
>>> >> important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc.
>>> etc.
>>> >> (apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels
>>> and
>>> >> that the labels are added by DoSu).
>>> >> The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in
>>> >> real Airflow repo.
>>> >>
>>> >> The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such
>>> >> "poorly written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train
>>> AI to
>>> >> help to write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate
>>> >> initial content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I
>>> understand.
>>> >>
>>> >> I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they
>>> seem to
>>> >> react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it
>>> seems).
>>> >> So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will
>>> be
>>> >> more careful. Or else ...
>>> >>
>>> >> Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for
>>> >> them - so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach
>>> out
>>> >> to me personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.
>>> >>
>>> >> Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
>>> >> think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption
>>> they
>>> >> had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
>>> >> would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them
>>> knowing
>>> >> the quality of data they got in.
>>> >>
>>> >> After understanding better how people are currently attempting to
>>> train
>>> >> AI for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of
>>> - AI
>>> >> is not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to
>>> learn
>>> >> how to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to
>>> get. But
>>> >> I am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that
>>> having
>>> >> OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
>>> >> business to have.
>>> >>
>>> >> J.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
>>> >>> happened.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and
>>> from
>>> >>> this comment I gather:
>>> >>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
>>> >>>
>>> >>> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue
>>> creation"
>>> >>> easier - with help of AI
>>> >>> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people
>>> who
>>> >>> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new
>>> things with
>>> >>> AI)
>>> >>> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
>>> >>> tried it
>>> >>> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some
>>> documentation or
>>> >>> default settings as "examples"
>>> >>> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are
>>> "testing"
>>> >>> issue creation where it actually created those issues
>>> >>> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either
>>> stopped
>>> >>> it or removed some confusion
>>> >>> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the
>>> user
>>> >>> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the
>>> user was
>>> >>> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information
>>> so I
>>> >>> hope I will get more information soon).
>>> >>>
>>> >>> J.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <
>>> >>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> Hi
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow
>>> >>>> repo if
>>> >>>> we see it happening again?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me
>>> (also
>>> >>>> for
>>> >>>> Iceberg).
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Best
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <
>>> >>>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see
>>> that
>>> >>>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
>>> >>>> project
>>> >>>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
>>> >>>> report
>>> >>>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
>>> >>>> looking
>>> >>>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now,
>>> but I
>>> >>>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
>>> >>>> something
>>> >>>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>>> >>>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>>> >>>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some
>>> >>>> initial
>>> >>>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >> J.
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>>> >>>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> +1 from me.
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these
>>> tickets
>>> >>>> when
>>> >>>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>> >>> Regards,
>>> >>>> >>> Pavan Kumar
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
>>> >>>> users" -
>>> >>>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions
>>> >>>> with the
>>> >>>> >>> repo
>>> >>>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA
>>> ticket
>>> >>>> for
>>> >>>> >>> that,
>>> >>>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
>>> >>>> maybe if
>>> >>>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single
>>> >>>> ticket for
>>> >>>> >>> > that.
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster
>>> implementation
>>> >>>> and
>>> >>>> >>> testing
>>> >>>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest
>>> >>>> roundtable) -
>>> >>>> >>> and
>>> >>>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>>> >>>> >>> temporarily we
>>> >>>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I
>>> >>>> will
>>> >>>> >>> open a
>>> >>>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of
>>> ours
>>> >>>> think
>>> >>>> >>> as
>>> >>>> >>> > well :)
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > J.
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are
>>> coming
>>> >>>> at the
>>> >>>> >>> > same
>>> >>>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are
>>> >>>> very.
>>> >>>> >>> ....
>>> >>>> >>> > > strange
>>> >>>> >>> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <
>>> eladkal@apache.org
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago,
>>> >>>> with some
>>> >>>> >>> > minor
>>> >>>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to
>>> Github
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI"
>>> trials,
>>> >>>> >>> where
>>> >>>> >>> > >> someone
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in
>>> the
>>> >>>> repo
>>> >>>> >>> > would".
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> >>>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>>> >>>> >>> self-close
>>> >>>> >>> > the
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > issue
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <
>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032
>>> >>>> >).
>>> >>>> >>> Closed
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > after 1
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
>>> >>>> mailbox.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
>>> >>>> airflow
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 -
>>> >>>> iceberg
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
>>> >>>> except
>>> >>>> >>> > noise.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you
>>> >>>> look at
>>> >>>> >>> > their
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in
>>> iceberg
>>> >>>> and
>>> >>>> >>> airflow
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > about
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now
>>> >>>> than you
>>> >>>> >>> > >> think.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > J.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a
>>> bit
>>> >>>> too
>>> >>>> >>> many -
>>> >>>> >>> > >> and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a
>>> very
>>> >>>> >>> > rudimentary
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > check
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > .
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the
>>> last 12
>>> >>>> >>> hours.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't
>>> accidentally
>>> >>>> close
>>> >>>> >>> > issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > that
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
>>> >>>> project.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very
>>> human-like -
>>> >>>> they
>>> >>>> >>> are
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > reported
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text
>>> seem
>>> >>>> >>> legitimate,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> but
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > they
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that
>>> those
>>> >>>> are
>>> >>>> >>> > >> completely
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the
>>> >>>> problem,
>>> >>>> >>> that it
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > takes
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > a
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are
>>> valid
>>> >>>> or
>>> >>>> >>> not -
>>> >>>> >>> > and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > with
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze
>>> >>>> whether
>>> >>>> >>> they
>>> >>>> >>> > are
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > good
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > or
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> >>>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you
>>> >>>> talk
>>> >>>> >>> about
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some
>>> suspicious
>>> >>>> issues
>>> >>>> >>> (eg,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> here
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>),
>>> >>>> but not
>>> >>>> >>> > many.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> I
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
>>> >>>> additional
>>> >>>> >>> > work,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > we
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
>>> close
>>> >>>> >>> issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> that
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > don't
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
>>> project.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded
>>> >>>> with a
>>> >>>> >>> > number
>>> >>>> >>> > >> of
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>>> >>>> >>> generated
>>> >>>> >>> > and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > make
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > no
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We
>>> noticed
>>> >>>> >>> that the
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > users
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are
>>> >>>> created in
>>> >>>> >>> > Airflow
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > are
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and
>>> >>>> reporting such
>>> >>>> >>> > >> issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > to
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>>> >>>> >>> spending too
>>> >>>> >>> > >> much
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue
>>> >>>> report that
>>> >>>> >>> > >> brings
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > no
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking
>>> users
>>> >>>> that
>>> >>>> >>> > sends a
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > lot
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > of
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of
>>> yesterday
>>> >>>> so we
>>> >>>> >>> will
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > report
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is
>>> >>>> testing an
>>> >>>> >>> > >> "agentic
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > AI"
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the
>>> AI
>>> >>>> agents
>>> >>>> >>> on
>>> >>>> >>> > >> their
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source
>>> >>>> reporting it
>>> >>>> >>> to
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > Github -
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those
>>> >>>> without
>>> >>>> >>> > involving
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue
>>> (...
>>> >>>> at
>>> >>>> >>> the top
>>> >>>> >>> > >> and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>>
>>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account
>>> to
>>> >>>> >>> github.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת
>>> >>>> Pavankumar
>>> >>>> >>> > Gopidesu
>>> >>>> >>> > >> ‏<
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai
>>> <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
>>> >>>> requests
>>> >>>> >>> as
>>> >>>> >>> > >> well,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > so
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can
>>> >>>> delete it
>>> >>>> >>> and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > report
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You
>>> Liu <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>>> >>>> >>> It
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > appears
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek
>>> >>>> Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets
>>> from
>>> >>>> your
>>> >>>> >>> > account
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you
>>> >>>> can add
>>> >>>> >>> a
>>> >>>> >>> > >> comment
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > to
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
>>> >>>> opening a
>>> >>>> >>> new
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > ticket.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
>>> >>>> Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw
>>> >>>> after
>>> >>>> >>> sending
>>> >>>> >>> > >> it.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.
>>> I
>>> >>>> hope
>>> >>>> >>> they
>>> >>>> >>> > >> will
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM
>>> Vikram
>>> >>>> Koka
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM
>>> Jarek
>>> >>>> >>> Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
>>> >>>> generated
>>> >>>> >>> > >> feature
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat
>>> legitimate,
>>> >>>> with
>>> >>>> >>> > >> somewhat
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense
>>> >>>> when you
>>> >>>> >>> read
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > them.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with
>>> >>>> short
>>> >>>> >>> > history
>>> >>>> >>> > >> in
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > GH
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues
>>> AND
>>> >>>> report
>>> >>>> >>> > >> authors
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > to
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the
>>> AI-generated
>>> >>>> >>> traffic
>>> >>>> >>> > >> flood.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>>
>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

BTW. Next escalation step if this does not help will be to go to all the
repos where those users created the issues and comment on them, explain the
situation and to ask them to react in similar ways. There are quite a
number of those repos now - react, Pinot, Typescript, .....

On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 2:53 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Starting at Linkedin. They don't seem to be on Mastodon or Bluesky, I quit
> X and don't care any more for content there.
>
>  -> if you would like to share it, feel free:
>
>
> https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jarekpotiuk_outlier-you-are-doing-it-wrong-please-activity-7289278690213990400-MOuC
>
>
> J.
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 2:43 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
>> Ok. The issue continues. I am raising to a bit higher level and start to
>> complain on https://outlier.ai/ in social media - they are driving those
>> issues.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 7:59 PM Russell Spitzer <
>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Obviously as an OSS Dev I don't mind folks profiting from the work I'm
>>> doing as
>>> long as they collaborate with the community in good faith. But this feels
>>> like well beyond
>>> the pale in creating additional work only in bad faith, but also not as a
>>> member
>>> of the community.
>>>
>>> Personally it's very upsetting to me to spend time helping someone on an
>>> issue only to realize
>>> that not only do they not care, but they also were paid to waste my time
>>> to
>>> make someone
>>> else money. Being welcoming to users who don't understand the project is
>>> difficult and time
>>> consuming and I'd hate it if we can't do that because there is too much
>>> risk that the user isn't
>>> even real.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 12:49 PM Piotr Findeisen <
>>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi
>>> >
>>> > This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
>>> > Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly
>>> -- by
>>> > observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
>>> > Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it
>>> economically
>>> > makes sense :(
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this
>>> is
>>> >> one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where
>>> they pay
>>> >> people for some AI tasks.
>>> >>
>>> >> Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training
>>> the
>>> >> AI by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable"
>>> >> repositories like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and
>>> >> people they pay are supposed to take existing issue reports and write
>>> >> "better versions of those issues".
>>> >> They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do
>>> it,
>>> >> and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow
>>> repo
>>> >> using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining
>>> what is
>>> >> important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc.
>>> etc.
>>> >> (apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels
>>> and
>>> >> that the labels are added by DoSu).
>>> >> The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in
>>> >> real Airflow repo.
>>> >>
>>> >> The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such
>>> >> "poorly written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train
>>> AI to
>>> >> help to write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate
>>> >> initial content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I
>>> understand.
>>> >>
>>> >> I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they
>>> seem to
>>> >> react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it
>>> seems).
>>> >> So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will
>>> be
>>> >> more careful. Or else ...
>>> >>
>>> >> Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for
>>> >> them - so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach
>>> out
>>> >> to me personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.
>>> >>
>>> >> Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
>>> >> think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption
>>> they
>>> >> had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
>>> >> would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them
>>> knowing
>>> >> the quality of data they got in.
>>> >>
>>> >> After understanding better how people are currently attempting to
>>> train
>>> >> AI for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of
>>> - AI
>>> >> is not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to
>>> learn
>>> >> how to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to
>>> get. But
>>> >> I am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that
>>> having
>>> >> OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
>>> >> business to have.
>>> >>
>>> >> J.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
>>> >>> happened.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and
>>> from
>>> >>> this comment I gather:
>>> >>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
>>> >>>
>>> >>> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue
>>> creation"
>>> >>> easier - with help of AI
>>> >>> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people
>>> who
>>> >>> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new
>>> things with
>>> >>> AI)
>>> >>> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
>>> >>> tried it
>>> >>> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some
>>> documentation or
>>> >>> default settings as "examples"
>>> >>> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are
>>> "testing"
>>> >>> issue creation where it actually created those issues
>>> >>> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either
>>> stopped
>>> >>> it or removed some confusion
>>> >>> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the
>>> user
>>> >>> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the
>>> user was
>>> >>> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information
>>> so I
>>> >>> hope I will get more information soon).
>>> >>>
>>> >>> J.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <
>>> >>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> Hi
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow
>>> >>>> repo if
>>> >>>> we see it happening again?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me
>>> (also
>>> >>>> for
>>> >>>> Iceberg).
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Best
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <
>>> >>>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see
>>> that
>>> >>>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
>>> >>>> project
>>> >>>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
>>> >>>> report
>>> >>>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
>>> >>>> looking
>>> >>>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now,
>>> but I
>>> >>>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
>>> >>>> something
>>> >>>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>>> >>>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>>> >>>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some
>>> >>>> initial
>>> >>>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >> J.
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>>> >>>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> +1 from me.
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these
>>> tickets
>>> >>>> when
>>> >>>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>> >>> Regards,
>>> >>>> >>> Pavan Kumar
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
>>> >>>> users" -
>>> >>>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions
>>> >>>> with the
>>> >>>> >>> repo
>>> >>>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA
>>> ticket
>>> >>>> for
>>> >>>> >>> that,
>>> >>>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
>>> >>>> maybe if
>>> >>>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single
>>> >>>> ticket for
>>> >>>> >>> > that.
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster
>>> implementation
>>> >>>> and
>>> >>>> >>> testing
>>> >>>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest
>>> >>>> roundtable) -
>>> >>>> >>> and
>>> >>>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>>> >>>> >>> temporarily we
>>> >>>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I
>>> >>>> will
>>> >>>> >>> open a
>>> >>>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of
>>> ours
>>> >>>> think
>>> >>>> >>> as
>>> >>>> >>> > well :)
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > J.
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are
>>> coming
>>> >>>> at the
>>> >>>> >>> > same
>>> >>>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are
>>> >>>> very.
>>> >>>> >>> ....
>>> >>>> >>> > > strange
>>> >>>> >>> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <
>>> eladkal@apache.org
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago,
>>> >>>> with some
>>> >>>> >>> > minor
>>> >>>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to
>>> Github
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI"
>>> trials,
>>> >>>> >>> where
>>> >>>> >>> > >> someone
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in
>>> the
>>> >>>> repo
>>> >>>> >>> > would".
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> >>>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>>> >>>> >>> self-close
>>> >>>> >>> > the
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > issue
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <
>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032
>>> >>>> >).
>>> >>>> >>> Closed
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > after 1
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
>>> >>>> mailbox.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
>>> >>>> airflow
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 -
>>> >>>> iceberg
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
>>> >>>> except
>>> >>>> >>> > noise.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you
>>> >>>> look at
>>> >>>> >>> > their
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in
>>> iceberg
>>> >>>> and
>>> >>>> >>> airflow
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > about
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now
>>> >>>> than you
>>> >>>> >>> > >> think.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > J.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a
>>> bit
>>> >>>> too
>>> >>>> >>> many -
>>> >>>> >>> > >> and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a
>>> very
>>> >>>> >>> > rudimentary
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > check
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > .
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the
>>> last 12
>>> >>>> >>> hours.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't
>>> accidentally
>>> >>>> close
>>> >>>> >>> > issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > that
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
>>> >>>> project.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very
>>> human-like -
>>> >>>> they
>>> >>>> >>> are
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > reported
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text
>>> seem
>>> >>>> >>> legitimate,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> but
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > they
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that
>>> those
>>> >>>> are
>>> >>>> >>> > >> completely
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the
>>> >>>> problem,
>>> >>>> >>> that it
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > takes
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > a
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are
>>> valid
>>> >>>> or
>>> >>>> >>> not -
>>> >>>> >>> > and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > with
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze
>>> >>>> whether
>>> >>>> >>> they
>>> >>>> >>> > are
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > good
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > or
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> >>>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you
>>> >>>> talk
>>> >>>> >>> about
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some
>>> suspicious
>>> >>>> issues
>>> >>>> >>> (eg,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> here
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>),
>>> >>>> but not
>>> >>>> >>> > many.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> I
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
>>> >>>> additional
>>> >>>> >>> > work,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > we
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
>>> close
>>> >>>> >>> issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> that
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > don't
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
>>> project.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded
>>> >>>> with a
>>> >>>> >>> > number
>>> >>>> >>> > >> of
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>>> >>>> >>> generated
>>> >>>> >>> > and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > make
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > no
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We
>>> noticed
>>> >>>> >>> that the
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > users
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are
>>> >>>> created in
>>> >>>> >>> > Airflow
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > are
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and
>>> >>>> reporting such
>>> >>>> >>> > >> issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > to
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>>> >>>> >>> spending too
>>> >>>> >>> > >> much
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue
>>> >>>> report that
>>> >>>> >>> > >> brings
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > no
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking
>>> users
>>> >>>> that
>>> >>>> >>> > sends a
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > lot
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > of
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of
>>> yesterday
>>> >>>> so we
>>> >>>> >>> will
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > report
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is
>>> >>>> testing an
>>> >>>> >>> > >> "agentic
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > AI"
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the
>>> AI
>>> >>>> agents
>>> >>>> >>> on
>>> >>>> >>> > >> their
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source
>>> >>>> reporting it
>>> >>>> >>> to
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > Github -
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those
>>> >>>> without
>>> >>>> >>> > involving
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue
>>> (...
>>> >>>> at
>>> >>>> >>> the top
>>> >>>> >>> > >> and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>>
>>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account
>>> to
>>> >>>> >>> github.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת
>>> >>>> Pavankumar
>>> >>>> >>> > Gopidesu
>>> >>>> >>> > >> ‏<
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai
>>> <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
>>> >>>> requests
>>> >>>> >>> as
>>> >>>> >>> > >> well,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > so
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can
>>> >>>> delete it
>>> >>>> >>> and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > report
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You
>>> Liu <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>>> >>>> >>> It
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > appears
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek
>>> >>>> Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets
>>> from
>>> >>>> your
>>> >>>> >>> > account
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you
>>> >>>> can add
>>> >>>> >>> a
>>> >>>> >>> > >> comment
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > to
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
>>> >>>> opening a
>>> >>>> >>> new
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > ticket.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
>>> >>>> Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw
>>> >>>> after
>>> >>>> >>> sending
>>> >>>> >>> > >> it.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.
>>> I
>>> >>>> hope
>>> >>>> >>> they
>>> >>>> >>> > >> will
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM
>>> Vikram
>>> >>>> Koka
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM
>>> Jarek
>>> >>>> >>> Potiuk <
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
>>> >>>> generated
>>> >>>> >>> > >> feature
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat
>>> legitimate,
>>> >>>> with
>>> >>>> >>> > >> somewhat
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense
>>> >>>> when you
>>> >>>> >>> read
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > them.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with
>>> >>>> short
>>> >>>> >>> > history
>>> >>>> >>> > >> in
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > GH
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues
>>> AND
>>> >>>> report
>>> >>>> >>> > >> authors
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > to
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the
>>> AI-generated
>>> >>>> >>> traffic
>>> >>>> >>> > >> flood.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>>> >>> > >
>>> >>>> >>> >
>>> >>>> >>>
>>> >>>> >>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>>
>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Starting at Linkedin. They don't seem to be on Mastodon or Bluesky, I quit
X and don't care any more for content there.

 -> if you would like to share it, feel free:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jarekpotiuk_outlier-you-are-doing-it-wrong-please-activity-7289278690213990400-MOuC


J.


On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 2:43 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Ok. The issue continues. I am raising to a bit higher level and start to
> complain on https://outlier.ai/ in social media - they are driving those
> issues.
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 7:59 PM Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Obviously as an OSS Dev I don't mind folks profiting from the work I'm
>> doing as
>> long as they collaborate with the community in good faith. But this feels
>> like well beyond
>> the pale in creating additional work only in bad faith, but also not as a
>> member
>> of the community.
>>
>> Personally it's very upsetting to me to spend time helping someone on an
>> issue only to realize
>> that not only do they not care, but they also were paid to waste my time
>> to
>> make someone
>> else money. Being welcoming to users who don't understand the project is
>> difficult and time
>> consuming and I'd hate it if we can't do that because there is too much
>> risk that the user isn't
>> even real.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 12:49 PM Piotr Findeisen <
>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
>> > Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly --
>> by
>> > observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
>> > Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it
>> economically
>> > makes sense :(
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this
>> is
>> >> one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where
>> they pay
>> >> people for some AI tasks.
>> >>
>> >> Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training the
>> >> AI by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable"
>> >> repositories like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and
>> >> people they pay are supposed to take existing issue reports and write
>> >> "better versions of those issues".
>> >> They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do
>> it,
>> >> and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow
>> repo
>> >> using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining
>> what is
>> >> important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc.
>> etc.
>> >> (apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels
>> and
>> >> that the labels are added by DoSu).
>> >> The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in
>> >> real Airflow repo.
>> >>
>> >> The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such
>> >> "poorly written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train AI
>> to
>> >> help to write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate
>> >> initial content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I
>> understand.
>> >>
>> >> I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they seem
>> to
>> >> react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it
>> seems).
>> >> So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will be
>> >> more careful. Or else ...
>> >>
>> >> Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for
>> >> them - so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach
>> out
>> >> to me personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.
>> >>
>> >> Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
>> >> think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption
>> they
>> >> had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
>> >> would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them
>> knowing
>> >> the quality of data they got in.
>> >>
>> >> After understanding better how people are currently attempting to train
>> >> AI for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of
>> - AI
>> >> is not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to
>> learn
>> >> how to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to
>> get. But
>> >> I am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that
>> having
>> >> OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
>> >> business to have.
>> >>
>> >> J.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
>> >>> happened.
>> >>>
>> >>> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and
>> from
>> >>> this comment I gather:
>> >>>
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
>> >>>
>> >>> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue
>> creation"
>> >>> easier - with help of AI
>> >>> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who
>> >>> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things
>> with
>> >>> AI)
>> >>> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
>> >>> tried it
>> >>> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation
>> or
>> >>> default settings as "examples"
>> >>> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
>> >>> issue creation where it actually created those issues
>> >>> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either
>> stopped
>> >>> it or removed some confusion
>> >>> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the
>> user
>> >>> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the
>> user was
>> >>> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so
>> I
>> >>> hope I will get more information soon).
>> >>>
>> >>> J.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <
>> >>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Hi
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow
>> >>>> repo if
>> >>>> we see it happening again?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me
>> (also
>> >>>> for
>> >>>> Iceberg).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Best
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <
>> >>>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see
>> that
>> >>>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
>> >>>> project
>> >>>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
>> >>>> report
>> >>>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
>> >>>> looking
>> >>>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now,
>> but I
>> >>>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
>> >>>> something
>> >>>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>> >>>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>> >>>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some
>> >>>> initial
>> >>>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> J.
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>> >>>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >>> +1 from me.
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these
>> tickets
>> >>>> when
>> >>>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> Regards,
>> >>>> >>> Pavan Kumar
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
>> >>>> users" -
>> >>>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions
>> >>>> with the
>> >>>> >>> repo
>> >>>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA
>> ticket
>> >>>> for
>> >>>> >>> that,
>> >>>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
>> >>>> maybe if
>> >>>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single
>> >>>> ticket for
>> >>>> >>> > that.
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation
>> >>>> and
>> >>>> >>> testing
>> >>>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest
>> >>>> roundtable) -
>> >>>> >>> and
>> >>>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>> >>>> >>> temporarily we
>> >>>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I
>> >>>> will
>> >>>> >>> open a
>> >>>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of
>> ours
>> >>>> think
>> >>>> >>> as
>> >>>> >>> > well :)
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > J.
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are
>> coming
>> >>>> at the
>> >>>> >>> > same
>> >>>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are
>> >>>> very.
>> >>>> >>> ....
>> >>>> >>> > > strange
>> >>>> >>> > >
>> >>>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <
>> eladkal@apache.org
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>> >>>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago,
>> >>>> with some
>> >>>> >>> > minor
>> >>>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to
>> Github
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI"
>> trials,
>> >>>> >>> where
>> >>>> >>> > >> someone
>> >>>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in
>> the
>> >>>> repo
>> >>>> >>> > would".
>> >>>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>> >>>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
>> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>> >>>> >>> self-close
>> >>>> >>> > the
>> >>>> >>> > >> > issue
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032
>> >>>> >).
>> >>>> >>> Closed
>> >>>> >>> > >> > after 1
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
>> >>>> mailbox.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
>> >>>> airflow
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 -
>> >>>> iceberg
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
>> >>>> except
>> >>>> >>> > noise.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you
>> >>>> look at
>> >>>> >>> > their
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg
>> >>>> and
>> >>>> >>> airflow
>> >>>> >>> > >> > about
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now
>> >>>> than you
>> >>>> >>> > >> think.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > J.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit
>> >>>> too
>> >>>> >>> many -
>> >>>> >>> > >> and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a
>> very
>> >>>> >>> > rudimentary
>> >>>> >>> > >> > check
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > .
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the
>> last 12
>> >>>> >>> hours.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't
>> accidentally
>> >>>> close
>> >>>> >>> > issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> > that
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
>> >>>> project.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very
>> human-like -
>> >>>> they
>> >>>> >>> are
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > reported
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>> >>>> >>> legitimate,
>> >>>> >>> > >> but
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > they
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that
>> those
>> >>>> are
>> >>>> >>> > >> completely
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the
>> >>>> problem,
>> >>>> >>> that it
>> >>>> >>> > >> > takes
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > a
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are
>> valid
>> >>>> or
>> >>>> >>> not -
>> >>>> >>> > and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > with
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze
>> >>>> whether
>> >>>> >>> they
>> >>>> >>> > are
>> >>>> >>> > >> > good
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > or
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>> >>>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you
>> >>>> talk
>> >>>> >>> about
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
>> >>>> issues
>> >>>> >>> (eg,
>> >>>> >>> > >> here
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>),
>> >>>> but not
>> >>>> >>> > many.
>> >>>> >>> > >> I
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
>> >>>> additional
>> >>>> >>> > work,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > we
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
>> close
>> >>>> >>> issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> that
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > don't
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>> >>>> >>> > >> >:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded
>> >>>> with a
>> >>>> >>> > number
>> >>>> >>> > >> of
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>> >>>> >>> generated
>> >>>> >>> > and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > make
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > no
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We
>> noticed
>> >>>> >>> that the
>> >>>> >>> > >> > users
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are
>> >>>> created in
>> >>>> >>> > Airflow
>> >>>> >>> > >> > are
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and
>> >>>> reporting such
>> >>>> >>> > >> issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> > to
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>> >>>> >>> spending too
>> >>>> >>> > >> much
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue
>> >>>> report that
>> >>>> >>> > >> brings
>> >>>> >>> > >> > no
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking
>> users
>> >>>> that
>> >>>> >>> > sends a
>> >>>> >>> > >> > lot
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > of
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of
>> yesterday
>> >>>> so we
>> >>>> >>> will
>> >>>> >>> > >> > report
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is
>> >>>> testing an
>> >>>> >>> > >> "agentic
>> >>>> >>> > >> > AI"
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
>> >>>> agents
>> >>>> >>> on
>> >>>> >>> > >> their
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source
>> >>>> reporting it
>> >>>> >>> to
>> >>>> >>> > >> > Github -
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those
>> >>>> without
>> >>>> >>> > involving
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue
>> (...
>> >>>> at
>> >>>> >>> the top
>> >>>> >>> > >> and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>> >>>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account
>> to
>> >>>> >>> github.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת
>> >>>> Pavankumar
>> >>>> >>> > Gopidesu
>> >>>> >>> > >> ‏<
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
>> >>>> requests
>> >>>> >>> as
>> >>>> >>> > >> well,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > so
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can
>> >>>> delete it
>> >>>> >>> and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > report
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You
>> Liu <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>> >>>> >>> It
>> >>>> >>> > >> > appears
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek
>> >>>> Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from
>> >>>> your
>> >>>> >>> > account
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you
>> >>>> can add
>> >>>> >>> a
>> >>>> >>> > >> comment
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > to
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
>> >>>> opening a
>> >>>> >>> new
>> >>>> >>> > >> > ticket.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
>> >>>> Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw
>> >>>> after
>> >>>> >>> sending
>> >>>> >>> > >> it.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I
>> >>>> hope
>> >>>> >>> they
>> >>>> >>> > >> will
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM
>> Vikram
>> >>>> Koka
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM
>> Jarek
>> >>>> >>> Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
>> >>>> generated
>> >>>> >>> > >> feature
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat
>> legitimate,
>> >>>> with
>> >>>> >>> > >> somewhat
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense
>> >>>> when you
>> >>>> >>> read
>> >>>> >>> > >> > them.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with
>> >>>> short
>> >>>> >>> > history
>> >>>> >>> > >> in
>> >>>> >>> > >> > GH
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
>> >>>> report
>> >>>> >>> > >> authors
>> >>>> >>> > >> > to
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the
>> AI-generated
>> >>>> >>> traffic
>> >>>> >>> > >> flood.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Starting at Linkedin. They don't seem to be on Mastodon or Bluesky, I quit
X and don't care any more for content there.

 -> if you would like to share it, feel free:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jarekpotiuk_outlier-you-are-doing-it-wrong-please-activity-7289278690213990400-MOuC


J.


On Sun, Jan 26, 2025 at 2:43 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Ok. The issue continues. I am raising to a bit higher level and start to
> complain on https://outlier.ai/ in social media - they are driving those
> issues.
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 7:59 PM Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Obviously as an OSS Dev I don't mind folks profiting from the work I'm
>> doing as
>> long as they collaborate with the community in good faith. But this feels
>> like well beyond
>> the pale in creating additional work only in bad faith, but also not as a
>> member
>> of the community.
>>
>> Personally it's very upsetting to me to spend time helping someone on an
>> issue only to realize
>> that not only do they not care, but they also were paid to waste my time
>> to
>> make someone
>> else money. Being welcoming to users who don't understand the project is
>> difficult and time
>> consuming and I'd hate it if we can't do that because there is too much
>> risk that the user isn't
>> even real.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 12:49 PM Piotr Findeisen <
>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi
>> >
>> > This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
>> > Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly --
>> by
>> > observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
>> > Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it
>> economically
>> > makes sense :(
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this
>> is
>> >> one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where
>> they pay
>> >> people for some AI tasks.
>> >>
>> >> Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training the
>> >> AI by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable"
>> >> repositories like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and
>> >> people they pay are supposed to take existing issue reports and write
>> >> "better versions of those issues".
>> >> They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do
>> it,
>> >> and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow
>> repo
>> >> using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining
>> what is
>> >> important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc.
>> etc.
>> >> (apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels
>> and
>> >> that the labels are added by DoSu).
>> >> The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in
>> >> real Airflow repo.
>> >>
>> >> The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such
>> >> "poorly written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train AI
>> to
>> >> help to write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate
>> >> initial content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I
>> understand.
>> >>
>> >> I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they seem
>> to
>> >> react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it
>> seems).
>> >> So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will be
>> >> more careful. Or else ...
>> >>
>> >> Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for
>> >> them - so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach
>> out
>> >> to me personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.
>> >>
>> >> Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
>> >> think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption
>> they
>> >> had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
>> >> would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them
>> knowing
>> >> the quality of data they got in.
>> >>
>> >> After understanding better how people are currently attempting to train
>> >> AI for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of
>> - AI
>> >> is not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to
>> learn
>> >> how to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to
>> get. But
>> >> I am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that
>> having
>> >> OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
>> >> business to have.
>> >>
>> >> J.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
>> >>> happened.
>> >>>
>> >>> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and
>> from
>> >>> this comment I gather:
>> >>>
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
>> >>>
>> >>> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue
>> creation"
>> >>> easier - with help of AI
>> >>> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who
>> >>> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things
>> with
>> >>> AI)
>> >>> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
>> >>> tried it
>> >>> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation
>> or
>> >>> default settings as "examples"
>> >>> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
>> >>> issue creation where it actually created those issues
>> >>> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either
>> stopped
>> >>> it or removed some confusion
>> >>> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the
>> user
>> >>> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the
>> user was
>> >>> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so
>> I
>> >>> hope I will get more information soon).
>> >>>
>> >>> J.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <
>> >>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Hi
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>> >>>>
>> >>>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow
>> >>>> repo if
>> >>>> we see it happening again?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me
>> (also
>> >>>> for
>> >>>> Iceberg).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Best
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <
>> >>>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see
>> that
>> >>>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
>> >>>> project
>> >>>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
>> >>>> report
>> >>>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
>> >>>> looking
>> >>>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now,
>> but I
>> >>>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
>> >>>> something
>> >>>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>> >>>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>> >>>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some
>> >>>> initial
>> >>>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> J.
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>> >>>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>> >>> +1 from me.
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these
>> tickets
>> >>>> when
>> >>>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> Regards,
>> >>>> >>> Pavan Kumar
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
>> >>>> users" -
>> >>>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions
>> >>>> with the
>> >>>> >>> repo
>> >>>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA
>> ticket
>> >>>> for
>> >>>> >>> that,
>> >>>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
>> >>>> maybe if
>> >>>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single
>> >>>> ticket for
>> >>>> >>> > that.
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation
>> >>>> and
>> >>>> >>> testing
>> >>>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest
>> >>>> roundtable) -
>> >>>> >>> and
>> >>>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>> >>>> >>> temporarily we
>> >>>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I
>> >>>> will
>> >>>> >>> open a
>> >>>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of
>> ours
>> >>>> think
>> >>>> >>> as
>> >>>> >>> > well :)
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > J.
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are
>> coming
>> >>>> at the
>> >>>> >>> > same
>> >>>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are
>> >>>> very.
>> >>>> >>> ....
>> >>>> >>> > > strange
>> >>>> >>> > >
>> >>>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <
>> eladkal@apache.org
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>> >>>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago,
>> >>>> with some
>> >>>> >>> > minor
>> >>>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to
>> Github
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI"
>> trials,
>> >>>> >>> where
>> >>>> >>> > >> someone
>> >>>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in
>> the
>> >>>> repo
>> >>>> >>> > would".
>> >>>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>> >>>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
>> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>> >>>> >>> self-close
>> >>>> >>> > the
>> >>>> >>> > >> > issue
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032
>> >>>> >).
>> >>>> >>> Closed
>> >>>> >>> > >> > after 1
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
>> >>>> mailbox.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
>> >>>> airflow
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 -
>> >>>> iceberg
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
>> >>>> except
>> >>>> >>> > noise.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you
>> >>>> look at
>> >>>> >>> > their
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg
>> >>>> and
>> >>>> >>> airflow
>> >>>> >>> > >> > about
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now
>> >>>> than you
>> >>>> >>> > >> think.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > J.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit
>> >>>> too
>> >>>> >>> many -
>> >>>> >>> > >> and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a
>> very
>> >>>> >>> > rudimentary
>> >>>> >>> > >> > check
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > .
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the
>> last 12
>> >>>> >>> hours.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't
>> accidentally
>> >>>> close
>> >>>> >>> > issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> > that
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
>> >>>> project.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very
>> human-like -
>> >>>> they
>> >>>> >>> are
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > reported
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>> >>>> >>> legitimate,
>> >>>> >>> > >> but
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > they
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that
>> those
>> >>>> are
>> >>>> >>> > >> completely
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the
>> >>>> problem,
>> >>>> >>> that it
>> >>>> >>> > >> > takes
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > a
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are
>> valid
>> >>>> or
>> >>>> >>> not -
>> >>>> >>> > and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > with
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze
>> >>>> whether
>> >>>> >>> they
>> >>>> >>> > are
>> >>>> >>> > >> > good
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > or
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>> >>>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you
>> >>>> talk
>> >>>> >>> about
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
>> >>>> issues
>> >>>> >>> (eg,
>> >>>> >>> > >> here
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>),
>> >>>> but not
>> >>>> >>> > many.
>> >>>> >>> > >> I
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
>> >>>> additional
>> >>>> >>> > work,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > we
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
>> close
>> >>>> >>> issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> that
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > don't
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>> >>>> >>> > >> >:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded
>> >>>> with a
>> >>>> >>> > number
>> >>>> >>> > >> of
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>> >>>> >>> generated
>> >>>> >>> > and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > make
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > no
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We
>> noticed
>> >>>> >>> that the
>> >>>> >>> > >> > users
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are
>> >>>> created in
>> >>>> >>> > Airflow
>> >>>> >>> > >> > are
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and
>> >>>> reporting such
>> >>>> >>> > >> issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> > to
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>> >>>> >>> spending too
>> >>>> >>> > >> much
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue
>> >>>> report that
>> >>>> >>> > >> brings
>> >>>> >>> > >> > no
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking
>> users
>> >>>> that
>> >>>> >>> > sends a
>> >>>> >>> > >> > lot
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > of
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of
>> yesterday
>> >>>> so we
>> >>>> >>> will
>> >>>> >>> > >> > report
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is
>> >>>> testing an
>> >>>> >>> > >> "agentic
>> >>>> >>> > >> > AI"
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
>> >>>> agents
>> >>>> >>> on
>> >>>> >>> > >> their
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source
>> >>>> reporting it
>> >>>> >>> to
>> >>>> >>> > >> > Github -
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those
>> >>>> without
>> >>>> >>> > involving
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue
>> (...
>> >>>> at
>> >>>> >>> the top
>> >>>> >>> > >> and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>> >>>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account
>> to
>> >>>> >>> github.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת
>> >>>> Pavankumar
>> >>>> >>> > Gopidesu
>> >>>> >>> > >> ‏<
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
>> >>>> requests
>> >>>> >>> as
>> >>>> >>> > >> well,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > so
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can
>> >>>> delete it
>> >>>> >>> and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > report
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You
>> Liu <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>> >>>> >>> It
>> >>>> >>> > >> > appears
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek
>> >>>> Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from
>> >>>> your
>> >>>> >>> > account
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you
>> >>>> can add
>> >>>> >>> a
>> >>>> >>> > >> comment
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > to
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
>> >>>> opening a
>> >>>> >>> new
>> >>>> >>> > >> > ticket.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
>> >>>> Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw
>> >>>> after
>> >>>> >>> sending
>> >>>> >>> > >> it.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I
>> >>>> hope
>> >>>> >>> they
>> >>>> >>> > >> will
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM
>> Vikram
>> >>>> Koka
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM
>> Jarek
>> >>>> >>> Potiuk <
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
>> >>>> generated
>> >>>> >>> > >> feature
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat
>> legitimate,
>> >>>> with
>> >>>> >>> > >> somewhat
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense
>> >>>> when you
>> >>>> >>> read
>> >>>> >>> > >> > them.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with
>> >>>> short
>> >>>> >>> > history
>> >>>> >>> > >> in
>> >>>> >>> > >> > GH
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
>> >>>> report
>> >>>> >>> > >> authors
>> >>>> >>> > >> > to
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the
>> AI-generated
>> >>>> >>> traffic
>> >>>> >>> > >> flood.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>>> >>> > >> >
>> >>>> >>> > >>
>> >>>> >>> > >
>> >>>> >>> >
>> >>>> >>>
>> >>>> >>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Ok. The issue continues. I am raising to a bit higher level and start to
complain on https://outlier.ai/ in social media - they are driving those
issues.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 7:59 PM Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Obviously as an OSS Dev I don't mind folks profiting from the work I'm
> doing as
> long as they collaborate with the community in good faith. But this feels
> like well beyond
> the pale in creating additional work only in bad faith, but also not as a
> member
> of the community.
>
> Personally it's very upsetting to me to spend time helping someone on an
> issue only to realize
> that not only do they not care, but they also were paid to waste my time to
> make someone
> else money. Being welcoming to users who don't understand the project is
> difficult and time
> consuming and I'd hate it if we can't do that because there is too much
> risk that the user isn't
> even real.
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 12:49 PM Piotr Findeisen <
> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
> > Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly --
> by
> > observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
> > Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it
> economically
> > makes sense :(
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> >> FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this is
> >> one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where they
> pay
> >> people for some AI tasks.
> >>
> >> Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training the
> >> AI by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable"
> >> repositories like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and
> >> people they pay are supposed to take existing issue reports and write
> >> "better versions of those issues".
> >> They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do
> it,
> >> and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow
> repo
> >> using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining
> what is
> >> important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc.
> etc.
> >> (apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels
> and
> >> that the labels are added by DoSu).
> >> The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in
> >> real Airflow repo.
> >>
> >> The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such
> >> "poorly written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train AI
> to
> >> help to write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate
> >> initial content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I
> understand.
> >>
> >> I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they seem
> to
> >> react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it
> seems).
> >> So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will be
> >> more careful. Or else ...
> >>
> >> Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for
> >> them - so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach
> out
> >> to me personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.
> >>
> >> Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
> >> think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption
> they
> >> had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
> >> would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them knowing
> >> the quality of data they got in.
> >>
> >> After understanding better how people are currently attempting to train
> >> AI for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of -
> AI
> >> is not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to
> learn
> >> how to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to get.
> But
> >> I am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that
> having
> >> OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
> >> business to have.
> >>
> >> J.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
> >>> happened.
> >>>
> >>> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and
> from
> >>> this comment I gather:
> >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
> >>>
> >>> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue
> creation"
> >>> easier - with help of AI
> >>> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who
> >>> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things
> with
> >>> AI)
> >>> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
> >>> tried it
> >>> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation
> or
> >>> default settings as "examples"
> >>> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
> >>> issue creation where it actually created those issues
> >>> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either
> stopped
> >>> it or removed some confusion
> >>> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the
> user
> >>> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the
> user was
> >>> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so I
> >>> hope I will get more information soon).
> >>>
> >>> J.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <
> >>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
> >>>>
> >>>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow
> >>>> repo if
> >>>> we see it happening again?
> >>>>
> >>>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also
> >>>> for
> >>>> Iceberg).
> >>>>
> >>>> Best
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <
> >>>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see
> that
> >>>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
> >>>> project
> >>>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
> >>>> report
> >>>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
> >>>> looking
> >>>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but
> I
> >>>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
> >>>> something
> >>>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
> >>>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
> >>>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some
> >>>> initial
> >>>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> J.
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
> >>>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>> +1 from me.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these
> tickets
> >>>> when
> >>>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> Regards,
> >>>> >>> Pavan Kumar
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
> >>>> users" -
> >>>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions
> >>>> with the
> >>>> >>> repo
> >>>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA
> ticket
> >>>> for
> >>>> >>> that,
> >>>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
> >>>> maybe if
> >>>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single
> >>>> ticket for
> >>>> >>> > that.
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation
> >>>> and
> >>>> >>> testing
> >>>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest
> >>>> roundtable) -
> >>>> >>> and
> >>>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
> >>>> >>> temporarily we
> >>>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I
> >>>> will
> >>>> >>> open a
> >>>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours
> >>>> think
> >>>> >>> as
> >>>> >>> > well :)
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > J.
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
> >
> >>>> >>> wrote:
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming
> >>>> at the
> >>>> >>> > same
> >>>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are
> >>>> very.
> >>>> >>> ....
> >>>> >>> > > strange
> >>>> >>> > >
> >>>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <
> eladkal@apache.org
> >>>> >
> >>>> >>> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
> >>>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago,
> >>>> with some
> >>>> >>> > minor
> >>>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to
> Github
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>>> >>> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI"
> trials,
> >>>> >>> where
> >>>> >>> > >> someone
> >>>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the
> >>>> repo
> >>>> >>> > would".
> >>>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> >>>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
> >>>> >>> self-close
> >>>> >>> > the
> >>>> >>> > >> > issue
> >>>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032
> >>>> >).
> >>>> >>> Closed
> >>>> >>> > >> > after 1
> >>>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
> >>>> mailbox.
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
> >>>> airflow
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 -
> >>>> iceberg
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
> >>>> except
> >>>> >>> > noise.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you
> >>>> look at
> >>>> >>> > their
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg
> >>>> and
> >>>> >>> airflow
> >>>> >>> > >> > about
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now
> >>>> than you
> >>>> >>> > >> think.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > J.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit
> >>>> too
> >>>> >>> many -
> >>>> >>> > >> and
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
> >>>> >>> > rudimentary
> >>>> >>> > >> > check
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>>
> >>>>
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> >>>> >>> > >> > > .
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last
> 12
> >>>> >>> hours.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
> >>>> close
> >>>> >>> > issues
> >>>> >>> > >> > that
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
> >>>> project.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like
> -
> >>>> they
> >>>> >>> are
> >>>> >>> > >> > > reported
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
> >>>> >>> legitimate,
> >>>> >>> > >> but
> >>>> >>> > >> > > they
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that
> those
> >>>> are
> >>>> >>> > >> completely
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the
> >>>> problem,
> >>>> >>> that it
> >>>> >>> > >> > takes
> >>>> >>> > >> > > a
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid
> >>>> or
> >>>> >>> not -
> >>>> >>> > and
> >>>> >>> > >> > with
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze
> >>>> whether
> >>>> >>> they
> >>>> >>> > are
> >>>> >>> > >> > good
> >>>> >>> > >> > > or
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> >>>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you
> >>>> talk
> >>>> >>> about
> >>>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
> >>>> issues
> >>>> >>> (eg,
> >>>> >>> > >> here
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>),
> >>>> but not
> >>>> >>> > many.
> >>>> >>> > >> I
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
> >>>> additional
> >>>> >>> > work,
> >>>> >>> > >> > and
> >>>> >>> > >> > > we
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
> close
> >>>> >>> issues
> >>>> >>> > >> that
> >>>> >>> > >> > > don't
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
> >>>> >>> > >> >:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded
> >>>> with a
> >>>> >>> > number
> >>>> >>> > >> of
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
> >>>> >>> generated
> >>>> >>> > and
> >>>> >>> > >> > make
> >>>> >>> > >> > > no
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We
> noticed
> >>>> >>> that the
> >>>> >>> > >> > users
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are
> >>>> created in
> >>>> >>> > Airflow
> >>>> >>> > >> > are
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and
> >>>> reporting such
> >>>> >>> > >> issues
> >>>> >>> > >> > to
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
> >>>> >>> spending too
> >>>> >>> > >> much
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue
> >>>> report that
> >>>> >>> > >> brings
> >>>> >>> > >> > no
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users
> >>>> that
> >>>> >>> > sends a
> >>>> >>> > >> > lot
> >>>> >>> > >> > > of
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday
> >>>> so we
> >>>> >>> will
> >>>> >>> > >> > report
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is
> >>>> testing an
> >>>> >>> > >> "agentic
> >>>> >>> > >> > AI"
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
> >>>> agents
> >>>> >>> on
> >>>> >>> > >> their
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source
> >>>> reporting it
> >>>> >>> to
> >>>> >>> > >> > Github -
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those
> >>>> without
> >>>> >>> > involving
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (...
> >>>> at
> >>>> >>> the top
> >>>> >>> > >> and
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>>
> >>>>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
> >>>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
> >>>> >>> github.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת
> >>>> Pavankumar
> >>>> >>> > Gopidesu
> >>>> >>> > >> ‏<
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
> >>>> requests
> >>>> >>> as
> >>>> >>> > >> well,
> >>>> >>> > >> > so
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can
> >>>> delete it
> >>>> >>> and
> >>>> >>> > >> > report
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu
> <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
> >>>> >>> It
> >>>> >>> > >> > appears
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> >>>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek
> >>>> Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from
> >>>> your
> >>>> >>> > account
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you
> >>>> can add
> >>>> >>> a
> >>>> >>> > >> comment
> >>>> >>> > >> > > to
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
> >>>> opening a
> >>>> >>> new
> >>>> >>> > >> > ticket.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
> >>>> Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw
> >>>> after
> >>>> >>> sending
> >>>> >>> > >> it.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I
> >>>> hope
> >>>> >>> they
> >>>> >>> > >> will
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM
> Vikram
> >>>> Koka
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
> >>>> >>> Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
> >>>> generated
> >>>> >>> > >> feature
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat
> legitimate,
> >>>> with
> >>>> >>> > >> somewhat
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense
> >>>> when you
> >>>> >>> read
> >>>> >>> > >> > them.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with
> >>>> short
> >>>> >>> > history
> >>>> >>> > >> in
> >>>> >>> > >> > GH
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
> >>>> report
> >>>> >>> > >> authors
> >>>> >>> > >> > to
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
> >>>> >>> traffic
> >>>> >>> > >> flood.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> > >
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>
> >>>>
> >>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Ok. The issue continues. I am raising to a bit higher level and start to
complain on https://outlier.ai/ in social media - they are driving those
issues.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 7:59 PM Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Obviously as an OSS Dev I don't mind folks profiting from the work I'm
> doing as
> long as they collaborate with the community in good faith. But this feels
> like well beyond
> the pale in creating additional work only in bad faith, but also not as a
> member
> of the community.
>
> Personally it's very upsetting to me to spend time helping someone on an
> issue only to realize
> that not only do they not care, but they also were paid to waste my time to
> make someone
> else money. Being welcoming to users who don't understand the project is
> difficult and time
> consuming and I'd hate it if we can't do that because there is too much
> risk that the user isn't
> even real.
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 12:49 PM Piotr Findeisen <
> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
> > Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly --
> by
> > observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
> > Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it
> economically
> > makes sense :(
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> >> FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this is
> >> one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where they
> pay
> >> people for some AI tasks.
> >>
> >> Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training the
> >> AI by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable"
> >> repositories like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and
> >> people they pay are supposed to take existing issue reports and write
> >> "better versions of those issues".
> >> They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do
> it,
> >> and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow
> repo
> >> using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining
> what is
> >> important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc.
> etc.
> >> (apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels
> and
> >> that the labels are added by DoSu).
> >> The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in
> >> real Airflow repo.
> >>
> >> The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such
> >> "poorly written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train AI
> to
> >> help to write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate
> >> initial content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I
> understand.
> >>
> >> I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they seem
> to
> >> react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it
> seems).
> >> So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will be
> >> more careful. Or else ...
> >>
> >> Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for
> >> them - so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach
> out
> >> to me personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.
> >>
> >> Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
> >> think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption
> they
> >> had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
> >> would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them knowing
> >> the quality of data they got in.
> >>
> >> After understanding better how people are currently attempting to train
> >> AI for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of -
> AI
> >> is not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to
> learn
> >> how to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to get.
> But
> >> I am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that
> having
> >> OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
> >> business to have.
> >>
> >> J.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
> >>> happened.
> >>>
> >>> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and
> from
> >>> this comment I gather:
> >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
> >>>
> >>> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue
> creation"
> >>> easier - with help of AI
> >>> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who
> >>> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things
> with
> >>> AI)
> >>> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
> >>> tried it
> >>> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation
> or
> >>> default settings as "examples"
> >>> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
> >>> issue creation where it actually created those issues
> >>> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either
> stopped
> >>> it or removed some confusion
> >>> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the
> user
> >>> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the
> user was
> >>> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so I
> >>> hope I will get more information soon).
> >>>
> >>> J.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <
> >>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
> >>>>
> >>>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow
> >>>> repo if
> >>>> we see it happening again?
> >>>>
> >>>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also
> >>>> for
> >>>> Iceberg).
> >>>>
> >>>> Best
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <
> >>>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see
> that
> >>>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
> >>>> project
> >>>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
> >>>> report
> >>>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
> >>>> looking
> >>>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but
> I
> >>>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
> >>>> something
> >>>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
> >>>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
> >>>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some
> >>>> initial
> >>>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> J.
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
> >>>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>> +1 from me.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these
> tickets
> >>>> when
> >>>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> Regards,
> >>>> >>> Pavan Kumar
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
> >>>> users" -
> >>>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions
> >>>> with the
> >>>> >>> repo
> >>>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA
> ticket
> >>>> for
> >>>> >>> that,
> >>>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
> >>>> maybe if
> >>>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single
> >>>> ticket for
> >>>> >>> > that.
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation
> >>>> and
> >>>> >>> testing
> >>>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest
> >>>> roundtable) -
> >>>> >>> and
> >>>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
> >>>> >>> temporarily we
> >>>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I
> >>>> will
> >>>> >>> open a
> >>>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours
> >>>> think
> >>>> >>> as
> >>>> >>> > well :)
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > J.
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
> >
> >>>> >>> wrote:
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming
> >>>> at the
> >>>> >>> > same
> >>>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are
> >>>> very.
> >>>> >>> ....
> >>>> >>> > > strange
> >>>> >>> > >
> >>>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <
> eladkal@apache.org
> >>>> >
> >>>> >>> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
> >>>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago,
> >>>> with some
> >>>> >>> > minor
> >>>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to
> Github
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>>> >>> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI"
> trials,
> >>>> >>> where
> >>>> >>> > >> someone
> >>>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the
> >>>> repo
> >>>> >>> > would".
> >>>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> >>>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
> >>>> >>> self-close
> >>>> >>> > the
> >>>> >>> > >> > issue
> >>>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032
> >>>> >).
> >>>> >>> Closed
> >>>> >>> > >> > after 1
> >>>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
> >>>> mailbox.
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
> >>>> airflow
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 -
> >>>> iceberg
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
> >>>> except
> >>>> >>> > noise.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you
> >>>> look at
> >>>> >>> > their
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg
> >>>> and
> >>>> >>> airflow
> >>>> >>> > >> > about
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now
> >>>> than you
> >>>> >>> > >> think.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > J.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit
> >>>> too
> >>>> >>> many -
> >>>> >>> > >> and
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
> >>>> >>> > rudimentary
> >>>> >>> > >> > check
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>>
> >>>>
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> >>>> >>> > >> > > .
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last
> 12
> >>>> >>> hours.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
> >>>> close
> >>>> >>> > issues
> >>>> >>> > >> > that
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
> >>>> project.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like
> -
> >>>> they
> >>>> >>> are
> >>>> >>> > >> > > reported
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
> >>>> >>> legitimate,
> >>>> >>> > >> but
> >>>> >>> > >> > > they
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that
> those
> >>>> are
> >>>> >>> > >> completely
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the
> >>>> problem,
> >>>> >>> that it
> >>>> >>> > >> > takes
> >>>> >>> > >> > > a
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid
> >>>> or
> >>>> >>> not -
> >>>> >>> > and
> >>>> >>> > >> > with
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze
> >>>> whether
> >>>> >>> they
> >>>> >>> > are
> >>>> >>> > >> > good
> >>>> >>> > >> > > or
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> >>>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you
> >>>> talk
> >>>> >>> about
> >>>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
> >>>> issues
> >>>> >>> (eg,
> >>>> >>> > >> here
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>),
> >>>> but not
> >>>> >>> > many.
> >>>> >>> > >> I
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
> >>>> additional
> >>>> >>> > work,
> >>>> >>> > >> > and
> >>>> >>> > >> > > we
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
> close
> >>>> >>> issues
> >>>> >>> > >> that
> >>>> >>> > >> > > don't
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
> >>>> >>> > >> >:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded
> >>>> with a
> >>>> >>> > number
> >>>> >>> > >> of
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
> >>>> >>> generated
> >>>> >>> > and
> >>>> >>> > >> > make
> >>>> >>> > >> > > no
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We
> noticed
> >>>> >>> that the
> >>>> >>> > >> > users
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are
> >>>> created in
> >>>> >>> > Airflow
> >>>> >>> > >> > are
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and
> >>>> reporting such
> >>>> >>> > >> issues
> >>>> >>> > >> > to
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
> >>>> >>> spending too
> >>>> >>> > >> much
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue
> >>>> report that
> >>>> >>> > >> brings
> >>>> >>> > >> > no
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users
> >>>> that
> >>>> >>> > sends a
> >>>> >>> > >> > lot
> >>>> >>> > >> > > of
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday
> >>>> so we
> >>>> >>> will
> >>>> >>> > >> > report
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is
> >>>> testing an
> >>>> >>> > >> "agentic
> >>>> >>> > >> > AI"
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
> >>>> agents
> >>>> >>> on
> >>>> >>> > >> their
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source
> >>>> reporting it
> >>>> >>> to
> >>>> >>> > >> > Github -
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those
> >>>> without
> >>>> >>> > involving
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (...
> >>>> at
> >>>> >>> the top
> >>>> >>> > >> and
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>>
> >>>>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
> >>>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
> >>>> >>> github.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת
> >>>> Pavankumar
> >>>> >>> > Gopidesu
> >>>> >>> > >> ‏<
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
> >>>> requests
> >>>> >>> as
> >>>> >>> > >> well,
> >>>> >>> > >> > so
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can
> >>>> delete it
> >>>> >>> and
> >>>> >>> > >> > report
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu
> <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
> >>>> >>> It
> >>>> >>> > >> > appears
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> >>>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek
> >>>> Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from
> >>>> your
> >>>> >>> > account
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you
> >>>> can add
> >>>> >>> a
> >>>> >>> > >> comment
> >>>> >>> > >> > > to
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
> >>>> opening a
> >>>> >>> new
> >>>> >>> > >> > ticket.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
> >>>> Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw
> >>>> after
> >>>> >>> sending
> >>>> >>> > >> it.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I
> >>>> hope
> >>>> >>> they
> >>>> >>> > >> will
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM
> Vikram
> >>>> Koka
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
> >>>> >>> Potiuk <
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
> >>>> generated
> >>>> >>> > >> feature
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat
> legitimate,
> >>>> with
> >>>> >>> > >> somewhat
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense
> >>>> when you
> >>>> >>> read
> >>>> >>> > >> > them.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with
> >>>> short
> >>>> >>> > history
> >>>> >>> > >> in
> >>>> >>> > >> > GH
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
> >>>> report
> >>>> >>> > >> authors
> >>>> >>> > >> > to
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
> >>>> >>> traffic
> >>>> >>> > >> flood.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>>> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>>> >>> > >> > >
> >>>> >>> > >> >
> >>>> >>> > >>
> >>>> >>> > >
> >>>> >>> >
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>
> >>>>
> >>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>]

Obviously as an OSS Dev I don't mind folks profiting from the work I'm
doing as
long as they collaborate with the community in good faith. But this feels
like well beyond
the pale in creating additional work only in bad faith, but also not as a
member
of the community.

Personally it's very upsetting to me to spend time helping someone on an
issue only to realize
that not only do they not care, but they also were paid to waste my time to
make someone
else money. Being welcoming to users who don't understand the project is
difficult and time
consuming and I'd hate it if we can't do that because there is too much
risk that the user isn't
even real.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 12:49 PM Piotr Findeisen <pi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi
>
> This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
> Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly -- by
> observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
> Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it economically
> makes sense :(
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
>> FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this is
>> one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where they pay
>> people for some AI tasks.
>>
>> Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training the
>> AI by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable"
>> repositories like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and
>> people they pay are supposed to take existing issue reports and write
>> "better versions of those issues".
>> They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do it,
>> and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow repo
>> using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining what is
>> important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc. etc.
>> (apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels and
>> that the labels are added by DoSu).
>> The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in
>> real Airflow repo.
>>
>> The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such
>> "poorly written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train AI to
>> help to write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate
>> initial content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I understand.
>>
>> I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they seem to
>> react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it seems).
>> So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will be
>> more careful. Or else ...
>>
>> Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for
>> them - so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach out
>> to me personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.
>>
>> Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
>> think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption they
>> had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
>> would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them knowing
>> the quality of data they got in.
>>
>> After understanding better how people are currently attempting to train
>> AI for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of - AI
>> is not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to learn
>> how to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to get. But
>> I am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that having
>> OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
>> business to have.
>>
>> J.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
>>> happened.
>>>
>>> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and from
>>> this comment I gather:
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
>>>
>>> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue creation"
>>> easier - with help of AI
>>> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who
>>> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things with
>>> AI)
>>> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
>>> tried it
>>> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation or
>>> default settings as "examples"
>>> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
>>> issue creation where it actually created those issues
>>> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either stopped
>>> it or removed some confusion
>>> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the user
>>> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the user was
>>> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so I
>>> hope I will get more information soon).
>>>
>>> J.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <
>>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>>>>
>>>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow
>>>> repo if
>>>> we see it happening again?
>>>>
>>>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also
>>>> for
>>>> Iceberg).
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <
>>>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
>>>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
>>>> project
>>>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>>>> >>
>>>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
>>>> report
>>>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
>>>> looking
>>>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
>>>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
>>>> something
>>>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>>>> >>
>>>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>>>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>>>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some
>>>> initial
>>>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> J.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>>>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> +1 from me.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets
>>>> when
>>>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Regards,
>>>> >>> Pavan Kumar
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
>>>> users" -
>>>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions
>>>> with the
>>>> >>> repo
>>>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket
>>>> for
>>>> >>> that,
>>>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
>>>> maybe if
>>>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single
>>>> ticket for
>>>> >>> > that.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation
>>>> and
>>>> >>> testing
>>>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest
>>>> roundtable) -
>>>> >>> and
>>>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>>>> >>> temporarily we
>>>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I
>>>> will
>>>> >>> open a
>>>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours
>>>> think
>>>> >>> as
>>>> >>> > well :)
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > J.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming
>>>> at the
>>>> >>> > same
>>>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are
>>>> very.
>>>> >>> ....
>>>> >>> > > strange
>>>> >>> > >
>>>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <eladkal@apache.org
>>>> >
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >
>>>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>>>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago,
>>>> with some
>>>> >>> > minor
>>>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials,
>>>> >>> where
>>>> >>> > >> someone
>>>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the
>>>> repo
>>>> >>> > would".
>>>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
>>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>>>> >>> self-close
>>>> >>> > the
>>>> >>> > >> > issue
>>>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032
>>>> >).
>>>> >>> Closed
>>>> >>> > >> > after 1
>>>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
>>>> mailbox.
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
>>>> airflow
>>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 -
>>>> iceberg
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
>>>> except
>>>> >>> > noise.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you
>>>> look at
>>>> >>> > their
>>>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg
>>>> and
>>>> >>> airflow
>>>> >>> > >> > about
>>>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now
>>>> than you
>>>> >>> > >> think.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > J.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit
>>>> too
>>>> >>> many -
>>>> >>> > >> and
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
>>>> >>> > rudimentary
>>>> >>> > >> > check
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>>
>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>>>> >>> > >> > > .
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
>>>> >>> hours.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
>>>> close
>>>> >>> > issues
>>>> >>> > >> > that
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
>>>> project.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like -
>>>> they
>>>> >>> are
>>>> >>> > >> > > reported
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>>>> >>> legitimate,
>>>> >>> > >> but
>>>> >>> > >> > > they
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those
>>>> are
>>>> >>> > >> completely
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the
>>>> problem,
>>>> >>> that it
>>>> >>> > >> > takes
>>>> >>> > >> > > a
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid
>>>> or
>>>> >>> not -
>>>> >>> > and
>>>> >>> > >> > with
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze
>>>> whether
>>>> >>> they
>>>> >>> > are
>>>> >>> > >> > good
>>>> >>> > >> > > or
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you
>>>> talk
>>>> >>> about
>>>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
>>>> issues
>>>> >>> (eg,
>>>> >>> > >> here
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>),
>>>> but not
>>>> >>> > many.
>>>> >>> > >> I
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
>>>> additional
>>>> >>> > work,
>>>> >>> > >> > and
>>>> >>> > >> > > we
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>>>> >>> issues
>>>> >>> > >> that
>>>> >>> > >> > > don't
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>>>> >>> > >> >:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded
>>>> with a
>>>> >>> > number
>>>> >>> > >> of
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>>>> >>> generated
>>>> >>> > and
>>>> >>> > >> > make
>>>> >>> > >> > > no
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed
>>>> >>> that the
>>>> >>> > >> > users
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are
>>>> created in
>>>> >>> > Airflow
>>>> >>> > >> > are
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and
>>>> reporting such
>>>> >>> > >> issues
>>>> >>> > >> > to
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>>>> >>> spending too
>>>> >>> > >> much
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue
>>>> report that
>>>> >>> > >> brings
>>>> >>> > >> > no
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users
>>>> that
>>>> >>> > sends a
>>>> >>> > >> > lot
>>>> >>> > >> > > of
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday
>>>> so we
>>>> >>> will
>>>> >>> > >> > report
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is
>>>> testing an
>>>> >>> > >> "agentic
>>>> >>> > >> > AI"
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
>>>> agents
>>>> >>> on
>>>> >>> > >> their
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source
>>>> reporting it
>>>> >>> to
>>>> >>> > >> > Github -
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those
>>>> without
>>>> >>> > involving
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (...
>>>> at
>>>> >>> the top
>>>> >>> > >> and
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>>>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>>
>>>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>>>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
>>>> >>> github.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת
>>>> Pavankumar
>>>> >>> > Gopidesu
>>>> >>> > >> ‏<
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
>>>> requests
>>>> >>> as
>>>> >>> > >> well,
>>>> >>> > >> > so
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can
>>>> delete it
>>>> >>> and
>>>> >>> > >> > report
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>>>> >>> It
>>>> >>> > >> > appears
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>>>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek
>>>> Potiuk <
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from
>>>> your
>>>> >>> > account
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you
>>>> can add
>>>> >>> a
>>>> >>> > >> comment
>>>> >>> > >> > > to
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
>>>> opening a
>>>> >>> new
>>>> >>> > >> > ticket.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
>>>> Potiuk <
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw
>>>> after
>>>> >>> sending
>>>> >>> > >> it.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I
>>>> hope
>>>> >>> they
>>>> >>> > >> will
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram
>>>> Koka
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
>>>> >>> Potiuk <
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
>>>> generated
>>>> >>> > >> feature
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate,
>>>> with
>>>> >>> > >> somewhat
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense
>>>> when you
>>>> >>> read
>>>> >>> > >> > them.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with
>>>> short
>>>> >>> > history
>>>> >>> > >> in
>>>> >>> > >> > GH
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
>>>> report
>>>> >>> > >> authors
>>>> >>> > >> > to
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
>>>> >>> traffic
>>>> >>> > >> flood.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> > >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>>
>>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Generally I think the only viable way to fight with such AI slop is to
find cheap ways on how to feed them back with even more garbage :). One of
my favourite projects in that space is "AI Granny" done by O2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV_SdCfZ-0s -> go and watch it :)

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 7:54 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

>
> This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
>> Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly -- by
>> observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
>> Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it economically
>> makes sense :(
>>
>
> Yes. That's why we need to employ AI to respond to those issues - maybe a
> little guided by maintainers (with minimising the effort needed by
> maintainers to assess it) - but without revealing that.
> That's what I am going to advocate for with my friends who are building
> OSS-friendly AI.
>
> Let the AI fight with each other :).
>
> J.
>
>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Generally I think the only viable way to fight with such AI slop is to
find cheap ways on how to feed them back with even more garbage :). One of
my favourite projects in that space is "AI Granny" done by O2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RV_SdCfZ-0s -> go and watch it :)

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 7:54 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

>
> This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
>> Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly -- by
>> observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
>> Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it economically
>> makes sense :(
>>
>
> Yes. That's why we need to employ AI to respond to those issues - maybe a
> little guided by maintainers (with minimising the effort needed by
> maintainers to assess it) - but without revealing that.
> That's what I am going to advocate for with my friends who are building
> OSS-friendly AI.
>
> Let the AI fight with each other :).
>
> J.
>
>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

> This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
> Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly -- by
> observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
> Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it economically
> makes sense :(
>

Yes. That's why we need to employ AI to respond to those issues - maybe a
little guided by maintainers (with minimising the effort needed by
maintainers to assess it) - but without revealing that.
That's what I am going to advocate for with my friends who are building
OSS-friendly AI.

Let the AI fight with each other :).

J.

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

> This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
> Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly -- by
> observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
> Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it economically
> makes sense :(
>

Yes. That's why we need to employ AI to respond to those issues - maybe a
little guided by maintainers (with minimising the effort needed by
maintainers to assess it) - but without revealing that.
That's what I am going to advocate for with my friends who are building
OSS-friendly AI.

Let the AI fight with each other :).

J.

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>]

Obviously as an OSS Dev I don't mind folks profiting from the work I'm
doing as
long as they collaborate with the community in good faith. But this feels
like well beyond
the pale in creating additional work only in bad faith, but also not as a
member
of the community.

Personally it's very upsetting to me to spend time helping someone on an
issue only to realize
that not only do they not care, but they also were paid to waste my time to
make someone
else money. Being welcoming to users who don't understand the project is
difficult and time
consuming and I'd hate it if we can't do that because there is too much
risk that the user isn't
even real.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 12:49 PM Piotr Findeisen <pi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi
>
> This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
> Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly -- by
> observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
> Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it economically
> makes sense :(
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
>> FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this is
>> one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where they pay
>> people for some AI tasks.
>>
>> Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training the
>> AI by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable"
>> repositories like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and
>> people they pay are supposed to take existing issue reports and write
>> "better versions of those issues".
>> They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do it,
>> and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow repo
>> using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining what is
>> important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc. etc.
>> (apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels and
>> that the labels are added by DoSu).
>> The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in
>> real Airflow repo.
>>
>> The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such
>> "poorly written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train AI to
>> help to write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate
>> initial content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I understand.
>>
>> I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they seem to
>> react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it seems).
>> So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will be
>> more careful. Or else ...
>>
>> Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for
>> them - so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach out
>> to me personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.
>>
>> Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
>> think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption they
>> had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
>> would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them knowing
>> the quality of data they got in.
>>
>> After understanding better how people are currently attempting to train
>> AI for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of - AI
>> is not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to learn
>> how to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to get. But
>> I am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that having
>> OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
>> business to have.
>>
>> J.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
>>> happened.
>>>
>>> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and from
>>> this comment I gather:
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
>>>
>>> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue creation"
>>> easier - with help of AI
>>> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who
>>> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things with
>>> AI)
>>> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
>>> tried it
>>> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation or
>>> default settings as "examples"
>>> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
>>> issue creation where it actually created those issues
>>> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either stopped
>>> it or removed some confusion
>>> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the user
>>> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the user was
>>> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so I
>>> hope I will get more information soon).
>>>
>>> J.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <
>>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>>>>
>>>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow
>>>> repo if
>>>> we see it happening again?
>>>>
>>>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also
>>>> for
>>>> Iceberg).
>>>>
>>>> Best
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <
>>>> russell.spitzer@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
>>>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
>>>> project
>>>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>>>> >>
>>>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
>>>> report
>>>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
>>>> looking
>>>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
>>>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
>>>> something
>>>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>>>> >>
>>>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>>>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>>>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some
>>>> initial
>>>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> J.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>>>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> +1 from me.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets
>>>> when
>>>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Regards,
>>>> >>> Pavan Kumar
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
>>>> users" -
>>>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions
>>>> with the
>>>> >>> repo
>>>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket
>>>> for
>>>> >>> that,
>>>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
>>>> maybe if
>>>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single
>>>> ticket for
>>>> >>> > that.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation
>>>> and
>>>> >>> testing
>>>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest
>>>> roundtable) -
>>>> >>> and
>>>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>>>> >>> temporarily we
>>>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I
>>>> will
>>>> >>> open a
>>>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours
>>>> think
>>>> >>> as
>>>> >>> > well :)
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > J.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming
>>>> at the
>>>> >>> > same
>>>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are
>>>> very.
>>>> >>> ....
>>>> >>> > > strange
>>>> >>> > >
>>>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <eladkal@apache.org
>>>> >
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >
>>>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>>>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago,
>>>> with some
>>>> >>> > minor
>>>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials,
>>>> >>> where
>>>> >>> > >> someone
>>>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the
>>>> repo
>>>> >>> > would".
>>>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
>>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>>>> >>> self-close
>>>> >>> > the
>>>> >>> > >> > issue
>>>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032
>>>> >).
>>>> >>> Closed
>>>> >>> > >> > after 1
>>>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
>>>> mailbox.
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
>>>> airflow
>>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 -
>>>> iceberg
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
>>>> except
>>>> >>> > noise.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you
>>>> look at
>>>> >>> > their
>>>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg
>>>> and
>>>> >>> airflow
>>>> >>> > >> > about
>>>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now
>>>> than you
>>>> >>> > >> think.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > J.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit
>>>> too
>>>> >>> many -
>>>> >>> > >> and
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
>>>> >>> > rudimentary
>>>> >>> > >> > check
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>>
>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>>>> >>> > >> > > .
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
>>>> >>> hours.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
>>>> close
>>>> >>> > issues
>>>> >>> > >> > that
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
>>>> project.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like -
>>>> they
>>>> >>> are
>>>> >>> > >> > > reported
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>>>> >>> legitimate,
>>>> >>> > >> but
>>>> >>> > >> > > they
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those
>>>> are
>>>> >>> > >> completely
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the
>>>> problem,
>>>> >>> that it
>>>> >>> > >> > takes
>>>> >>> > >> > > a
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid
>>>> or
>>>> >>> not -
>>>> >>> > and
>>>> >>> > >> > with
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze
>>>> whether
>>>> >>> they
>>>> >>> > are
>>>> >>> > >> > good
>>>> >>> > >> > > or
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you
>>>> talk
>>>> >>> about
>>>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
>>>> issues
>>>> >>> (eg,
>>>> >>> > >> here
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>),
>>>> but not
>>>> >>> > many.
>>>> >>> > >> I
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
>>>> additional
>>>> >>> > work,
>>>> >>> > >> > and
>>>> >>> > >> > > we
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>>>> >>> issues
>>>> >>> > >> that
>>>> >>> > >> > > don't
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>>>> >>> > >> >:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded
>>>> with a
>>>> >>> > number
>>>> >>> > >> of
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>>>> >>> generated
>>>> >>> > and
>>>> >>> > >> > make
>>>> >>> > >> > > no
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed
>>>> >>> that the
>>>> >>> > >> > users
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are
>>>> created in
>>>> >>> > Airflow
>>>> >>> > >> > are
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and
>>>> reporting such
>>>> >>> > >> issues
>>>> >>> > >> > to
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>>>> >>> spending too
>>>> >>> > >> much
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue
>>>> report that
>>>> >>> > >> brings
>>>> >>> > >> > no
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users
>>>> that
>>>> >>> > sends a
>>>> >>> > >> > lot
>>>> >>> > >> > > of
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday
>>>> so we
>>>> >>> will
>>>> >>> > >> > report
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is
>>>> testing an
>>>> >>> > >> "agentic
>>>> >>> > >> > AI"
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
>>>> agents
>>>> >>> on
>>>> >>> > >> their
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source
>>>> reporting it
>>>> >>> to
>>>> >>> > >> > Github -
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those
>>>> without
>>>> >>> > involving
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (...
>>>> at
>>>> >>> the top
>>>> >>> > >> and
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>>>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>>
>>>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>>>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
>>>> >>> github.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת
>>>> Pavankumar
>>>> >>> > Gopidesu
>>>> >>> > >> ‏<
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
>>>> requests
>>>> >>> as
>>>> >>> > >> well,
>>>> >>> > >> > so
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can
>>>> delete it
>>>> >>> and
>>>> >>> > >> > report
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>>>> >>> It
>>>> >>> > >> > appears
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>>>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek
>>>> Potiuk <
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from
>>>> your
>>>> >>> > account
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you
>>>> can add
>>>> >>> a
>>>> >>> > >> comment
>>>> >>> > >> > > to
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
>>>> opening a
>>>> >>> new
>>>> >>> > >> > ticket.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
>>>> Potiuk <
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw
>>>> after
>>>> >>> sending
>>>> >>> > >> it.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I
>>>> hope
>>>> >>> they
>>>> >>> > >> will
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram
>>>> Koka
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
>>>> >>> Potiuk <
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
>>>> generated
>>>> >>> > >> feature
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate,
>>>> with
>>>> >>> > >> somewhat
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense
>>>> when you
>>>> >>> read
>>>> >>> > >> > them.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with
>>>> short
>>>> >>> > history
>>>> >>> > >> in
>>>> >>> > >> > GH
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
>>>> report
>>>> >>> > >> authors
>>>> >>> > >> > to
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
>>>> >>> traffic
>>>> >>> > >> flood.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>>> >>> > >> > >
>>>> >>> > >> >
>>>> >>> > >>
>>>> >>> > >
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>>
>>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Piotr Findeisen <pi...@gmail.com>]

Hi

This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly -- by
observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it economically
makes sense :(




On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this is
> one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where they pay
> people for some AI tasks.
>
> Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training the AI
> by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable" repositories
> like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and people they pay
> are supposed to take existing issue reports and write "better versions of
> those issues".
> They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do it,
> and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow repo
> using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining what is
> important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc. etc.
> (apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels and
> that the labels are added by DoSu).
> The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in
> real Airflow repo.
>
> The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such "poorly
> written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train AI to help to
> write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate initial
> content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I understand.
>
> I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they seem to
> react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it seems).
> So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will be
> more careful. Or else ...
>
> Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for
> them - so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach out
> to me personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.
>
> Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
> think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption they
> had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
> would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them knowing
> the quality of data they got in.
>
> After understanding better how people are currently attempting to train AI
> for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of - AI is
> not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to learn how
> to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to get. But I
> am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that having
> OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
> business to have.
>
> J.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
>> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
>> happened.
>>
>> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and from
>> this comment I gather:
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
>>
>> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue creation"
>> easier - with help of AI
>> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who
>> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things with
>> AI)
>> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
>> tried it
>> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation or
>> default settings as "examples"
>> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
>> issue creation where it actually created those issues
>> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either stopped
>> it or removed some confusion
>> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the user
>> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the user was
>> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so I
>> hope I will get more information soon).
>>
>> J.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <
>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>>>
>>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow repo
>>> if
>>> we see it happening again?
>>>
>>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also
>>> for
>>> Iceberg).
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <russell.spitzer@gmail.com
>>> >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
>>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
>>> project
>>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>>> >>
>>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
>>> report
>>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
>>> >>
>>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
>>> looking
>>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
>>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
>>> something
>>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>>> >>
>>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some
>>> initial
>>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>>> >>
>>> >> J.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> +1 from me.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets
>>> when
>>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Regards,
>>> >>> Pavan Kumar
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
>>> users" -
>>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with
>>> the
>>> >>> repo
>>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket
>>> for
>>> >>> that,
>>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
>>> maybe if
>>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket
>>> for
>>> >>> > that.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
>>> >>> testing
>>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest
>>> roundtable) -
>>> >>> and
>>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>>> >>> temporarily we
>>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will
>>> >>> open a
>>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours
>>> think
>>> >>> as
>>> >>> > well :)
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > J.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming
>>> at the
>>> >>> > same
>>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are
>>> very.
>>> >>> ....
>>> >>> > > strange
>>> >>> > >
>>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> > >
>>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with
>>> some
>>> >>> > minor
>>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials,
>>> >>> where
>>> >>> > >> someone
>>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the
>>> repo
>>> >>> > would".
>>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>>> >>> self-close
>>> >>> > the
>>> >>> > >> > issue
>>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
>>> >>> Closed
>>> >>> > >> > after 1
>>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
>>> mailbox.
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
>>> airflow
>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 -
>>> iceberg
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
>>> except
>>> >>> > noise.
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you
>>> look at
>>> >>> > their
>>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
>>> >>> airflow
>>> >>> > >> > about
>>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now
>>> than you
>>> >>> > >> think.
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > J.
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too
>>> >>> many -
>>> >>> > >> and
>>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
>>> >>> > rudimentary
>>> >>> > >> > check
>>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>>> >>> > >> > > .
>>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
>>> >>> hours.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
>>> close
>>> >>> > issues
>>> >>> > >> > that
>>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
>>> project.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like -
>>> they
>>> >>> are
>>> >>> > >> > > reported
>>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>>> >>> legitimate,
>>> >>> > >> but
>>> >>> > >> > > they
>>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those
>>> are
>>> >>> > >> completely
>>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem,
>>> >>> that it
>>> >>> > >> > takes
>>> >>> > >> > > a
>>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or
>>> >>> not -
>>> >>> > and
>>> >>> > >> > with
>>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether
>>> >>> they
>>> >>> > are
>>> >>> > >> > good
>>> >>> > >> > > or
>>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk
>>> >>> about
>>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
>>> issues
>>> >>> (eg,
>>> >>> > >> here
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but
>>> not
>>> >>> > many.
>>> >>> > >> I
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
>>> additional
>>> >>> > work,
>>> >>> > >> > and
>>> >>> > >> > > we
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>>> >>> issues
>>> >>> > >> that
>>> >>> > >> > > don't
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >>> > >> >:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded
>>> with a
>>> >>> > number
>>> >>> > >> of
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>>> >>> generated
>>> >>> > and
>>> >>> > >> > make
>>> >>> > >> > > no
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed
>>> >>> that the
>>> >>> > >> > users
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created
>>> in
>>> >>> > Airflow
>>> >>> > >> > are
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting
>>> such
>>> >>> > >> issues
>>> >>> > >> > to
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>>> >>> spending too
>>> >>> > >> much
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report
>>> that
>>> >>> > >> brings
>>> >>> > >> > no
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users
>>> that
>>> >>> > sends a
>>> >>> > >> > lot
>>> >>> > >> > > of
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday
>>> so we
>>> >>> will
>>> >>> > >> > report
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing
>>> an
>>> >>> > >> "agentic
>>> >>> > >> > AI"
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
>>> agents
>>> >>> on
>>> >>> > >> their
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source
>>> reporting it
>>> >>> to
>>> >>> > >> > Github -
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
>>> >>> > involving
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at
>>> >>> the top
>>> >>> > >> and
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
>>> >>> github.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
>>> >>> > Gopidesu
>>> >>> > >> ‏<
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
>>> requests
>>> >>> as
>>> >>> > >> well,
>>> >>> > >> > so
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can
>>> delete it
>>> >>> and
>>> >>> > >> > report
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>>> >>> It
>>> >>> > >> > appears
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk
>>> <
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from
>>> your
>>> >>> > account
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can
>>> add
>>> >>> a
>>> >>> > >> comment
>>> >>> > >> > > to
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
>>> opening a
>>> >>> new
>>> >>> > >> > ticket.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
>>> Potiuk <
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
>>> >>> sending
>>> >>> > >> it.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I
>>> hope
>>> >>> they
>>> >>> > >> will
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram
>>> Koka
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
>>> >>> Potiuk <
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
>>> generated
>>> >>> > >> feature
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate,
>>> with
>>> >>> > >> somewhat
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when
>>> you
>>> >>> read
>>> >>> > >> > them.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with
>>> short
>>> >>> > history
>>> >>> > >> in
>>> >>> > >> > GH
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
>>> report
>>> >>> > >> authors
>>> >>> > >> > to
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
>>> >>> traffic
>>> >>> > >> flood.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> > >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>>
>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Piotr Findeisen <pi...@gmail.com>]

Hi

This ultimately means they train AI on the contributors & maintainers.
Either indirectly -- by extending high quality projects, or directly -- by
observing how project maintainers react to these issues.
Since the maintainers' time is a 'free resource' for them, it economically
makes sense :(




On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 at 19:35, Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this is
> one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where they pay
> people for some AI tasks.
>
> Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training the AI
> by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable" repositories
> like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and people they pay
> are supposed to take existing issue reports and write "better versions of
> those issues".
> They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do it,
> and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow repo
> using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining what is
> important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc. etc.
> (apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels and
> that the labels are added by DoSu).
> The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in
> real Airflow repo.
>
> The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such "poorly
> written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train AI to help to
> write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate initial
> content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I understand.
>
> I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they seem to
> react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it seems).
> So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will be
> more careful. Or else ...
>
> Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for
> them - so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach out
> to me personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.
>
> Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
> think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption they
> had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
> would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them knowing
> the quality of data they got in.
>
> After understanding better how people are currently attempting to train AI
> for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of - AI is
> not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to learn how
> to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to get. But I
> am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that having
> OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
> business to have.
>
> J.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
>> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
>> happened.
>>
>> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and from
>> this comment I gather:
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
>>
>> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue creation"
>> easier - with help of AI
>> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who
>> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things with
>> AI)
>> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
>> tried it
>> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation or
>> default settings as "examples"
>> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
>> issue creation where it actually created those issues
>> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either stopped
>> it or removed some confusion
>> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the user
>> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the user was
>> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so I
>> hope I will get more information soon).
>>
>> J.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <
>> piotr.findeisen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>>>
>>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow repo
>>> if
>>> we see it happening again?
>>>
>>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also
>>> for
>>> Iceberg).
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <russell.spitzer@gmail.com
>>> >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
>>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
>>> project
>>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>>> >>
>>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
>>> report
>>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
>>> >>
>>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
>>> looking
>>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
>>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
>>> something
>>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>>> >>
>>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some
>>> initial
>>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>>> >>
>>> >> J.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> +1 from me.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets
>>> when
>>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Regards,
>>> >>> Pavan Kumar
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
>>> users" -
>>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with
>>> the
>>> >>> repo
>>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket
>>> for
>>> >>> that,
>>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
>>> maybe if
>>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket
>>> for
>>> >>> > that.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
>>> >>> testing
>>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest
>>> roundtable) -
>>> >>> and
>>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>>> >>> temporarily we
>>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will
>>> >>> open a
>>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours
>>> think
>>> >>> as
>>> >>> > well :)
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > J.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming
>>> at the
>>> >>> > same
>>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are
>>> very.
>>> >>> ....
>>> >>> > > strange
>>> >>> > >
>>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> > >
>>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with
>>> some
>>> >>> > minor
>>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials,
>>> >>> where
>>> >>> > >> someone
>>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the
>>> repo
>>> >>> > would".
>>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>>> >>> self-close
>>> >>> > the
>>> >>> > >> > issue
>>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
>>> >>> Closed
>>> >>> > >> > after 1
>>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
>>> mailbox.
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
>>> airflow
>>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 -
>>> iceberg
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
>>> except
>>> >>> > noise.
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you
>>> look at
>>> >>> > their
>>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
>>> >>> airflow
>>> >>> > >> > about
>>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now
>>> than you
>>> >>> > >> think.
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > J.
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>> > >> wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too
>>> >>> many -
>>> >>> > >> and
>>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
>>> >>> > rudimentary
>>> >>> > >> > check
>>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>>> >>> > >> > > .
>>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
>>> >>> hours.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
>>> close
>>> >>> > issues
>>> >>> > >> > that
>>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the
>>> project.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like -
>>> they
>>> >>> are
>>> >>> > >> > > reported
>>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>>> >>> legitimate,
>>> >>> > >> but
>>> >>> > >> > > they
>>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those
>>> are
>>> >>> > >> completely
>>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem,
>>> >>> that it
>>> >>> > >> > takes
>>> >>> > >> > > a
>>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or
>>> >>> not -
>>> >>> > and
>>> >>> > >> > with
>>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether
>>> >>> they
>>> >>> > are
>>> >>> > >> > good
>>> >>> > >> > > or
>>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk
>>> >>> about
>>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
>>> issues
>>> >>> (eg,
>>> >>> > >> here
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but
>>> not
>>> >>> > many.
>>> >>> > >> I
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
>>> additional
>>> >>> > work,
>>> >>> > >> > and
>>> >>> > >> > > we
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>>> >>> issues
>>> >>> > >> that
>>> >>> > >> > > don't
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >>> > >> >:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded
>>> with a
>>> >>> > number
>>> >>> > >> of
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>>> >>> generated
>>> >>> > and
>>> >>> > >> > make
>>> >>> > >> > > no
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed
>>> >>> that the
>>> >>> > >> > users
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created
>>> in
>>> >>> > Airflow
>>> >>> > >> > are
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting
>>> such
>>> >>> > >> issues
>>> >>> > >> > to
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>>> >>> spending too
>>> >>> > >> much
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report
>>> that
>>> >>> > >> brings
>>> >>> > >> > no
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users
>>> that
>>> >>> > sends a
>>> >>> > >> > lot
>>> >>> > >> > > of
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday
>>> so we
>>> >>> will
>>> >>> > >> > report
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing
>>> an
>>> >>> > >> "agentic
>>> >>> > >> > AI"
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
>>> agents
>>> >>> on
>>> >>> > >> their
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source
>>> reporting it
>>> >>> to
>>> >>> > >> > Github -
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
>>> >>> > involving
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at
>>> >>> the top
>>> >>> > >> and
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
>>> >>> github.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
>>> >>> > Gopidesu
>>> >>> > >> ‏<
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
>>> requests
>>> >>> as
>>> >>> > >> well,
>>> >>> > >> > so
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can
>>> delete it
>>> >>> and
>>> >>> > >> > report
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>>> >>> It
>>> >>> > >> > appears
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk
>>> <
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from
>>> your
>>> >>> > account
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can
>>> add
>>> >>> a
>>> >>> > >> comment
>>> >>> > >> > > to
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
>>> opening a
>>> >>> new
>>> >>> > >> > ticket.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
>>> Potiuk <
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
>>> >>> sending
>>> >>> > >> it.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I
>>> hope
>>> >>> they
>>> >>> > >> will
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram
>>> Koka
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
>>> >>> Potiuk <
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
>>> generated
>>> >>> > >> feature
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate,
>>> with
>>> >>> > >> somewhat
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when
>>> you
>>> >>> read
>>> >>> > >> > them.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with
>>> short
>>> >>> > history
>>> >>> > >> in
>>> >>> > >> > GH
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
>>> report
>>> >>> > >> authors
>>> >>> > >> > to
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
>>> >>> traffic
>>> >>> > >> flood.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>>> >>> > >> > > >>
>>> >>> > >> > >
>>> >>> > >> >
>>> >>> > >>
>>> >>> > >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>>
>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this is
one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where they pay
people for some AI tasks.

Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training the AI
by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable" repositories
like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and people they pay
are supposed to take existing issue reports and write "better versions of
those issues".
They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do it,
and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow repo
using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining what is
important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc. etc.
(apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels and
that the labels are added by DoSu).
The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in real
Airflow repo.

The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such "poorly
written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train AI to help to
write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate initial
content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I understand.

I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they seem to
react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it seems).
So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will be
more careful. Or else ...

Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for them
- so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach out to me
personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.

Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption they
had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them knowing
the quality of data they got in.

After understanding better how people are currently attempting to train AI
for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of - AI is
not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to learn how
to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to get. But I
am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that having
OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
business to have.

J.



On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
> happened.
>
> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and from
> this comment I gather:
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
>
> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue creation"
> easier - with help of AI
> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who
> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things with
> AI)
> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
> tried it
> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation or
> default settings as "examples"
> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
> issue creation where it actually created those issues
> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either stopped
> it or removed some confusion
> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the user
> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the user was
> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so I
> hope I will get more information soon).
>
> J.
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <pi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>>
>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow repo
>> if
>> we see it happening again?
>>
>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also for
>> Iceberg).
>>
>> Best
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
>> project
>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>> >>
>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
>> report
>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
>> >>
>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
>> looking
>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
>> something
>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>> >>
>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some initial
>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>> >>
>> >> J.
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> +1 from me.
>> >>>
>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets
>> when
>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards,
>> >>> Pavan Kumar
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
>> users" -
>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with
>> the
>> >>> repo
>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>> >>> >
>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket
>> for
>> >>> that,
>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
>> maybe if
>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket
>> for
>> >>> > that.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
>> >>> testing
>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable)
>> -
>> >>> and
>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>> >>> temporarily we
>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will
>> >>> open a
>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours
>> think
>> >>> as
>> >>> > well :)
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > J.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at
>> the
>> >>> > same
>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very.
>> >>> ....
>> >>> > > strange
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with
>> some
>> >>> > minor
>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials,
>> >>> where
>> >>> > >> someone
>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the
>> repo
>> >>> > would".
>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
>> >>> > >> wrote:
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>> >>> self-close
>> >>> > the
>> >>> > >> > issue
>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
>> >>> Closed
>> >>> > >> > after 1
>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
>> mailbox.
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
>> airflow
>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
>> except
>> >>> > noise.
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look
>> at
>> >>> > their
>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
>> >>> airflow
>> >>> > >> > about
>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than
>> you
>> >>> > >> think.
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > > J.
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>> > >> wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too
>> >>> many -
>> >>> > >> and
>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
>> >>> > rudimentary
>> >>> > >> > check
>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>> >>> > >> > > .
>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
>> >>> hours.
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
>> close
>> >>> > issues
>> >>> > >> > that
>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like -
>> they
>> >>> are
>> >>> > >> > > reported
>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>> >>> legitimate,
>> >>> > >> but
>> >>> > >> > > they
>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those
>> are
>> >>> > >> completely
>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem,
>> >>> that it
>> >>> > >> > takes
>> >>> > >> > > a
>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or
>> >>> not -
>> >>> > and
>> >>> > >> > with
>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether
>> >>> they
>> >>> > are
>> >>> > >> > good
>> >>> > >> > > or
>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk
>> >>> about
>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
>> issues
>> >>> (eg,
>> >>> > >> here
>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but
>> not
>> >>> > many.
>> >>> > >> I
>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
>> additional
>> >>> > work,
>> >>> > >> > and
>> >>> > >> > > we
>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>> >>> issues
>> >>> > >> that
>> >>> > >> > > don't
>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>> >>> > >> >:
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with
>> a
>> >>> > number
>> >>> > >> of
>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>> >>> generated
>> >>> > and
>> >>> > >> > make
>> >>> > >> > > no
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed
>> >>> that the
>> >>> > >> > users
>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created
>> in
>> >>> > Airflow
>> >>> > >> > are
>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting
>> such
>> >>> > >> issues
>> >>> > >> > to
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>> >>> spending too
>> >>> > >> much
>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report
>> that
>> >>> > >> brings
>> >>> > >> > no
>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users
>> that
>> >>> > sends a
>> >>> > >> > lot
>> >>> > >> > > of
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so
>> we
>> >>> will
>> >>> > >> > report
>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing
>> an
>> >>> > >> "agentic
>> >>> > >> > AI"
>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
>> agents
>> >>> on
>> >>> > >> their
>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting
>> it
>> >>> to
>> >>> > >> > Github -
>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
>> >>> > involving
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at
>> >>> the top
>> >>> > >> and
>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
>> >>> github.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
>> >>> > Gopidesu
>> >>> > >> ‏<
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
>> requests
>> >>> as
>> >>> > >> well,
>> >>> > >> > so
>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete
>> it
>> >>> and
>> >>> > >> > report
>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>> >>> It
>> >>> > >> > appears
>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
>> >>> > account
>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can
>> add
>> >>> a
>> >>> > >> comment
>> >>> > >> > > to
>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
>> opening a
>> >>> new
>> >>> > >> > ticket.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
>> Potiuk <
>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
>> >>> sending
>> >>> > >> it.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope
>> >>> they
>> >>> > >> will
>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram
>> Koka
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
>> >>> Potiuk <
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
>> generated
>> >>> > >> feature
>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate,
>> with
>> >>> > >> somewhat
>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when
>> you
>> >>> read
>> >>> > >> > them.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
>> >>> > history
>> >>> > >> in
>> >>> > >> > GH
>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
>> report
>> >>> > >> authors
>> >>> > >> > to
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
>> >>> traffic
>> >>> > >> flood.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

FYI - I got some information where it originated from. Basically this is
one of a "crowdsource expert humans to train AI" platforms - where they pay
people for some AI tasks.

Apparently they are running some campaign to "crowdsource" training the AI
by human experts to write better issues. They use "reputable" repositories
like Airflow and Iceberg with good and poor issues - and people they pay
are supposed to take existing issue reports and write "better versions of
those issues".
They provided some instructions and videos to the people on how to do it,
and that involved actually showing how to create an issue in Airflow repo
using our templates (which were considered high quality) explaining what is
important to add and fill, explaining that labels are important etc. etc.
(apparently they did not  realize that contributors cannot add labels and
that the labels are added by DoSu).
The instructions were tricking people into actually creating issues in real
Airflow repo.

The assumption they have is that crowdsourced humans can take such "poorly
written issues" and "rewrite them in a better way" to train AI to help to
write better issues - this has some AI assistance to generate initial
content from such "poorly written issues" - as far as I understand.

I am quite sure people from that platform are listening in - they seem to
react and stop the people from doing what they were doing (or so it seems).
So I hope they will not make that mistake again - and that they will be
more careful. Or else ...

Sharing publicly the name of that platform would be rather painful for them
- so I am not going to do that publicly - but feel free to reach out to me
personally if you know me - I will gladly share it.

Taking into account what effect this could have on maintainers, also I
think - judging by the quality of the issues we had - the assumption they
had is completely wrong. Any of their customers who run their campaign
would likely be pretty discouraged to continue working with them knowing
the quality of data they got in.

After understanding better how people are currently attempting to train AI
for such tasks, I am quite certain we have nothing to be afraid of - AI is
not going to replace us :). I am only afraid that we will have to learn how
to deal with the huge amount of "AI slop" that we are going to get. But I
am already suggesting to some of the friends working with AI that having
OSS-friendly AI services to filter out such "AI slop" is a very good
business to have.

J.



On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 9:20 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
> happened.
>
> We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and from
> this comment I gather:
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111
>
> * there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue creation"
> easier - with help of AI
> * some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who
> have a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things with
> AI)
> * apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and
> tried it
> * this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation or
> default settings as "examples"
> * apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
> issue creation where it actually created those issues
> * I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either stopped
> it or removed some confusion
> * I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the user
> to provide information about what tooling they were using (and the user was
> apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so I
> hope I will get more information soon).
>
> J.
>
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <pi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>>
>> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow repo
>> if
>> we see it happening again?
>>
>> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also for
>> Iceberg).
>>
>> Best
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
>> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
>> project
>> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>> >>
>> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar
>> report
>> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
>> >>
>> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are
>> looking
>> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
>> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
>> something
>> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>> >>
>> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some initial
>> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>> >>
>> >> J.
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> +1 from me.
>> >>>
>> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets
>> when
>> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards,
>> >>> Pavan Kumar
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new
>> users" -
>> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with
>> the
>> >>> repo
>> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>> >>> >
>> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket
>> for
>> >>> that,
>> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and
>> maybe if
>> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket
>> for
>> >>> > that.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
>> >>> testing
>> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable)
>> -
>> >>> and
>> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>> >>> temporarily we
>> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will
>> >>> open a
>> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours
>> think
>> >>> as
>> >>> > well :)
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > J.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at
>> the
>> >>> > same
>> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very.
>> >>> ....
>> >>> > > strange
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with
>> some
>> >>> > minor
>> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials,
>> >>> where
>> >>> > >> someone
>> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the
>> repo
>> >>> > would".
>> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>> >>> fokko@apache.org>
>> >>> > >> wrote:
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>> >>> self-close
>> >>> > the
>> >>> > >> > issue
>> >>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
>> >>> Closed
>> >>> > >> > after 1
>> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my
>> mailbox.
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  -
>> airflow
>> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value
>> except
>> >>> > noise.
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look
>> at
>> >>> > their
>> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
>> >>> airflow
>> >>> > >> > about
>> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than
>> you
>> >>> > >> think.
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > > J.
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>> > >> wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too
>> >>> many -
>> >>> > >> and
>> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
>> >>> > rudimentary
>> >>> > >> > check
>> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>> >>> > >> > > .
>> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
>> >>> hours.
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
>> close
>> >>> > issues
>> >>> > >> > that
>> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like -
>> they
>> >>> are
>> >>> > >> > > reported
>> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>> >>> legitimate,
>> >>> > >> but
>> >>> > >> > > they
>> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those
>> are
>> >>> > >> completely
>> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem,
>> >>> that it
>> >>> > >> > takes
>> >>> > >> > > a
>> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or
>> >>> not -
>> >>> > and
>> >>> > >> > with
>> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether
>> >>> they
>> >>> > are
>> >>> > >> > good
>> >>> > >> > > or
>> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >> J.
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>> >>> > fokko@apache.org
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk
>> >>> about
>> >>> > >> > > flooding,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
>> issues
>> >>> (eg,
>> >>> > >> here
>> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but
>> not
>> >>> > many.
>> >>> > >> I
>> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
>> additional
>> >>> > work,
>> >>> > >> > and
>> >>> > >> > > we
>> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>> >>> issues
>> >>> > >> that
>> >>> > >> > > don't
>> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>> >>> > >> >:
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with
>> a
>> >>> > number
>> >>> > >> of
>> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>> >>> generated
>> >>> > and
>> >>> > >> > make
>> >>> > >> > > no
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed
>> >>> that the
>> >>> > >> > users
>> >>> > >> > > >>> who
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created
>> in
>> >>> > Airflow
>> >>> > >> > are
>> >>> > >> > > >>> also
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting
>> such
>> >>> > >> issues
>> >>> > >> > to
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>> >>> spending too
>> >>> > >> much
>> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report
>> that
>> >>> > >> brings
>> >>> > >> > no
>> >>> > >> > > >>> value
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users
>> that
>> >>> > sends a
>> >>> > >> > lot
>> >>> > >> > > of
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so
>> we
>> >>> will
>> >>> > >> > report
>> >>> > >> > > >>> your
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing
>> an
>> >>> > >> "agentic
>> >>> > >> > AI"
>> >>> > >> > > >>> that
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
>> agents
>> >>> on
>> >>> > >> their
>> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting
>> it
>> >>> to
>> >>> > >> > Github -
>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
>> >>> > involving
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at
>> >>> the top
>> >>> > >> and
>> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
>> >>> github.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
>> >>> > Gopidesu
>> >>> > >> ‏<
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull
>> requests
>> >>> as
>> >>> > >> well,
>> >>> > >> > so
>> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete
>> it
>> >>> and
>> >>> > >> > report
>> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>> >>> It
>> >>> > >> > appears
>> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>> >>> > >> > > >>> with
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
>> >>> > account
>> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can
>> add
>> >>> a
>> >>> > >> comment
>> >>> > >> > > to
>> >>> > >> > > >>> an
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before
>> opening a
>> >>> new
>> >>> > >> > ticket.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
>> Potiuk <
>> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
>> >>> sending
>> >>> > >> it.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope
>> >>> they
>> >>> > >> will
>> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram
>> Koka
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
>> >>> Potiuk <
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
>> generated
>> >>> > >> feature
>> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate,
>> with
>> >>> > >> somewhat
>> >>> > >> > > >>> related
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when
>> you
>> >>> read
>> >>> > >> > them.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
>> >>> > history
>> >>> > >> in
>> >>> > >> > GH
>> >>> > >> > > >>> and
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
>> report
>> >>> > >> authors
>> >>> > >> > to
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
>> >>> traffic
>> >>> > >> flood.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> >>> > >> > > >>> >
>> >>> > >> > > >>>
>> >>> > >> > > >>
>> >>> > >> > >
>> >>> > >> >
>> >>> > >>
>> >>> > >
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
happened.

We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and from
this comment I gather:
https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111

* there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue creation"
easier - with help of AI
* some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who have
a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things with AI)
* apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and tried
it
* this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation or
default settings as "examples"
* apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
issue creation where it actually created those issues
* I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either stopped it
or removed some confusion
* I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the user to
provide information about what tooling they were using (and the user was
apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so I
hope I will get more information soon).

J.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <pi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi
>
> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>
> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow repo if
> we see it happening again?
>
> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also for
> Iceberg).
>
> Best
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
> project
> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
> >>
> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar report
> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
> >>
> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are looking
> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
> something
> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
> >>
> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some initial
> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
> >>
> >> J.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 from me.
> >>>
> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets
> when
> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Pavan Kumar
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users"
> -
> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
> >>> >
> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with
> the
> >>> repo
> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
> >>> >
> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
> >>> >
> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for
> >>> that,
> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe
> if
> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket
> for
> >>> > that.
> >>> >
> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
> >>> testing
> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) -
> >>> and
> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
> >>> temporarily we
> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
> >>> >
> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will
> >>> open a
> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours
> think
> >>> as
> >>> > well :)
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > J.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at
> the
> >>> > same
> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very.
> >>> ....
> >>> > > strange
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with
> some
> >>> > minor
> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials,
> >>> where
> >>> > >> someone
> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo
> >>> > would".
> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> >>> fokko@apache.org>
> >>> > >> wrote:
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
> >>> self-close
> >>> > the
> >>> > >> > issue
> >>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
> >>> Closed
> >>> > >> > after 1
> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except
> >>> > noise.
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look
> at
> >>> > their
> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
> >>> airflow
> >>> > >> > about
> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than
> you
> >>> > >> think.
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > > J.
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>> > >> wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too
> >>> many -
> >>> > >> and
> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
> >>> > rudimentary
> >>> > >> > check
> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >>
> >>> >
> >>>
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> >>> > >> > > .
> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
> >>> hours.
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
> close
> >>> > issues
> >>> > >> > that
> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like -
> they
> >>> are
> >>> > >> > > reported
> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
> >>> legitimate,
> >>> > >> but
> >>> > >> > > they
> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
> >>> > >> completely
> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem,
> >>> that it
> >>> > >> > takes
> >>> > >> > > a
> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or
> >>> not -
> >>> > and
> >>> > >> > with
> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether
> >>> they
> >>> > are
> >>> > >> > good
> >>> > >> > > or
> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >> J.
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> >>> > fokko@apache.org
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk
> >>> about
> >>> > >> > > flooding,
> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
> issues
> >>> (eg,
> >>> > >> here
> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but
> not
> >>> > many.
> >>> > >> I
> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
> additional
> >>> > work,
> >>> > >> > and
> >>> > >> > > we
> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
> >>> issues
> >>> > >> that
> >>> > >> > > don't
> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
> >>> > >> >:
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a
> >>> > number
> >>> > >> of
> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
> >>> generated
> >>> > and
> >>> > >> > make
> >>> > >> > > no
> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed
> >>> that the
> >>> > >> > users
> >>> > >> > > >>> who
> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in
> >>> > Airflow
> >>> > >> > are
> >>> > >> > > >>> also
> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting
> such
> >>> > >> issues
> >>> > >> > to
> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
> >>> spending too
> >>> > >> much
> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report
> that
> >>> > >> brings
> >>> > >> > no
> >>> > >> > > >>> value
> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that
> >>> > sends a
> >>> > >> > lot
> >>> > >> > > of
> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so
> we
> >>> will
> >>> > >> > report
> >>> > >> > > >>> your
> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
> >>> > >> "agentic
> >>> > >> > AI"
> >>> > >> > > >>> that
> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
> agents
> >>> on
> >>> > >> their
> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting
> it
> >>> to
> >>> > >> > Github -
> >>> > >> > > >>> and
> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
> >>> > involving
> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at
> >>> the top
> >>> > >> and
> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >>
> >>> >
> >>>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
> >>> github.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
> >>> > Gopidesu
> >>> > >> ‏<
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests
> >>> as
> >>> > >> well,
> >>> > >> > so
> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete
> it
> >>> and
> >>> > >> > report
> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837
> .
> >>> It
> >>> > >> > appears
> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> >>> > >> > > >>> with
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
> >>> > account
> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can
> add
> >>> a
> >>> > >> comment
> >>> > >> > > to
> >>> > >> > > >>> an
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening
> a
> >>> new
> >>> > >> > ticket.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
> Potiuk <
> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
> >>> sending
> >>> > >> it.
> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope
> >>> they
> >>> > >> will
> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram
> Koka
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
> >>> Potiuk <
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
> generated
> >>> > >> feature
> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate,
> with
> >>> > >> somewhat
> >>> > >> > > >>> related
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when
> you
> >>> read
> >>> > >> > them.
> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
> >>> > history
> >>> > >> in
> >>> > >> > GH
> >>> > >> > > >>> and
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
> report
> >>> > >> authors
> >>> > >> > to
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
> >>> traffic
> >>> > >> flood.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Just as a little follow up - I think I have a hypothesis about what
happened.

We got one other user creating one issue which was very similar and from
this comment I gather:
https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45940#issuecomment-2608307111

* there is some tool out there that is supposed to make "issue creation"
easier - with help of AI
* some test accounts were used to test it (likely there are people who have
a bunch of fake Github accounts they maintain to test new things with AI)
* apparently some "real" people also got their hands on that tool and tried
it
* this tool LIKELY used "airflow" and "iceberg" in some documentation or
default settings as "examples"
* apparently this tool mislead people into thinking they are "testing"
issue creation where it actually created those issues
* I guess whoever has the tool realised their mistake and either stopped it
or removed some confusion
* I have my own suspicions (which I am exploring) - but I asked the user to
provide information about what tooling they were using (and the user was
apologising, and expressed willingness to provide more information so I
hope I will get more information soon).

J.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 8:57 AM Piotr Findeisen <pi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi
>
> Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!
>
> > Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow repo if
> we see it happening again?
>
> Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also for
> Iceberg).
>
> Best
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
> > using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the
> project
> > which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> >>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
> >>
> >> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar report
> >> for the last 4 hours or so.
> >>
> >> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are looking
> >> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
> >> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when
> something
> >> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
> >>
> >> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
> >> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
> >> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some initial
> >> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
> >>
> >> J.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
> >> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 from me.
> >>>
> >>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets
> when
> >>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Pavan Kumar
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users"
> -
> >>> > created just an hour or so ago.
> >>> >
> >>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with
> the
> >>> repo
> >>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
> >>> >
> >>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
> >>> >
> >>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for
> >>> that,
> >>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe
> if
> >>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket
> for
> >>> > that.
> >>> >
> >>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
> >>> testing
> >>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) -
> >>> and
> >>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
> >>> temporarily we
> >>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
> >>> >
> >>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will
> >>> open a
> >>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours
> think
> >>> as
> >>> > well :)
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > J.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at
> the
> >>> > same
> >>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very.
> >>> ....
> >>> > > strange
> >>> > >
> >>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > >
> >>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
> >>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with
> some
> >>> > minor
> >>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials,
> >>> where
> >>> > >> someone
> >>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo
> >>> > would".
> >>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> >>> fokko@apache.org>
> >>> > >> wrote:
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
> >>> self-close
> >>> > the
> >>> > >> > issue
> >>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
> >>> Closed
> >>> > >> > after 1
> >>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> > > > Example case:
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> >>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except
> >>> > noise.
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look
> at
> >>> > their
> >>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
> >>> airflow
> >>> > >> > about
> >>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than
> you
> >>> > >> think.
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > > J.
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>> > >> wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too
> >>> many -
> >>> > >> and
> >>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
> >>> > rudimentary
> >>> > >> > check
> >>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >>
> >>> >
> >>>
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> >>> > >> > > .
> >>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
> >>> hours.
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally
> close
> >>> > issues
> >>> > >> > that
> >>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like -
> they
> >>> are
> >>> > >> > > reported
> >>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
> >>> legitimate,
> >>> > >> but
> >>> > >> > > they
> >>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
> >>> > >> completely
> >>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem,
> >>> that it
> >>> > >> > takes
> >>> > >> > > a
> >>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or
> >>> not -
> >>> > and
> >>> > >> > with
> >>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether
> >>> they
> >>> > are
> >>> > >> > good
> >>> > >> > > or
> >>> > >> > > >> bad.
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >> J.
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> >>> > fokko@apache.org
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >> wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk
> >>> about
> >>> > >> > > flooding,
> >>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious
> issues
> >>> (eg,
> >>> > >> here
> >>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but
> not
> >>> > many.
> >>> > >> I
> >>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all
> additional
> >>> > work,
> >>> > >> > and
> >>> > >> > > we
> >>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
> >>> issues
> >>> > >> that
> >>> > >> > > don't
> >>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
> >>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> > jarek@potiuk.com
> >>> > >> >:
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a
> >>> > number
> >>> > >> of
> >>> > >> > > >>> issues
> >>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
> >>> generated
> >>> > and
> >>> > >> > make
> >>> > >> > > no
> >>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed
> >>> that the
> >>> > >> > users
> >>> > >> > > >>> who
> >>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in
> >>> > Airflow
> >>> > >> > are
> >>> > >> > > >>> also
> >>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting
> such
> >>> > >> issues
> >>> > >> > to
> >>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
> >>> spending too
> >>> > >> much
> >>> > >> > > >>> time on
> >>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
> >>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report
> that
> >>> > >> brings
> >>> > >> > no
> >>> > >> > > >>> value
> >>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that
> >>> > sends a
> >>> > >> > lot
> >>> > >> > > of
> >>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so
> we
> >>> will
> >>> > >> > report
> >>> > >> > > >>> your
> >>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> >>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
> >>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> >>> > >> > > >>> > ```
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
> >>> > >> "agentic
> >>> > >> > AI"
> >>> > >> > > >>> that
> >>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI
> agents
> >>> on
> >>> > >> their
> >>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
> >>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> >>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting
> it
> >>> to
> >>> > >> > Github -
> >>> > >> > > >>> and
> >>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
> >>> > involving
> >>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > J.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> >>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> >>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at
> >>> the top
> >>> > >> and
> >>> > >> > > >>> "report
> >>> > >> > > >>> > content")
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> >>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> >>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >>
> >>> >
> >>>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
> >>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
> >>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
> >>> github.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
> >>> > Gopidesu
> >>> > >> ‏<
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> >>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests
> >>> as
> >>> > >> well,
> >>> > >> > so
> >>> > >> > > >>> if any
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete
> it
> >>> and
> >>> > >> > report
> >>> > >> > > >>> it.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> >>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837
> .
> >>> It
> >>> > >> > appears
> >>> > >> > > >>> to be
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> a
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> >>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> >>> > >> > > >>> with
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
> >>> > account
> >>> > >> > > >>> recently.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> If
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can
> add
> >>> a
> >>> > >> comment
> >>> > >> > > to
> >>> > >> > > >>> an
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening
> a
> >>> new
> >>> > >> > ticket.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek
> Potiuk <
> >>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
> >>> sending
> >>> > >> it.
> >>> > >> > > >>> There is
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope
> >>> they
> >>> > >> will
> >>> > >> > > >>> manage
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> >>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram
> Koka
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
> >>> Potiuk <
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI
> generated
> >>> > >> feature
> >>> > >> > > >>> requests
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate,
> with
> >>> > >> somewhat
> >>> > >> > > >>> related
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when
> you
> >>> read
> >>> > >> > them.
> >>> > >> > > >>> Some
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
> >>> > history
> >>> > >> in
> >>> > >> > GH
> >>> > >> > > >>> and
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> not
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND
> report
> >>> > >> authors
> >>> > >> > to
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
> >>> traffic
> >>> > >> flood.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >> >
> >>> > >> > > >>> >>
> >>> > >> > > >>> >
> >>> > >> > > >>>
> >>> > >> > > >>
> >>> > >> > >
> >>> > >> >
> >>> > >>
> >>> > >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Piotr Findeisen <pi...@gmail.com>]

Hi

Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!

> Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow repo if
we see it happening again?

Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also for
Iceberg).

Best




On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
> using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the project
> which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
>>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>>
>> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar report
>> for the last 4 hours or so.
>>
>> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are looking
>> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
>> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when something
>> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>>
>> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some initial
>> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>>
>> J.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 from me.
>>>
>>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets when
>>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Pavan Kumar
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users" -
>>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>>> >
>>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with the
>>> repo
>>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>>> >
>>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>>> >
>>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for
>>> that,
>>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe if
>>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket for
>>> > that.
>>> >
>>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
>>> testing
>>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) -
>>> and
>>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>>> temporarily we
>>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>>> >
>>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will
>>> open a
>>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours think
>>> as
>>> > well :)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > J.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the
>>> > same
>>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very.
>>> ....
>>> > > strange
>>> > >
>>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some
>>> > minor
>>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>>> > >>
>>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials,
>>> where
>>> > >> someone
>>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo
>>> > would".
>>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> fokko@apache.org>
>>> > >> wrote:
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>>> self-close
>>> > the
>>> > >> > issue
>>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
>>> Closed
>>> > >> > after 1
>>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > > Example case:
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
>>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except
>>> > noise.
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at
>>> > their
>>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
>>> airflow
>>> > >> > about
>>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you
>>> > >> think.
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > J.
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> > >> wrote:
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too
>>> many -
>>> > >> and
>>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
>>> > rudimentary
>>> > >> > check
>>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>>> > >> > > .
>>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
>>> hours.
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>>> > issues
>>> > >> > that
>>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they
>>> are
>>> > >> > > reported
>>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>>> legitimate,
>>> > >> but
>>> > >> > > they
>>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
>>> > >> completely
>>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem,
>>> that it
>>> > >> > takes
>>> > >> > > a
>>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or
>>> not -
>>> > and
>>> > >> > with
>>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether
>>> they
>>> > are
>>> > >> > good
>>> > >> > > or
>>> > >> > > >> bad.
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >> J.
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> > fokko@apache.org
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk
>>> about
>>> > >> > > flooding,
>>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues
>>> (eg,
>>> > >> here
>>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not
>>> > many.
>>> > >> I
>>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional
>>> > work,
>>> > >> > and
>>> > >> > > we
>>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>>> issues
>>> > >> that
>>> > >> > > don't
>>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>>> > >> >:
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a
>>> > number
>>> > >> of
>>> > >> > > >>> issues
>>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>>> generated
>>> > and
>>> > >> > make
>>> > >> > > no
>>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed
>>> that the
>>> > >> > users
>>> > >> > > >>> who
>>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in
>>> > Airflow
>>> > >> > are
>>> > >> > > >>> also
>>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such
>>> > >> issues
>>> > >> > to
>>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>>> spending too
>>> > >> much
>>> > >> > > >>> time on
>>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that
>>> > >> brings
>>> > >> > no
>>> > >> > > >>> value
>>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that
>>> > sends a
>>> > >> > lot
>>> > >> > > of
>>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we
>>> will
>>> > >> > report
>>> > >> > > >>> your
>>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
>>> > >> "agentic
>>> > >> > AI"
>>> > >> > > >>> that
>>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents
>>> on
>>> > >> their
>>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it
>>> to
>>> > >> > Github -
>>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
>>> > involving
>>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at
>>> the top
>>> > >> and
>>> > >> > > >>> "report
>>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
>>> github.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
>>> > Gopidesu
>>> > >> ‏<
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests
>>> as
>>> > >> well,
>>> > >> > so
>>> > >> > > >>> if any
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it
>>> and
>>> > >> > report
>>> > >> > > >>> it.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>>> It
>>> > >> > appears
>>> > >> > > >>> to be
>>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>>> > >> > > >>> with
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
>>> > account
>>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add
>>> a
>>> > >> comment
>>> > >> > > to
>>> > >> > > >>> an
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a
>>> new
>>> > >> > ticket.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
>>> sending
>>> > >> it.
>>> > >> > > >>> There is
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope
>>> they
>>> > >> will
>>> > >> > > >>> manage
>>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
>>> Potiuk <
>>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
>>> > >> feature
>>> > >> > > >>> requests
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
>>> > >> somewhat
>>> > >> > > >>> related
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you
>>> read
>>> > >> > them.
>>> > >> > > >>> Some
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
>>> > history
>>> > >> in
>>> > >> > GH
>>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report
>>> > >> authors
>>> > >> > to
>>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
>>> traffic
>>> > >> flood.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Piotr Findeisen <pi...@gmail.com>]

Hi

Thank you Jarek for taking care of this matter!

> Should we react and block new users from interacting with Airflow repo if
we see it happening again?

Maintainers' time is not an infinite resource, so "yes!" from me (also for
Iceberg).

Best




On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 at 15:40, Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
> using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the project
> which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
>>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>>
>> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar report
>> for the last 4 hours or so.
>>
>> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are looking
>> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
>> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when something
>> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>>
>> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
>> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
>> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some initial
>> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>>
>> J.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
>> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 from me.
>>>
>>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets when
>>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Pavan Kumar
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users" -
>>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>>> >
>>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with the
>>> repo
>>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>>> >
>>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>>> >
>>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for
>>> that,
>>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe if
>>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket for
>>> > that.
>>> >
>>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
>>> testing
>>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) -
>>> and
>>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>>> temporarily we
>>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>>> >
>>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will
>>> open a
>>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours think
>>> as
>>> > well :)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > J.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the
>>> > same
>>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very.
>>> ....
>>> > > strange
>>> > >
>>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some
>>> > minor
>>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>>> > >>
>>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials,
>>> where
>>> > >> someone
>>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo
>>> > would".
>>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> fokko@apache.org>
>>> > >> wrote:
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes
>>> self-close
>>> > the
>>> > >> > issue
>>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
>>> Closed
>>> > >> > after 1
>>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > > Example case:
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
>>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except
>>> > noise.
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at
>>> > their
>>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
>>> airflow
>>> > >> > about
>>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you
>>> > >> think.
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > J.
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> > >> wrote:
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too
>>> many -
>>> > >> and
>>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
>>> > rudimentary
>>> > >> > check
>>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>>> > >> > > .
>>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
>>> hours.
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>>> > issues
>>> > >> > that
>>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they
>>> are
>>> > >> > > reported
>>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>>> legitimate,
>>> > >> but
>>> > >> > > they
>>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
>>> > >> completely
>>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem,
>>> that it
>>> > >> > takes
>>> > >> > > a
>>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or
>>> not -
>>> > and
>>> > >> > with
>>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether
>>> they
>>> > are
>>> > >> > good
>>> > >> > > or
>>> > >> > > >> bad.
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >> J.
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>>> > fokko@apache.org
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk
>>> about
>>> > >> > > flooding,
>>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues
>>> (eg,
>>> > >> here
>>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not
>>> > many.
>>> > >> I
>>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional
>>> > work,
>>> > >> > and
>>> > >> > > we
>>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>>> issues
>>> > >> that
>>> > >> > > don't
>>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>>> > >> >:
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a
>>> > number
>>> > >> of
>>> > >> > > >>> issues
>>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI
>>> generated
>>> > and
>>> > >> > make
>>> > >> > > no
>>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed
>>> that the
>>> > >> > users
>>> > >> > > >>> who
>>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in
>>> > Airflow
>>> > >> > are
>>> > >> > > >>> also
>>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such
>>> > >> issues
>>> > >> > to
>>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without
>>> spending too
>>> > >> much
>>> > >> > > >>> time on
>>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that
>>> > >> brings
>>> > >> > no
>>> > >> > > >>> value
>>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that
>>> > sends a
>>> > >> > lot
>>> > >> > > of
>>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we
>>> will
>>> > >> > report
>>> > >> > > >>> your
>>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
>>> > >> "agentic
>>> > >> > AI"
>>> > >> > > >>> that
>>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents
>>> on
>>> > >> their
>>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it
>>> to
>>> > >> > Github -
>>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
>>> > involving
>>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at
>>> the top
>>> > >> and
>>> > >> > > >>> "report
>>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> >
>>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to
>>> github.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
>>> > Gopidesu
>>> > >> ‏<
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests
>>> as
>>> > >> well,
>>> > >> > so
>>> > >> > > >>> if any
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it
>>> and
>>> > >> > report
>>> > >> > > >>> it.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>>> It
>>> > >> > appears
>>> > >> > > >>> to be
>>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>>> > >> > > >>> with
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
>>> > account
>>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add
>>> a
>>> > >> comment
>>> > >> > > to
>>> > >> > > >>> an
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a
>>> new
>>> > >> > ticket.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
>>> sending
>>> > >> it.
>>> > >> > > >>> There is
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope
>>> they
>>> > >> will
>>> > >> > > >>> manage
>>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek
>>> Potiuk <
>>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
>>> > >> feature
>>> > >> > > >>> requests
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
>>> > >> somewhat
>>> > >> > > >>> related
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you
>>> read
>>> > >> > them.
>>> > >> > > >>> Some
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
>>> > history
>>> > >> in
>>> > >> > GH
>>> > >> > > >>> and
>>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report
>>> > >> authors
>>> > >> > to
>>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated
>>> traffic
>>> > >> flood.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>>> > >> > > >>> >>
>>> > >> > > >>> >
>>> > >> > > >>>
>>> > >> > > >>
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>]

This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the project
which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>
> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar report
> for the last 4 hours or so.
>
> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are looking
> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when something
> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>
> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some initial
> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>
> J.
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 from me.
>>
>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets when
>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Pavan Kumar
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users" -
>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>> >
>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with the
>> repo
>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>> >
>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>> >
>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for
>> that,
>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe if
>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket for
>> > that.
>> >
>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
>> testing
>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) -
>> and
>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>> temporarily we
>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>> >
>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will
>> open a
>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours think
>> as
>> > well :)
>> >
>> >
>> > J.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the
>> > same
>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very.
>> ....
>> > > strange
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>> > >>
>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some
>> > minor
>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>> > >>
>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where
>> > >> someone
>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo
>> > would".
>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fokko@apache.org
>> >
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close
>> > the
>> > >> > issue
>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
>> Closed
>> > >> > after 1
>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > > Example case:
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except
>> > noise.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at
>> > their
>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
>> airflow
>> > >> > about
>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you
>> > >> think.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > J.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>> >
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too
>> many -
>> > >> and
>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
>> > rudimentary
>> > >> > check
>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>> > >> > > .
>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
>> hours.
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>> > issues
>> > >> > that
>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they
>> are
>> > >> > > reported
>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>> legitimate,
>> > >> but
>> > >> > > they
>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
>> > >> completely
>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem,
>> that it
>> > >> > takes
>> > >> > > a
>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not
>> -
>> > and
>> > >> > with
>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they
>> > are
>> > >> > good
>> > >> > > or
>> > >> > > >> bad.
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >> J.
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>> > fokko@apache.org
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk
>> about
>> > >> > > flooding,
>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues
>> (eg,
>> > >> here
>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not
>> > many.
>> > >> I
>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional
>> > work,
>> > >> > and
>> > >> > > we
>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>> issues
>> > >> that
>> > >> > > don't
>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>> > >> >:
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a
>> > number
>> > >> of
>> > >> > > >>> issues
>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated
>> > and
>> > >> > make
>> > >> > > no
>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that
>> the
>> > >> > users
>> > >> > > >>> who
>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in
>> > Airflow
>> > >> > are
>> > >> > > >>> also
>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such
>> > >> issues
>> > >> > to
>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending
>> too
>> > >> much
>> > >> > > >>> time on
>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that
>> > >> brings
>> > >> > no
>> > >> > > >>> value
>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that
>> > sends a
>> > >> > lot
>> > >> > > of
>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we
>> will
>> > >> > report
>> > >> > > >>> your
>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
>> > >> "agentic
>> > >> > AI"
>> > >> > > >>> that
>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents
>> on
>> > >> their
>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it
>> to
>> > >> > Github -
>> > >> > > >>> and
>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
>> > involving
>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the
>> top
>> > >> and
>> > >> > > >>> "report
>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
>> > Gopidesu
>> > >> ‏<
>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as
>> > >> well,
>> > >> > so
>> > >> > > >>> if any
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it
>> and
>> > >> > report
>> > >> > > >>> it.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>> It
>> > >> > appears
>> > >> > > >>> to be
>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>> > >> > > >>> with
>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
>> > account
>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a
>> > >> comment
>> > >> > > to
>> > >> > > >>> an
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a
>> new
>> > >> > ticket.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
>> sending
>> > >> it.
>> > >> > > >>> There is
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope
>> they
>> > >> will
>> > >> > > >>> manage
>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk
>> <
>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
>> > >> feature
>> > >> > > >>> requests
>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
>> > >> somewhat
>> > >> > > >>> related
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you
>> read
>> > >> > them.
>> > >> > > >>> Some
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
>> > history
>> > >> in
>> > >> > GH
>> > >> > > >>> and
>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report
>> > >> authors
>> > >> > to
>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic
>> > >> flood.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Russell Spitzer <ru...@gmail.com>]

This is pretty disturbing and I hope that any users out there see that
using automated tools to submit issues is just adding noise to the project
which makes it very hard for real issues to be addressed.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:58 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

>  - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)
>
> It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar report
> for the last 4 hours or so.
>
> I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are looking
> at the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I
> think we can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when something
> like this happens, so that we can potentially react quickly
>
> What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from
> interacting with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe
> temporarily - for a day or two initially - after reporting some initial
> reports? Does it sound reasonable?
>
> J.
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
> gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 from me.
>>
>> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets when
>> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Pavan Kumar
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users" -
>> > created just an hour or so ago.
>> >
>> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with the
>> repo
>> > for new users - see this screenshot:
>> >
>> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>> >
>> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for
>> that,
>> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe if
>> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket for
>> > that.
>> >
>> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
>> testing
>> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) -
>> and
>> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but
>> temporarily we
>> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
>> >
>> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will
>> open a
>> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours think
>> as
>> > well :)
>> >
>> >
>> > J.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the
>> > same
>> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very.
>> ....
>> > > strange
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>> > >>
>> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some
>> > minor
>> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>> > >>
>> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where
>> > >> someone
>> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo
>> > would".
>> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fokko@apache.org
>> >
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close
>> > the
>> > >> > issue
>> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
>> Closed
>> > >> > after 1
>> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> jarek@potiuk.com>:
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > > Example case:
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
>> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except
>> > noise.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at
>> > their
>> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
>> airflow
>> > >> > about
>> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you
>> > >> think.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > J.
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>> >
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >> > > >
>> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too
>> many -
>> > >> and
>> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
>> > rudimentary
>> > >> > check
>> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>> > >> > > .
>> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12
>> hours.
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>> > issues
>> > >> > that
>> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they
>> are
>> > >> > > reported
>> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
>> legitimate,
>> > >> but
>> > >> > > they
>> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
>> > >> completely
>> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem,
>> that it
>> > >> > takes
>> > >> > > a
>> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not
>> -
>> > and
>> > >> > with
>> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they
>> > are
>> > >> > good
>> > >> > > or
>> > >> > > >> bad.
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >> J.
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
>> > fokko@apache.org
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > >> wrote:
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk
>> about
>> > >> > > flooding,
>> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues
>> (eg,
>> > >> here
>> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not
>> > many.
>> > >> I
>> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional
>> > work,
>> > >> > and
>> > >> > > we
>> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
>> issues
>> > >> that
>> > >> > > don't
>> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
>> > >> > > >>> Fokko
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
>> > jarek@potiuk.com
>> > >> >:
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a
>> > number
>> > >> of
>> > >> > > >>> issues
>> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated
>> > and
>> > >> > make
>> > >> > > no
>> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that
>> the
>> > >> > users
>> > >> > > >>> who
>> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in
>> > Airflow
>> > >> > are
>> > >> > > >>> also
>> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such
>> > >> issues
>> > >> > to
>> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending
>> too
>> > >> much
>> > >> > > >>> time on
>> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that
>> > >> brings
>> > >> > no
>> > >> > > >>> value
>> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that
>> > sends a
>> > >> > lot
>> > >> > > of
>> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we
>> will
>> > >> > report
>> > >> > > >>> your
>> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>> > >> > > >>> > ```
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
>> > >> "agentic
>> > >> > AI"
>> > >> > > >>> that
>> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents
>> on
>> > >> their
>> > >> > > >>> behalf.
>> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it
>> to
>> > >> > Github -
>> > >> > > >>> and
>> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
>> > involving
>> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > J.
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the
>> top
>> > >> and
>> > >> > > >>> "report
>> > >> > > >>> > content")
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
>> > >> > > >>> wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
>> > Gopidesu
>> > >> ‏<
>> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as
>> > >> well,
>> > >> > so
>> > >> > > >>> if any
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it
>> and
>> > >> > report
>> > >> > > >>> it.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837.
>> It
>> > >> > appears
>> > >> > > >>> to be
>> > >> > > >>> >> a
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>> > >> > > >>> with
>> > >> > > >>> >> > just
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
>> > account
>> > >> > > >>> recently.
>> > >> > > >>> >> If
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a
>> > >> comment
>> > >> > > to
>> > >> > > >>> an
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a
>> new
>> > >> > ticket.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
>> sending
>> > >> it.
>> > >> > > >>> There is
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope
>> they
>> > >> will
>> > >> > > >>> manage
>> > >> > > >>> >> to do
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk
>> <
>> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
>> > >> feature
>> > >> > > >>> requests
>> > >> > > >>> >> > for
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
>> > >> somewhat
>> > >> > > >>> related
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you
>> read
>> > >> > them.
>> > >> > > >>> Some
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
>> > history
>> > >> in
>> > >> > GH
>> > >> > > >>> and
>> > >> > > >>> >> not
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report
>> > >> authors
>> > >> > to
>> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic
>> > >> flood.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> > >
>> > >> > > >>> >> >
>> > >> > > >>> >>
>> > >> > > >>> >
>> > >> > > >>>
>> > >> > > >>
>> > >> > >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

 - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)

It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar report
for the last 4 hours or so.

I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are looking at
the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I think we
can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when something like this
happens, so that we can potentially react quickly

What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from interacting
with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe temporarily - for a
day or two initially - after reporting some initial reports? Does it sound
reasonable?

J.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 from me.
>
> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets when
> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>
> Regards,
> Pavan Kumar
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users" -
> > created just an hour or so ago.
> >
> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with the
> repo
> > for new users - see this screenshot:
> >
> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
> >
> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for
> that,
> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe if
> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket for
> > that.
> >
> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
> testing
> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) - and
> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but temporarily
> we
> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
> >
> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will open
> a
> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours think as
> > well :)
> >
> >
> > J.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the
> > same
> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very. ....
> > > strange
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
> > >>
> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some
> > minor
> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where
> > >> someone
> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo
> > would".
> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close
> > the
> > >> > issue
> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
> Closed
> > >> > after 1
> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> > >> > >
> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
> >:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Example case:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except
> > noise.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at
> > their
> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
> airflow
> > >> > about
> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you
> > >> think.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > J.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many
> -
> > >> and
> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
> > rudimentary
> > >> > check
> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> > >> > > .
> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
> > issues
> > >> > that
> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they
> are
> > >> > > reported
> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
> legitimate,
> > >> but
> > >> > > they
> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
> > >> completely
> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that
> it
> > >> > takes
> > >> > > a
> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not -
> > and
> > >> > with
> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they
> > are
> > >> > good
> > >> > > or
> > >> > > >> bad.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> J.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> > fokko@apache.org
> > >> >
> > >> > > >> wrote:
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
> > >> > > flooding,
> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues
> (eg,
> > >> here
> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not
> > many.
> > >> I
> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional
> > work,
> > >> > and
> > >> > > we
> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
> > >> that
> > >> > > don't
> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
> > >> > > >>> Fokko
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> > jarek@potiuk.com
> > >> >:
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a
> > number
> > >> of
> > >> > > >>> issues
> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated
> > and
> > >> > make
> > >> > > no
> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that
> the
> > >> > users
> > >> > > >>> who
> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in
> > Airflow
> > >> > are
> > >> > > >>> also
> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such
> > >> issues
> > >> > to
> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending
> too
> > >> much
> > >> > > >>> time on
> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > ```
> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that
> > >> brings
> > >> > no
> > >> > > >>> value
> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that
> > sends a
> > >> > lot
> > >> > > of
> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we
> will
> > >> > report
> > >> > > >>> your
> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> > >> > > >>> > ```
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
> > >> "agentic
> > >> > AI"
> > >> > > >>> that
> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on
> > >> their
> > >> > > >>> behalf.
> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to
> > >> > Github -
> > >> > > >>> and
> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
> > involving
> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > J.
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the
> top
> > >> and
> > >> > > >>> "report
> > >> > > >>> > content")
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
> > >> > > >>> wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
> > Gopidesu
> > >> ‏<
> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as
> > >> well,
> > >> > so
> > >> > > >>> if any
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it
> and
> > >> > report
> > >> > > >>> it.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It
> > >> > appears
> > >> > > >>> to be
> > >> > > >>> >> a
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> > >> > > >>> with
> > >> > > >>> >> > just
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
> > account
> > >> > > >>> recently.
> > >> > > >>> >> If
> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a
> > >> comment
> > >> > > to
> > >> > > >>> an
> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a
> new
> > >> > ticket.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
> sending
> > >> it.
> > >> > > >>> There is
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they
> > >> will
> > >> > > >>> manage
> > >> > > >>> >> to do
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
> > >> feature
> > >> > > >>> requests
> > >> > > >>> >> > for
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
> > >> somewhat
> > >> > > >>> related
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you
> read
> > >> > them.
> > >> > > >>> Some
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
> > history
> > >> in
> > >> > GH
> > >> > > >>> and
> > >> > > >>> >> not
> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report
> > >> authors
> > >> > to
> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic
> > >> flood.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

 - Iceberg dev to not flood them :) (in bcc:)

It looks like the flood had been somehow flood-gated - no similar report
for the last 4 hours or so.

I also started to receive confirmation from Github that they are looking at
the reports, so likely we do not have to do any action now, but I think we
can turn it into deciding about "future" reactions when something like this
happens, so that we can potentially react quickly

What do others think ? Should we react and block new users from interacting
with Airflow repo if we see it happening again? Maybe temporarily - for a
day or two initially - after reporting some initial reports? Does it sound
reasonable?

J.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:35 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
gopidesupavan@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 from me.
>
> It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets when
> new users starts testing those AI agents.
>
> Regards,
> Pavan Kumar
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users" -
> > created just an hour or so ago.
> >
> > Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with the
> repo
> > for new users - see this screenshot:
> >
> > https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
> >
> > And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for
> that,
> > because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe if
> > Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket for
> > that.
> >
> > There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and
> testing
> > of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) - and
> > we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but temporarily
> we
> > might want to ask INFRA to help.
> >
> > WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will open
> a
> > JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours think as
> > well :)
> >
> >
> > J.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the
> > same
> > > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very. ....
> > > strange
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
> > >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
> > >>
> > >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
> > >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some
> > minor
> > >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where
> > >> someone
> > >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo
> > would".
> > >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close
> > the
> > >> > issue
> > >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>).
> Closed
> > >> > after 1
> > >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> > >> > >
> > >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
> >:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Example case:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> > >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except
> > noise.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at
> > their
> > >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and
> airflow
> > >> > about
> > >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you
> > >> think.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > J.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many
> -
> > >> and
> > >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
> > rudimentary
> > >> > check
> > >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> > >> > > .
> > >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
> > issues
> > >> > that
> > >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they
> are
> > >> > > reported
> > >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem
> legitimate,
> > >> but
> > >> > > they
> > >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
> > >> completely
> > >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that
> it
> > >> > takes
> > >> > > a
> > >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not -
> > and
> > >> > with
> > >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they
> > are
> > >> > good
> > >> > > or
> > >> > > >> bad.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> J.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> > fokko@apache.org
> > >> >
> > >> > > >> wrote:
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
> > >> > > flooding,
> > >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues
> (eg,
> > >> here
> > >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not
> > many.
> > >> I
> > >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional
> > work,
> > >> > and
> > >> > > we
> > >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
> > >> that
> > >> > > don't
> > >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > > >>> Kind regards,
> > >> > > >>> Fokko
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> > jarek@potiuk.com
> > >> >:
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a
> > number
> > >> of
> > >> > > >>> issues
> > >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated
> > and
> > >> > make
> > >> > > no
> > >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that
> the
> > >> > users
> > >> > > >>> who
> > >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in
> > Airflow
> > >> > are
> > >> > > >>> also
> > >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such
> > >> issues
> > >> > to
> > >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending
> too
> > >> much
> > >> > > >>> time on
> > >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > ```
> > >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that
> > >> brings
> > >> > no
> > >> > > >>> value
> > >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that
> > sends a
> > >> > lot
> > >> > > of
> > >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we
> will
> > >> > report
> > >> > > >>> your
> > >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> > >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
> > >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> > >> > > >>> > ```
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
> > >> "agentic
> > >> > AI"
> > >> > > >>> that
> > >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on
> > >> their
> > >> > > >>> behalf.
> > >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> > >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to
> > >> > Github -
> > >> > > >>> and
> > >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
> > involving
> > >> > > >>> > maintainers.
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > J.
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> > >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> > >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the
> top
> > >> and
> > >> > > >>> "report
> > >> > > >>> > content")
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> > >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> > >> > > >>> > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> > >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
> > >> eladkal@apache.org>
> > >> > > >>> wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
> > Gopidesu
> > >> ‏<
> > >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
> > >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> > >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as
> > >> well,
> > >> > so
> > >> > > >>> if any
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it
> and
> > >> > report
> > >> > > >>> it.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> > >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It
> > >> > appears
> > >> > > >>> to be
> > >> > > >>> >> a
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> > >> > > >>> with
> > >> > > >>> >> > just
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > the
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
> > account
> > >> > > >>> recently.
> > >> > > >>> >> If
> > >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a
> > >> comment
> > >> > > to
> > >> > > >>> an
> > >> > > >>> >> > > existing
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a
> new
> > >> > ticket.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after
> sending
> > >> it.
> > >> > > >>> There is
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they
> > >> will
> > >> > > >>> manage
> > >> > > >>> >> to do
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> > >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
> > >> feature
> > >> > > >>> requests
> > >> > > >>> >> > for
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
> > >> somewhat
> > >> > > >>> related
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you
> read
> > >> > them.
> > >> > > >>> Some
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
> > history
> > >> in
> > >> > GH
> > >> > > >>> and
> > >> > > >>> >> not
> > >> > > >>> >> > > much
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report
> > >> authors
> > >> > to
> > >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic
> > >> flood.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > > >
> > >> > > >>> >> > >
> > >> > > >>> >> >
> > >> > > >>> >>
> > >> > > >>> >
> > >> > > >>>
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Pavankumar Gopidesu <go...@gmail.com>]

+1 from me.

It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets when
new users starts testing those AI agents.

Regards,
Pavan Kumar

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users" -
> created just an hour or so ago.
>
> Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with the repo
> for new users - see this screenshot:
>
> https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>
> And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for that,
> because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe if
> Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket for
> that.
>
> There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and testing
> of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) - and
> we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but temporarily we
> might want to ask INFRA to help.
>
> WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will open a
> JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours think as
> well :)
>
>
> J.
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the
> same
> > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very. ....
> > strange
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
> >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
> >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
> >>
> >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
> >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some
> minor
> >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where
> >> someone
> >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo
> would".
> >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close
> the
> >> > issue
> >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed
> >> > after 1
> >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> >> > >
> >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Example case:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except
> noise.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at
> their
> >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow
> >> > about
> >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you
> >> think.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > J.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many -
> >> and
> >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
> rudimentary
> >> > check
> >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> >> > > >>
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> >> > > .
> >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
> issues
> >> > that
> >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are
> >> > > reported
> >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate,
> >> but
> >> > > they
> >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
> >> completely
> >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it
> >> > takes
> >> > > a
> >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not -
> and
> >> > with
> >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they
> are
> >> > good
> >> > > or
> >> > > >> bad.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> J.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> fokko@apache.org
> >> >
> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
> >> > > flooding,
> >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg,
> >> here
> >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not
> many.
> >> I
> >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional
> work,
> >> > and
> >> > > we
> >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
> >> that
> >> > > don't
> >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Kind regards,
> >> > > >>> Fokko
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> jarek@potiuk.com
> >> >:
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a
> number
> >> of
> >> > > >>> issues
> >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated
> and
> >> > make
> >> > > no
> >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the
> >> > users
> >> > > >>> who
> >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in
> Airflow
> >> > are
> >> > > >>> also
> >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such
> >> issues
> >> > to
> >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too
> >> much
> >> > > >>> time on
> >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > ```
> >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that
> >> brings
> >> > no
> >> > > >>> value
> >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that
> sends a
> >> > lot
> >> > > of
> >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will
> >> > report
> >> > > >>> your
> >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
> >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> >> > > >>> > ```
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
> >> "agentic
> >> > AI"
> >> > > >>> that
> >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on
> >> their
> >> > > >>> behalf.
> >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to
> >> > Github -
> >> > > >>> and
> >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
> involving
> >> > > >>> > maintainers.
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > J.
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top
> >> and
> >> > > >>> "report
> >> > > >>> > content")
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> >> > > >>> > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
> >> eladkal@apache.org>
> >> > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
> Gopidesu
> >> ‏<
> >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> >> > > >>> >> > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
> >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
> >> > > >>> >> > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as
> >> well,
> >> > so
> >> > > >>> if any
> >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and
> >> > report
> >> > > >>> it.
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It
> >> > appears
> >> > > >>> to be
> >> > > >>> >> a
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> >> > > >>> with
> >> > > >>> >> > just
> >> > > >>> >> > > > the
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
> account
> >> > > >>> recently.
> >> > > >>> >> If
> >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a
> >> comment
> >> > > to
> >> > > >>> an
> >> > > >>> >> > > existing
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new
> >> > ticket.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending
> >> it.
> >> > > >>> There is
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they
> >> will
> >> > > >>> manage
> >> > > >>> >> to do
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
> >> feature
> >> > > >>> requests
> >> > > >>> >> > for
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
> >> somewhat
> >> > > >>> related
> >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read
> >> > them.
> >> > > >>> Some
> >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
> history
> >> in
> >> > GH
> >> > > >>> and
> >> > > >>> >> not
> >> > > >>> >> > > much
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report
> >> authors
> >> > to
> >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic
> >> flood.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > >
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Pavankumar Gopidesu <go...@gmail.com>]

+1 from me.

It looks started yesterday, I feel we may get many of these tickets when
new users starts testing those AI agents.

Regards,
Pavan Kumar

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025, 10:27 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users" -
> created just an hour or so ago.
>
> Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with the repo
> for new users - see this screenshot:
>
> https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB
>
> And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for that,
> because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe if
> Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket for
> that.
>
> There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and testing
> of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) - and
> we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but temporarily we
> might want to ask INFRA to help.
>
> WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will open a
> JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours think as
> well :)
>
>
> J.
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the
> same
> > time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very. ....
> > strange
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
> >> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
> >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
> >>
> >> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
> >> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some
> minor
> >> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where
> >> someone
> >> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo
> would".
> >> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close
> the
> >> > issue
> >> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed
> >> > after 1
> >> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> >> > >
> >> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Example case:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> >> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except
> noise.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at
> their
> >> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow
> >> > about
> >> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you
> >> think.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > J.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many -
> >> and
> >> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very
> rudimentary
> >> > check
> >> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> >> > > >>
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> >> > > .
> >> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close
> issues
> >> > that
> >> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are
> >> > > reported
> >> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate,
> >> but
> >> > > they
> >> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
> >> completely
> >> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it
> >> > takes
> >> > > a
> >> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not -
> and
> >> > with
> >> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they
> are
> >> > good
> >> > > or
> >> > > >> bad.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> J.
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <
> fokko@apache.org
> >> >
> >> > > >> wrote:
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
> >> > > flooding,
> >> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg,
> >> here
> >> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not
> many.
> >> I
> >> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional
> work,
> >> > and
> >> > > we
> >> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
> >> that
> >> > > don't
> >> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Kind regards,
> >> > > >>> Fokko
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <
> jarek@potiuk.com
> >> >:
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a
> number
> >> of
> >> > > >>> issues
> >> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated
> and
> >> > make
> >> > > no
> >> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the
> >> > users
> >> > > >>> who
> >> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in
> Airflow
> >> > are
> >> > > >>> also
> >> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such
> >> issues
> >> > to
> >> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too
> >> much
> >> > > >>> time on
> >> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > ```
> >> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that
> >> brings
> >> > no
> >> > > >>> value
> >> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that
> sends a
> >> > lot
> >> > > of
> >> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will
> >> > report
> >> > > >>> your
> >> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> >> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
> >> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> >> > > >>> > ```
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
> >> "agentic
> >> > AI"
> >> > > >>> that
> >> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on
> >> their
> >> > > >>> behalf.
> >> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> >> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to
> >> > Github -
> >> > > >>> and
> >> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without
> involving
> >> > > >>> > maintainers.
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > J.
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> >> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> >> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top
> >> and
> >> > > >>> "report
> >> > > >>> > content")
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> >> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> >> > > >>> > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>>
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
> >> eladkal@apache.org>
> >> > > >>> wrote:
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar
> Gopidesu
> >> ‏<
> >> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> >> > > >>> >> > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
> >> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
> >> > > >>> >> > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> >> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as
> >> well,
> >> > so
> >> > > >>> if any
> >> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> >> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and
> >> > report
> >> > > >>> it.
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> >> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> >> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It
> >> > appears
> >> > > >>> to be
> >> > > >>> >> a
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> >> > > >>> with
> >> > > >>> >> > just
> >> > > >>> >> > > > the
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >> > > >>> >> > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your
> account
> >> > > >>> recently.
> >> > > >>> >> If
> >> > > >>> >> > > you'd
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a
> >> comment
> >> > > to
> >> > > >>> an
> >> > > >>> >> > > existing
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new
> >> > ticket.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> >> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending
> >> it.
> >> > > >>> There is
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > something
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they
> >> will
> >> > > >>> manage
> >> > > >>> >> to do
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> >> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> >> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
> >> feature
> >> > > >>> requests
> >> > > >>> >> > for
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
> >> somewhat
> >> > > >>> related
> >> > > >>> >> > > > content,
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read
> >> > them.
> >> > > >>> Some
> >> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
> >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short
> history
> >> in
> >> > GH
> >> > > >>> and
> >> > > >>> >> not
> >> > > >>> >> > > much
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report
> >> authors
> >> > to
> >> > > >>> >> GitHub -
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic
> >> flood.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > > >
> >> > > >>> >> > >
> >> > > >>> >> >
> >> > > >>> >>
> >> > > >>> >
> >> > > >>>
> >> > > >>
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users" -
created just an hour or so ago.

Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with the repo
for new users - see this screenshot:

https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB

And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for that,
because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe if
Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket for that.

There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and testing
of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) - and
we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but temporarily we
might want to ask INFRA to help.

WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will open a
JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours think as
well :)


J.


On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the same
> time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very. ....
> strange
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>>
>> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some minor
>> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where
>> someone
>> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo would".
>> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close the
>> > issue
>> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed
>> > after 1
>> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>> > >
>> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
>> > >
>> > > > Example case:
>> > > >
>> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
>> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
>> > > >
>> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.
>> > > >
>> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their
>> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow
>> > about
>> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you
>> think.
>> > > >
>> > > > J.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many -
>> and
>> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary
>> > check
>> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>> > > .
>> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
>> > that
>> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are
>> > > reported
>> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate,
>> but
>> > > they
>> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
>> completely
>> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it
>> > takes
>> > > a
>> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and
>> > with
>> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are
>> > good
>> > > or
>> > > >> bad.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> J.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fokko@apache.org
>> >
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
>> > > flooding,
>> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg,
>> here
>> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many.
>> I
>> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work,
>> > and
>> > > we
>> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
>> that
>> > > don't
>> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Kind regards,
>> > > >>> Fokko
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>> >:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number
>> of
>> > > >>> issues
>> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and
>> > make
>> > > no
>> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the
>> > users
>> > > >>> who
>> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow
>> > are
>> > > >>> also
>> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such
>> issues
>> > to
>> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too
>> much
>> > > >>> time on
>> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > ```
>> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that
>> brings
>> > no
>> > > >>> value
>> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a
>> > lot
>> > > of
>> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will
>> > report
>> > > >>> your
>> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>> > > >>> > ```
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
>> "agentic
>> > AI"
>> > > >>> that
>> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on
>> their
>> > > >>> behalf.
>> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to
>> > Github -
>> > > >>> and
>> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
>> > > >>> > maintainers.
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > J.
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top
>> and
>> > > >>> "report
>> > > >>> > content")
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>> > > >>> > wrote:
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>> eladkal@apache.org>
>> > > >>> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu
>> ‏<
>> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> > > >>> >> > >
>> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>> > > >>> >> > >
>> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as
>> well,
>> > so
>> > > >>> if any
>> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and
>> > report
>> > > >>> it.
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It
>> > appears
>> > > >>> to be
>> > > >>> >> a
>> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>> > > >>> with
>> > > >>> >> > just
>> > > >>> >> > > > the
>> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
>> > > >>> recently.
>> > > >>> >> If
>> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a
>> comment
>> > > to
>> > > >>> an
>> > > >>> >> > > existing
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new
>> > ticket.
>> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending
>> it.
>> > > >>> There is
>> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they
>> will
>> > > >>> manage
>> > > >>> >> to do
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
>> feature
>> > > >>> requests
>> > > >>> >> > for
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
>> somewhat
>> > > >>> related
>> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read
>> > them.
>> > > >>> Some
>> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history
>> in
>> > GH
>> > > >>> and
>> > > >>> >> not
>> > > >>> >> > > much
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report
>> authors
>> > to
>> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic
>> flood.
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > >
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

We continue getting new issues - and more of them are by "new users" -
created just an hour or so ago.

Apparently Github has a way to temporarily limit interactions with the repo
for new users - see this screenshot:

https://ibb.co/WWsr7RB

And I think I'd be for enabling it - we will need an INFRA ticket for that,
because that's not currently configurable via .asf.yaml  - and maybe if
Iceberg would like to do it as well, we can create a single ticket for that.

There is a new framework coming to enable faster implementation and testing
of .asf.yaml features (this was discussed at the latest roundtable) - and
we can contribute a feature to add it in .asf.yaml soon, but temporarily we
might want to ask INFRA to help.

WDYT? If I hear a few voices for +1 and no strong opposition I will open a
JIRA ticket (and would love to hear what Iceberg friends of ours think as
well :)


J.


On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:36 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the same
> time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very. ....
> strange
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>>
>> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
>> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some minor
>> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where
>> someone
>> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo would".
>> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close the
>> > issue
>> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed
>> > after 1
>> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>> > >
>> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
>> > >
>> > > > Example case:
>> > > >
>> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
>> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
>> > > >
>> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.
>> > > >
>> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their
>> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow
>> > about
>> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you
>> think.
>> > > >
>> > > > J.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many -
>> and
>> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary
>> > check
>> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
>> > > .
>> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
>> > that
>> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are
>> > > reported
>> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate,
>> but
>> > > they
>> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
>> completely
>> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it
>> > takes
>> > > a
>> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and
>> > with
>> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are
>> > good
>> > > or
>> > > >> bad.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> J.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fokko@apache.org
>> >
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
>> > > flooding,
>> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg,
>> here
>> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many.
>> I
>> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work,
>> > and
>> > > we
>> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
>> that
>> > > don't
>> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Kind regards,
>> > > >>> Fokko
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>> >:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number
>> of
>> > > >>> issues
>> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and
>> > make
>> > > no
>> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the
>> > users
>> > > >>> who
>> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow
>> > are
>> > > >>> also
>> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such
>> issues
>> > to
>> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too
>> much
>> > > >>> time on
>> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > ```
>> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that
>> brings
>> > no
>> > > >>> value
>> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a
>> > lot
>> > > of
>> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will
>> > report
>> > > >>> your
>> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
>> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>> > > >>> > ```
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an
>> "agentic
>> > AI"
>> > > >>> that
>> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on
>> their
>> > > >>> behalf.
>> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to
>> > Github -
>> > > >>> and
>> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
>> > > >>> > maintainers.
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > J.
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top
>> and
>> > > >>> "report
>> > > >>> > content")
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
>> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
>> > > >>> > wrote:
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <
>> eladkal@apache.org>
>> > > >>> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu
>> ‏<
>> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> > > >>> >> > >
>> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
>> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
>> > > >>> >> > >
>> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as
>> well,
>> > so
>> > > >>> if any
>> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and
>> > report
>> > > >>> it.
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It
>> > appears
>> > > >>> to be
>> > > >>> >> a
>> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
>> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>> > > >>> with
>> > > >>> >> > just
>> > > >>> >> > > > the
>> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > > >>> >> > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
>> > > >>> recently.
>> > > >>> >> If
>> > > >>> >> > > you'd
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a
>> comment
>> > > to
>> > > >>> an
>> > > >>> >> > > existing
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new
>> > ticket.
>> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending
>> it.
>> > > >>> There is
>> > > >>> >> > > > > something
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they
>> will
>> > > >>> manage
>> > > >>> >> to do
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
>> feature
>> > > >>> requests
>> > > >>> >> > for
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
>> somewhat
>> > > >>> related
>> > > >>> >> > > > content,
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read
>> > them.
>> > > >>> Some
>> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > *
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history
>> in
>> > GH
>> > > >>> and
>> > > >>> >> not
>> > > >>> >> > > much
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report
>> authors
>> > to
>> > > >>> >> GitHub -
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic
>> flood.
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
>> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > > >
>> > > >>> >> > > >
>> > > >>> >> > >
>> > > >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the same
time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very. ....
strange

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:

> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>
> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some minor
> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where
> someone
> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo would".
> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close the
> > issue
> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed
> > after 1
> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> > >
> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
> > >
> > >
> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
> > >
> > > > Example case:
> > > >
> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> > > >
> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.
> > > >
> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their
> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow
> > about
> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> > > >
> > > > J.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary
> > check
> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> > > .
> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
> > > >>
> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
> > that
> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > > >>
> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are
> > > reported
> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate,
> but
> > > they
> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
> completely
> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it
> > takes
> > > a
> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and
> > with
> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are
> > good
> > > or
> > > >> bad.
> > > >>
> > > >> J.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
> > > flooding,
> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg,
> here
> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work,
> > and
> > > we
> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
> > > don't
> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Kind regards,
> > > >>> Fokko
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
> >:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number
> of
> > > >>> issues
> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and
> > make
> > > no
> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the
> > users
> > > >>> who
> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow
> > are
> > > >>> also
> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues
> > to
> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too
> much
> > > >>> time on
> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > ```
> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings
> > no
> > > >>> value
> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a
> > lot
> > > of
> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will
> > report
> > > >>> your
> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> > > >>> > ```
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic
> > AI"
> > > >>> that
> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on
> their
> > > >>> behalf.
> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to
> > Github -
> > > >>> and
> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> > > >>> > maintainers.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > J.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top
> and
> > > >>> "report
> > > >>> > content")
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <eladkal@apache.org
> >
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu
> ‏<
> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well,
> > so
> > > >>> if any
> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and
> > report
> > > >>> it.
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It
> > appears
> > > >>> to be
> > > >>> >> a
> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> > > >>> with
> > > >>> >> > just
> > > >>> >> > > > the
> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > > >>> >> > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
> > > >>> recently.
> > > >>> >> If
> > > >>> >> > > you'd
> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a
> comment
> > > to
> > > >>> an
> > > >>> >> > > existing
> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new
> > ticket.
> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending
> it.
> > > >>> There is
> > > >>> >> > > > > something
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will
> > > >>> manage
> > > >>> >> to do
> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
> feature
> > > >>> requests
> > > >>> >> > for
> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
> somewhat
> > > >>> related
> > > >>> >> > > > content,
> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read
> > them.
> > > >>> Some
> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history
> in
> > GH
> > > >>> and
> > > >>> >> not
> > > >>> >> > > much
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors
> > to
> > > >>> >> GitHub -
> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic
> flood.
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Yeah. just closed this one. The pattern where those are coming at the same
time as two unrelated issues to both iceberg and airflow are very. ....
strange

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 10:35 AM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:

> Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920
>
> Same "mistake" with the # Title.
> All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some minor
> traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where
> someone
> > is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo would".
> > That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close the
> > issue
> > > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed
> > after 1
> > > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> > >
> > > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
> > >
> > >
> > > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
> > >
> > > > Example case:
> > > >
> > > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> > > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> > > >
> > > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.
> > > >
> > > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their
> > > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow
> > about
> > > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> > > >
> > > > J.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
> > > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary
> > check
> > > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> > > .
> > > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
> > > >>
> > > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
> > that
> > > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > > >>
> > > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are
> > > reported
> > > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate,
> but
> > > they
> > > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are
> completely
> > > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it
> > takes
> > > a
> > > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and
> > with
> > > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are
> > good
> > > or
> > > >> bad.
> > > >>
> > > >> J.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hey Jarek,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
> > > flooding,
> > > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg,
> here
> > > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
> > > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work,
> > and
> > > we
> > > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
> > > don't
> > > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Kind regards,
> > > >>> Fokko
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
> >:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number
> of
> > > >>> issues
> > > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and
> > make
> > > no
> > > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the
> > users
> > > >>> who
> > > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow
> > are
> > > >>> also
> > > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues
> > to
> > > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too
> much
> > > >>> time on
> > > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > ```
> > > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings
> > no
> > > >>> value
> > > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a
> > lot
> > > of
> > > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will
> > report
> > > >>> your
> > > >>> > account and block it unless:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> > > >>> > b) prove you are human
> > > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> > > >>> > ```
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic
> > AI"
> > > >>> that
> > > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on
> their
> > > >>> behalf.
> > > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> > > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to
> > Github -
> > > >>> and
> > > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> > > >>> > maintainers.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > J.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> > > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> > > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top
> and
> > > >>> "report
> > > >>> > content")
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> > > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> > > >>> > wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> This is how its done:
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>>
> > >
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> > > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <eladkal@apache.org
> >
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu
> ‏<
> > > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > Regards,
> > > >>> >> > > Pavan
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> > > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well,
> > so
> > > >>> if any
> > > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and
> > report
> > > >>> it.
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> > > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> > > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It
> > appears
> > > >>> to be
> > > >>> >> a
> > > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> > > >>> with
> > > >>> >> > just
> > > >>> >> > > > the
> > > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > > >>> >> > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
> > > >>> recently.
> > > >>> >> If
> > > >>> >> > > you'd
> > > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a
> comment
> > > to
> > > >>> an
> > > >>> >> > > existing
> > > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new
> > ticket.
> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending
> it.
> > > >>> There is
> > > >>> >> > > > > something
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will
> > > >>> manage
> > > >>> >> to do
> > > >>> >> > > > > > something
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated
> feature
> > > >>> requests
> > > >>> >> > for
> > > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with
> somewhat
> > > >>> related
> > > >>> >> > > > content,
> > > >>> >> > > > > > but
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read
> > them.
> > > >>> Some
> > > >>> >> > > > examples:
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history
> in
> > GH
> > > >>> and
> > > >>> >> not
> > > >>> >> > > much
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors
> > to
> > > >>> >> GitHub -
> > > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic
> flood.
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > > >
> > > >>> >> > > >
> > > >>> >> > >
> > > >>> >> >
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>]

Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920

Same "mistake" with the # Title.
All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some minor
traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where someone
> is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo would".
> That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close the
> issue
> > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed
> after 1
> > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> >
> > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> >
> >
> > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
> >
> >
> > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
> >
> > > Example case:
> > >
> > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> > >
> > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.
> > >
> > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their
> > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow
> about
> > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> > >
> > > J.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
> > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary
> check
> > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> > .
> > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
> > >>
> > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
> that
> > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > >>
> > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are
> > reported
> > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate, but
> > they
> > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are completely
> > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it
> takes
> > a
> > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and
> with
> > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are
> good
> > or
> > >> bad.
> > >>
> > >> J.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hey Jarek,
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
> > flooding,
> > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
> > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
> > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work,
> and
> > we
> > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
> > don't
> > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > >>>
> > >>> Kind regards,
> > >>> Fokko
> > >>>
> > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
> > >>>
> > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of
> > >>> issues
> > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and
> make
> > no
> > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the
> users
> > >>> who
> > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow
> are
> > >>> also
> > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues
> to
> > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much
> > >>> time on
> > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > ```
> > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings
> no
> > >>> value
> > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a
> lot
> > of
> > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will
> report
> > >>> your
> > >>> > account and block it unless:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> > >>> > b) prove you are human
> > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> > >>> > ```
> > >>> >
> > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic
> AI"
> > >>> that
> > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their
> > >>> behalf.
> > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to
> Github -
> > >>> and
> > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> > >>> > maintainers.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > J.
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and
> > >>> "report
> > >>> > content")
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> This is how its done:
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>
> > >>>
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
> > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> > >>> >> > >
> > >>> >> > > Regards,
> > >>> >> > > Pavan
> > >>> >> > >
> > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > >>> >> > >
> > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well,
> so
> > >>> if any
> > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and
> report
> > >>> it.
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It
> appears
> > >>> to be
> > >>> >> a
> > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> > >>> with
> > >>> >> > just
> > >>> >> > > > the
> > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> > >>> >> > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > >>> >> > wrote:
> > >>> >> > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
> > >>> recently.
> > >>> >> If
> > >>> >> > > you'd
> > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment
> > to
> > >>> an
> > >>> >> > > existing
> > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new
> ticket.
> > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it.
> > >>> There is
> > >>> >> > > > > something
> > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will
> > >>> manage
> > >>> >> to do
> > >>> >> > > > > > something
> > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature
> > >>> requests
> > >>> >> > for
> > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat
> > >>> related
> > >>> >> > > > content,
> > >>> >> > > > > > but
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read
> them.
> > >>> Some
> > >>> >> > > > examples:
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in
> GH
> > >>> and
> > >>> >> not
> > >>> >> > > much
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors
> to
> > >>> >> GitHub -
> > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > >
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > >
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>]

Another one who also opened issues in Airflow and Iceberg
https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034
https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45920

Same "mistake" with the # Title.
All of these seem to come with accounts opened months ago, with some minor
traffic to their own forks so they would appear legit to Github

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:23 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where someone
> is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo would".
> That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close the
> issue
> > (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed
> after 1
> > minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
> >
> > So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> >
> >
> > Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
> >
> >
> > Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
> >
> > > Example case:
> > >
> > > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> > > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> > >
> > > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.
> > >
> > > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their
> > > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow
> about
> > > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> > >
> > > J.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
> > >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary
> check
> > >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> > >>
> >
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> > .
> > >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
> > >>
> > >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues
> that
> > >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > >>
> > >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are
> > reported
> > >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate, but
> > they
> > >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are completely
> > >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it
> takes
> > a
> > >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and
> with
> > >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are
> good
> > or
> > >> bad.
> > >>
> > >> J.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hey Jarek,
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
> > flooding,
> > >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
> > >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
> > >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work,
> and
> > we
> > >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
> > don't
> > >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> > >>>
> > >>> Kind regards,
> > >>> Fokko
> > >>>
> > >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
> > >>>
> > >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of
> > >>> issues
> > >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and
> make
> > no
> > >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the
> users
> > >>> who
> > >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow
> are
> > >>> also
> > >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues
> to
> > >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much
> > >>> time on
> > >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > ```
> > >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings
> no
> > >>> value
> > >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a
> lot
> > of
> > >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will
> report
> > >>> your
> > >>> > account and block it unless:
> > >>> >
> > >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> > >>> > b) prove you are human
> > >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> > >>> > ```
> > >>> >
> > >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic
> AI"
> > >>> that
> > >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their
> > >>> behalf.
> > >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> > >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to
> Github -
> > >>> and
> > >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> > >>> > maintainers.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> > >>> >
> > >>> > J.
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> > >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> > >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> > >>> >
> > >>> >
> > >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and
> > >>> "report
> > >>> > content")
> > >>> >
> > >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> > amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> > >>> > wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> This is how its done:
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>
> > >>>
> >
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> > >>> >> Amogh Desai
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
> > >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> > >>> >> > >
> > >>> >> > > Regards,
> > >>> >> > > Pavan
> > >>> >> > >
> > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> > >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > >>> >> > >
> > >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well,
> so
> > >>> if any
> > >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and
> report
> > >>> it.
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> > >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> > >>> >> > > wrote:
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> > >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It
> appears
> > >>> to be
> > >>> >> a
> > >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> > >>> with
> > >>> >> > just
> > >>> >> > > > the
> > >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> > >>> >> > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > >>> >> > wrote:
> > >>> >> > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
> > >>> recently.
> > >>> >> If
> > >>> >> > > you'd
> > >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment
> > to
> > >>> an
> > >>> >> > > existing
> > >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new
> ticket.
> > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >> > > > wrote:
> > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it.
> > >>> There is
> > >>> >> > > > > something
> > >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will
> > >>> manage
> > >>> >> to do
> > >>> >> > > > > > something
> > >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> > >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature
> > >>> requests
> > >>> >> > for
> > >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat
> > >>> related
> > >>> >> > > > content,
> > >>> >> > > > > > but
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read
> them.
> > >>> Some
> > >>> >> > > > examples:
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in
> GH
> > >>> and
> > >>> >> not
> > >>> >> > > much
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors
> to
> > >>> >> GitHub -
> > >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> > >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> > >>> >> > > > > > >>
> > >>> >> > > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > > >
> > >>> >> > > > >
> > >>> >> > > >
> > >>> >> > >
> > >>> >> >
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where someone
is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo would".
That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:

> That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close the issue
> (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed after 1
> minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>
> So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>
>
> Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
>
>
> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
>
> > Example case:
> >
> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> >
> > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.
> >
> > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their
> > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow about
> > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> >
> > J.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
> >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary check
> >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> .
> >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
> >>
> >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
> >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >>
> >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are
> reported
> >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate, but
> they
> >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are completely
> >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it takes
> a
> >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and with
> >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are good
> or
> >> bad.
> >>
> >> J.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hey Jarek,
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
> flooding,
> >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
> >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
> >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work, and
> we
> >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
> don't
> >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >>>
> >>> Kind regards,
> >>> Fokko
> >>>
> >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
> >>>
> >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> >>> >
> >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of
> >>> issues
> >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make
> no
> >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users
> >>> who
> >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are
> >>> also
> >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> >>> >
> >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
> >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much
> >>> time on
> >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> >>> >
> >>> > ```
> >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no
> >>> value
> >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot
> of
> >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report
> >>> your
> >>> > account and block it unless:
> >>> >
> >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> >>> > b) prove you are human
> >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> >>> > ```
> >>> >
> >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI"
> >>> that
> >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their
> >>> behalf.
> >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github -
> >>> and
> >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> >>> > maintainers.
> >>> >
> >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> >>> >
> >>> > J.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and
> >>> "report
> >>> > content")
> >>> >
> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> This is how its done:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >>> >> Amogh Desai
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
> >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > Regards,
> >>> >> > > Pavan
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so
> >>> if any
> >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report
> >>> it.
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears
> >>> to be
> >>> >> a
> >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> >>> with
> >>> >> > just
> >>> >> > > > the
> >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> >>> >> > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>> >> > wrote:
> >>> >> > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
> >>> recently.
> >>> >> If
> >>> >> > > you'd
> >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment
> to
> >>> an
> >>> >> > > existing
> >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
> >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > > > wrote:
> >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it.
> >>> There is
> >>> >> > > > > something
> >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will
> >>> manage
> >>> >> to do
> >>> >> > > > > > something
> >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature
> >>> requests
> >>> >> > for
> >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat
> >>> related
> >>> >> > > > content,
> >>> >> > > > > > but
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them.
> >>> Some
> >>> >> > > > examples:
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH
> >>> and
> >>> >> not
> >>> >> > > much
> >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
> >>> >> GitHub -
> >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > >
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Yeah. Again - my guess is that those are "Agentic AI" trials, where someone
is deploying fake "agent" accounts acting as "people in the repo would".
That's a bit terrifying if this is not contained.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:52 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:

> That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close the issue
> (eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed after 1
> minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D
>
> So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>
>
> Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.
>
>
> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
>
> > Example case:
> >
> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> > * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
> >
> > Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.
> >
> > Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their
> > history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow about
> > the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you think.
> >
> > J.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
> >> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary check
> >> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22
> .
> >> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
> >>
> >> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
> >> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >>
> >> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are
> reported
> >> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate, but
> they
> >> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are completely
> >> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it takes
> a
> >> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and with
> >> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are good
> or
> >> bad.
> >>
> >> J.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hey Jarek,
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about
> flooding,
> >>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
> >>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
> >>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work, and
> we
> >>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
> don't
> >>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
> >>>
> >>> Kind regards,
> >>> Fokko
> >>>
> >>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
> >>>
> >>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> >>> >
> >>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of
> >>> issues
> >>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make
> no
> >>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users
> >>> who
> >>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are
> >>> also
> >>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> >>> >
> >>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
> >>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much
> >>> time on
> >>> > it with messages similar to this:
> >>> >
> >>> > ```
> >>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no
> >>> value
> >>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot
> of
> >>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report
> >>> your
> >>> > account and block it unless:
> >>> >
> >>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> >>> > b) prove you are human
> >>> > c) explain why you created the issue
> >>> > ```
> >>> >
> >>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI"
> >>> that
> >>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their
> >>> behalf.
> >>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> >>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github -
> >>> and
> >>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> >>> > maintainers.
> >>> >
> >>> > I hope it will not last too long.
> >>> >
> >>> > J.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> >>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> >>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> >>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and
> >>> "report
> >>> > content")
> >>> >
> >>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <
> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com>
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> This is how its done:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >>> >> Amogh Desai
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> > There are several reports from this user
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
> >>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > Regards,
> >>> >> > > Pavan
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> >>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so
> >>> if any
> >>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> >>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report
> >>> it.
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
> >>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
> >>> >> > > wrote:
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> >>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears
> >>> to be
> >>> >> a
> >>> >> > > > > copy-paste of
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> >>> with
> >>> >> > just
> >>> >> > > > the
> >>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> >>> >> > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>> >> > wrote:
> >>> >> > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
> >>> recently.
> >>> >> If
> >>> >> > > you'd
> >>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment
> to
> >>> an
> >>> >> > > existing
> >>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
> >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> jarek@potiuk.com
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > > > wrote:
> >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it.
> >>> There is
> >>> >> > > > > something
> >>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will
> >>> manage
> >>> >> to do
> >>> >> > > > > > something
> >>> >> > > > > > > about it
> >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
> >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> >>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> >>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> >>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >>> >> > > > > wrote:
> >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature
> >>> requests
> >>> >> > for
> >>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat
> >>> related
> >>> >> > > > content,
> >>> >> > > > > > but
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them.
> >>> Some
> >>> >> > > > examples:
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH
> >>> and
> >>> >> not
> >>> >> > > much
> >>> >> > > > > > >> activity
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > before
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
> >>> >> GitHub -
> >>> >> > > > > > hopefully
> >>> >> > > > > > >> we
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> >>> >> > > > > > >> >
> >>> >> > > > > > >>
> >>> >> > > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > > >
> >>> >> > > > >
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>]

That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close the issue
(eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed after 1
minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D

So you might have more such issues now than you think.


Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.


Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:

> Example case:
>
> * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
>
> Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.
>
> Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their
> history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow about
> the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>
> J.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
>> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
>> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary check
>> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22.
>> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
>>
>> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
>> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>
>> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are reported
>> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate, but they
>> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are completely
>> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it takes a
>> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and with
>> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are good or
>> bad.
>>
>> J.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Jarek,
>>>
>>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about flooding,
>>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
>>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
>>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work, and we
>>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that don't
>>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Fokko
>>>
>>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
>>>
>>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>>> >
>>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of
>>> issues
>>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
>>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users
>>> who
>>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are
>>> also
>>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>>> >
>>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
>>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much
>>> time on
>>> > it with messages similar to this:
>>> >
>>> > ```
>>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no
>>> value
>>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
>>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report
>>> your
>>> > account and block it unless:
>>> >
>>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>>> > b) prove you are human
>>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>>> > ```
>>> >
>>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI"
>>> that
>>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their
>>> behalf.
>>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github -
>>> and
>>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
>>> > maintainers.
>>> >
>>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>>> >
>>> > J.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and
>>> "report
>>> > content")
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>> >>
>>> >> This is how its done:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>>> >> Amogh Desai
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>>> >> >
>>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
>>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > Regards,
>>> >> > > Pavan
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>>> >> >
>>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so
>>> if any
>>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report
>>> it.
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears
>>> to be
>>> >> a
>>> >> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>>> with
>>> >> > just
>>> >> > > > the
>>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>>> >> > > > >
>>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>>> >> > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
>>> recently.
>>> >> If
>>> >> > > you'd
>>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to
>>> an
>>> >> > > existing
>>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
>>> >> > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >> >
>>> >> > > > wrote:
>>> >> > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it.
>>> There is
>>> >> > > > > something
>>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will
>>> manage
>>> >> to do
>>> >> > > > > > something
>>> >> > > > > > > about it
>>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >> > > > > wrote:
>>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature
>>> requests
>>> >> > for
>>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat
>>> related
>>> >> > > > content,
>>> >> > > > > > but
>>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them.
>>> Some
>>> >> > > > examples:
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH
>>> and
>>> >> not
>>> >> > > much
>>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
>>> >> GitHub -
>>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>>> >> > > > > > >> we
>>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > >
>>> >> > > > >
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > >
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>]

That's quite a few! I also noticed that they sometimes self-close the issue
(eg here <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12032>). Closed after 1
minute, but still flooding my mailbox :D

So you might have more such issues now than you think.


Yes, that's probably the case, still going through my mailbox.


Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:49 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:

> Example case:
>
> * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
> * https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg
>
> Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.
>
> Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their
> history - created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow about
> the same time. So you might have more such issues now than you think.
>
> J.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
>> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
>> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary check
>> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22.
>> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
>>
>> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
>> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>
>> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are reported
>> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate, but they
>> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are completely
>> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it takes a
>> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and with
>> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are good or
>> bad.
>>
>> J.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Jarek,
>>>
>>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about flooding,
>>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
>>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
>>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work, and we
>>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that don't
>>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Fokko
>>>
>>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
>>>
>>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>>> >
>>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of
>>> issues
>>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
>>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users
>>> who
>>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are
>>> also
>>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>>> >
>>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
>>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much
>>> time on
>>> > it with messages similar to this:
>>> >
>>> > ```
>>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no
>>> value
>>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
>>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report
>>> your
>>> > account and block it unless:
>>> >
>>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>>> > b) prove you are human
>>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>>> > ```
>>> >
>>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI"
>>> that
>>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their
>>> behalf.
>>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github -
>>> and
>>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
>>> > maintainers.
>>> >
>>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>>> >
>>> > J.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and
>>> "report
>>> > content")
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>> >>
>>> >> This is how its done:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>>> >> Amogh Desai
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>>> >> >
>>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
>>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > Regards,
>>> >> > > Pavan
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>>> >> >
>>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >> > >
>>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so
>>> if any
>>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report
>>> it.
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>>> >> > > wrote:
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears
>>> to be
>>> >> a
>>> >> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>>> with
>>> >> > just
>>> >> > > > the
>>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>>> >> > > > >
>>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>>> >> > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
>>> recently.
>>> >> If
>>> >> > > you'd
>>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to
>>> an
>>> >> > > existing
>>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
>>> >> > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> jarek@potiuk.com
>>> >> >
>>> >> > > > wrote:
>>> >> > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it.
>>> There is
>>> >> > > > > something
>>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will
>>> manage
>>> >> to do
>>> >> > > > > > something
>>> >> > > > > > > about it
>>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > > Last one is
>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>>> >> > > > > wrote:
>>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature
>>> requests
>>> >> > for
>>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat
>>> related
>>> >> > > > content,
>>> >> > > > > > but
>>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them.
>>> Some
>>> >> > > > examples:
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH
>>> and
>>> >> not
>>> >> > > much
>>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
>>> >> GitHub -
>>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>>> >> > > > > > >> we
>>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>>> >> > > > > > >> >
>>> >> > > > > > >>
>>> >> > > > > > >
>>> >> > > > > >
>>> >> > > > >
>>> >> > > >
>>> >> > >
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Example case:

* https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
* https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg

Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.

Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their history
- created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow about the same
time. So you might have more such issues now than you think.

J.




On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary check
> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22.
> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
>
> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>
> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are reported
> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate, but they
> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are completely
> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it takes a
> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and with
> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are good or
> bad.
>
> J.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hey Jarek,
>>
>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about flooding,
>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work, and we
>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that don't
>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Fokko
>>
>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
>>
>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>> >
>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of
>> issues
>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users who
>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are
>> also
>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>> >
>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much
>> time on
>> > it with messages similar to this:
>> >
>> > ```
>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no
>> value
>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report
>> your
>> > account and block it unless:
>> >
>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>> > b) prove you are human
>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>> > ```
>> >
>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI"
>> that
>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their
>> behalf.
>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github -
>> and
>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
>> > maintainers.
>> >
>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>> >
>> > J.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>> >
>> >
>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and
>> "report
>> > content")
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>> >>
>> >> This is how its done:
>> >>
>> >>
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>> >>
>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>> >> Amogh Desai
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>> >> >
>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>> >> >
>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Regards,
>> >> > > Pavan
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> >> >
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if
>> any
>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to
>> be
>> >> a
>> >> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>> with
>> >> > just
>> >> > > > the
>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>> >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
>> recently.
>> >> If
>> >> > > you'd
>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to
>> an
>> >> > > existing
>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> jarek@potiuk.com
>> >> >
>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it.
>> There is
>> >> > > > > something
>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage
>> >> to do
>> >> > > > > > something
>> >> > > > > > > about it
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature
>> requests
>> >> > for
>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat
>> related
>> >> > > > content,
>> >> > > > > > but
>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them.
>> Some
>> >> > > > examples:
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH
>> and
>> >> not
>> >> > > much
>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
>> >> GitHub -
>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>> >> > > > > > >> we
>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Example case:

* https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45904  - airflow
* https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12034 - iceberg

Both issues are generic and useless and bring 0 value except noise.

Interesting thing is that many of those users, if you look at their history
- created. similar number of issues in iceberg and airflow about the same
time. So you might have more such issues now than you think.

J.




On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:41 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
> other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary check
> and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22.
> -> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.
>
> > we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
> don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>
> Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are reported
> infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate, but they
> are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are completely
> useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it takes a
> lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and with
> such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are good or
> bad.
>
> J.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hey Jarek,
>>
>> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about flooding,
>> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
>> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
>> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work, and we
>> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that don't
>> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Fokko
>>
>> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
>>
>> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>> >
>> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of
>> issues
>> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
>> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users who
>> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are
>> also
>> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>> >
>> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
>> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much
>> time on
>> > it with messages similar to this:
>> >
>> > ```
>> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no
>> value
>> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
>> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report
>> your
>> > account and block it unless:
>> >
>> > a) you explain how you generated reports
>> > b) prove you are human
>> > c) explain why you created the issue
>> > ```
>> >
>> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI"
>> that
>> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their
>> behalf.
>> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
>> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github -
>> and
>> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
>> > maintainers.
>> >
>> > I hope it will not last too long.
>> >
>> > J.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
>> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
>> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>> >
>> >
>> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and
>> "report
>> > content")
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>> >>
>> >> This is how its done:
>> >>
>> >>
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>> >>
>> >> Thanks & Regards,
>> >> Amogh Desai
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > There are several reports from this user
>> >> >
>> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>> >> >
>> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
>> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Regards,
>> >> > > Pavan
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
>> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> >> >
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if
>> any
>> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> >> > > > Amogh Desai
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <
>> zhu424.dev@gmail.com>
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to
>> be
>> >> a
>> >> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
>> with
>> >> > just
>> >> > > > the
>> >> > > > > issue title changed.
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>> >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account
>> recently.
>> >> If
>> >> > > you'd
>> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to
>> an
>> >> > > existing
>> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> jarek@potiuk.com
>> >> >
>> >> > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it.
>> There is
>> >> > > > > something
>> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage
>> >> to do
>> >> > > > > > something
>> >> > > > > > > about it
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> >> > > > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature
>> requests
>> >> > for
>> >> > > > > > Airflow,
>> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat
>> related
>> >> > > > content,
>> >> > > > > > but
>> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them.
>> Some
>> >> > > > examples:
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH
>> and
>> >> not
>> >> > > much
>> >> > > > > > >> activity
>> >> > > > > > >> > before
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
>> >> GitHub -
>> >> > > > > > hopefully
>> >> > > > > > >> we
>> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >> > J.
>> >> > > > > > >> >
>> >> > > > > > >>
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary check
and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22.
-> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.

> we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.

Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are reported
infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate, but they
are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are completely
useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it takes a
lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and with
such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are good or
bad.

J.



On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hey Jarek,
>
> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about flooding,
> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work, and we
> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that don't
> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>
> Kind regards,
> Fokko
>
> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
>
> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> >
> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of issues
> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users who
> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are also
> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> >
> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much time
> on
> > it with messages similar to this:
> >
> > ```
> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no
> value
> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report
> your
> > account and block it unless:
> >
> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> > b) prove you are human
> > c) explain why you created the issue
> > ```
> >
> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI"
> that
> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their
> behalf.
> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github - and
> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> > maintainers.
> >
> > I hope it will not last too long.
> >
> > J.
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> >
> >
> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and
> "report
> > content")
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> >>
> >> This is how its done:
> >>
> >>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> >>
> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >> Amogh Desai
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> > There are several reports from this user
> >> >
> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> >> >
> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >> >
> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> >> > >
> >> > > Regards,
> >> > > Pavan
> >> > >
> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if
> any
> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zhu424.dev@gmail.com
> >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to
> be
> >> a
> >> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> with
> >> > just
> >> > > > the
> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently.
> >> If
> >> > > you'd
> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an
> >> > > existing
> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> jarek@potiuk.com
> >> >
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There
> is
> >> > > > > something
> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage
> >> to do
> >> > > > > > something
> >> > > > > > > about it
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature
> requests
> >> > for
> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat
> related
> >> > > > content,
> >> > > > > > but
> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
> >> > > > examples:
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and
> >> not
> >> > > much
> >> > > > > > >> activity
> >> > > > > > >> > before
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
> >> GitHub -
> >> > > > > > hopefully
> >> > > > > > >> we
> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

I have not counted all of them. there are quite a bit too many - and
other people closed some of them as well. I got a very rudimentary check
and applied "AI Spam" label to some of the issues
https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues?q=is%3Aissue%20state%3Aclosed%20AI%20label%3A%22AI%20Spam%22.
-> so we have had at least 25 such issues in the last 12 hours.

> we also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that
don't come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.

Those reports and patterns look very. very human-like - they are reported
infrequently (per user) the description and text seem legitimate, but they
are wordy and just reading and understanding that those are completely
useless takes a lot of time. This is part of the problem, that it takes a
lot of energy and time to determine if those are valid or not - and with
such a rate, it's not sustainable just to analyze whether they are good or
bad.

J.



On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:23 AM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hey Jarek,
>
> Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about flooding,
> how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
> <https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
> hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work, and we
> also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that don't
> come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.
>
> Kind regards,
> Fokko
>
> Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:
>
> > Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
> >
> > As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of issues
> > that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
> > sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users who
> > create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are also
> > creating similar issues for Iceberg.
> >
> > We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
> > GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much time
> on
> > it with messages similar to this:
> >
> > ```
> > This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no
> value
> > and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
> > spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report
> your
> > account and block it unless:
> >
> > a) you explain how you generated reports
> > b) prove you are human
> > c) explain why you created the issue
> > ```
> >
> > My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI"
> that
> > is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their
> behalf.
> > It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> > I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github - and
> > hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> > maintainers.
> >
> > I hope it will not last too long.
> >
> > J.
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> > Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> > To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
> >
> >
> > You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and
> "report
> > content")
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
> >>
> >> This is how its done:
> >>
> >>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
> >>
> >> Thanks & Regards,
> >> Amogh Desai
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> > There are several reports from this user
> >> >
> >> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> >> >
> >> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
> >> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >> >
> >> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> >> > >
> >> > > Regards,
> >> > > Pavan
> >> > >
> >> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <
> amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if
> any
> >> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> >> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> >> > > > Amogh Desai
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zhu424.dev@gmail.com
> >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to
> be
> >> a
> >> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661
> with
> >> > just
> >> > > > the
> >> > > > > issue title changed.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently.
> >> If
> >> > > you'd
> >> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an
> >> > > existing
> >> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> jarek@potiuk.com
> >> >
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There
> is
> >> > > > > something
> >> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage
> >> to do
> >> > > > > > something
> >> > > > > > > about it
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> >> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> >> jarek@potiuk.com>
> >> > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature
> requests
> >> > for
> >> > > > > > Airflow,
> >> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat
> related
> >> > > > content,
> >> > > > > > but
> >> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
> >> > > > examples:
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> >> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and
> >> not
> >> > > much
> >> > > > > > >> activity
> >> > > > > > >> > before
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
> >> GitHub -
> >> > > > > > hopefully
> >> > > > > > >> we
> >> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >> > J.
> >> > > > > > >> >
> >> > > > > > >>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>]

Hey Jarek,

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about flooding,
how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
<https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work, and we
also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that don't
come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.

Kind regards,
Fokko

Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:

> Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>
> As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of issues
> that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
> sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users who
> create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are also
> creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>
> We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
> GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much time on
> it with messages similar to this:
>
> ```
> This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no value
> and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
> spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report your
> account and block it unless:
>
> a) you explain how you generated reports
> b) prove you are human
> c) explain why you created the issue
> ```
>
> My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI" that
> is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their behalf.
> It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github - and
> hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> maintainers.
>
> I hope it will not last too long.
>
> J.
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>
>
> You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and "report
> content")
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>
>> This is how its done:
>>
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> Amogh Desai
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > There are several reports from this user
>> >
>> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> >
>> >
>> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>> >
>> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
>> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Pavan
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> > > >
>> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if any
>> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> > > > Amogh Desai
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be
>> a
>> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with
>> > just
>> > > > the
>> > > > > issue title changed.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently.
>> If
>> > > you'd
>> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an
>> > > existing
>> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is
>> > > > > something
>> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage
>> to do
>> > > > > > something
>> > > > > > > about it
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests
>> > for
>> > > > > > Airflow,
>> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related
>> > > > content,
>> > > > > > but
>> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
>> > > > examples:
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and
>> not
>> > > much
>> > > > > > >> activity
>> > > > > > >> > before
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
>> GitHub -
>> > > > > > hopefully
>> > > > > > >> we
>> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > J.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org>]

Hey Jarek,

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. When you talk about flooding,
how many are we talking about? I see some suspicious issues (eg, here
<https://github.com/apache/iceberg/issues/12039>), but not many. I
hope this will come to a halt soon because it all additional work, and we
also want to make sure that we don't accidentally close issues that don't
come from a bot, but just a newcomer to the project.

Kind regards,
Fokko

Op wo 22 jan 2025 om 09:00 schreef Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>:

> Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>
> As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of issues
> that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
> sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users who
> create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are also
> creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>
> We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
> GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much time on
> it with messages similar to this:
>
> ```
> This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no value
> and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
> spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report your
> account and block it unless:
>
> a) you explain how you generated reports
> b) prove you are human
> c) explain why you created the issue
> ```
>
> My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI" that
> is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their behalf.
> It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github - and
> hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> maintainers.
>
> I hope it will not last too long.
>
> J.
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>
>
> You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and "report
> content")
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>
>> This is how its done:
>>
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> Amogh Desai
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > There are several reports from this user
>> >
>> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> >
>> >
>> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>> >
>> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
>> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Pavan
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> > > >
>> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if any
>> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> > > > Amogh Desai
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be
>> a
>> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with
>> > just
>> > > > the
>> > > > > issue title changed.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently.
>> If
>> > > you'd
>> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an
>> > > existing
>> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is
>> > > > > something
>> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage
>> to do
>> > > > > > something
>> > > > > > > about it
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests
>> > for
>> > > > > > Airflow,
>> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related
>> > > > content,
>> > > > > > but
>> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
>> > > > examples:
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and
>> not
>> > > much
>> > > > > > >> activity
>> > > > > > >> > before
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
>> GitHub -
>> > > > > > hopefully
>> > > > > > >> we
>> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > J.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

I also forwarded it to `users@infra` - so that the infra people are aware
of it.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:00 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>
> As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of issues
> that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
> sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users who
> create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are also
> creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>
> We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
> GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much time on
> it with messages similar to this:
>
> ```
> This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no value
> and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
> spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report your
> account and block it unless:
>
> a) you explain how you generated reports
> b) prove you are human
> c) explain why you created the issue
> ```
>
> My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI" that
> is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their behalf.
> It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github - and
> hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> maintainers.
>
> I hope it will not last too long.
>
> J.
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>
>
> You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and "report
> content")
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>
>> This is how its done:
>>
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> Amogh Desai
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > There are several reports from this user
>> >
>> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> >
>> >
>> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>> >
>> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
>> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Pavan
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> > > >
>> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if any
>> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> > > > Amogh Desai
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be
>> a
>> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with
>> > just
>> > > > the
>> > > > > issue title changed.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently.
>> If
>> > > you'd
>> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an
>> > > existing
>> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is
>> > > > > something
>> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage
>> to do
>> > > > > > something
>> > > > > > > about it
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests
>> > for
>> > > > > > Airflow,
>> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related
>> > > > content,
>> > > > > > but
>> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
>> > > > examples:
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and
>> not
>> > > much
>> > > > > > >> activity
>> > > > > > >> > before
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
>> GitHub -
>> > > > > > hopefully
>> > > > > > >> we
>> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > J.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

I also forwarded it to `users@infra` - so that the infra people are aware
of it.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 9:00 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.
>
> As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of issues
> that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
> sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users who
> create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are also
> creating similar issues for Iceberg.
>
> We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to
> GitHub and we are blocking all such users without spending too much time on
> it with messages similar to this:
>
> ```
> This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no value
> and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
> spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report your
> account and block it unless:
>
> a) you explain how you generated reports
> b) prove you are human
> c) explain why you created the issue
> ```
>
> My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI" that
> is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their behalf.
> It does not look like regular bot-spam.
> I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github - and
> hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
> maintainers.
>
> I hope it will not last too long.
>
> J.
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
> Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
> To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>
>
>
> You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and "report
> content")
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>>
>> This is how its done:
>>
>> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>>
>> Thanks & Regards,
>> Amogh Desai
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > There are several reports from this user
>> >
>> > https://github.com/atharv9017
>> >
>> >
>> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>> >
>> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
>> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
>> > >
>> > > Regards,
>> > > Pavan
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <amoghdesai.oss@gmail.com
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>> > > >
>> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if any
>> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
>> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks & Regards,
>> > > > Amogh Desai
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
>> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be
>> a
>> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with
>> > just
>> > > > the
>> > > > > issue title changed.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently.
>> If
>> > > you'd
>> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an
>> > > existing
>> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is
>> > > > > something
>> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage
>> to do
>> > > > > > something
>> > > > > > > about it
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
>> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> Agreed.
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
>> jarek@potiuk.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests
>> > for
>> > > > > > Airflow,
>> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related
>> > > > content,
>> > > > > > but
>> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
>> > > > examples:
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and
>> not
>> > > much
>> > > > > > >> activity
>> > > > > > >> > before
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to
>> GitHub -
>> > > > > > hopefully
>> > > > > > >> we
>> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >> > J.
>> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Fwd: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.

As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of issues
that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users who
create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are also
creating similar issues for Iceberg.

We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to GitHub
and we are blocking all such users without spending too much time on it
with messages similar to this:

```
This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no value
and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report your
account and block it unless:

a) you explain how you generated reports
b) prove you are human
c) explain why you created the issue
```

My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI" that
is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their behalf.
It does not look like regular bot-spam.
I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github - and
hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
maintainers.

I hope it will not last too long.

J.



---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>


You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and "report
content")

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>
> This is how its done:
>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amogh Desai
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > There are several reports from this user
> >
> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >
> >
> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> >
> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Pavan
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> > > >
> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if any
> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > Amogh Desai
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be a
> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with
> > just
> > > > the
> > > > > issue title changed.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently. If
> > > you'd
> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an
> > > existing
> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is
> > > > > something
> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage to
> do
> > > > > > something
> > > > > > > about it
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests
> > for
> > > > > > Airflow,
> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related
> > > > content,
> > > > > > but
> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
> > > > examples:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and
> not
> > > much
> > > > > > >> activity
> > > > > > >> > before
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub
> -
> > > > > > hopefully
> > > > > > >> we
> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > J.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Fwd: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

Hey Iceberg community, And Airflow community too.

As of yesterday Airflow repo is literally flooded with a number of issues
that look almost good, except they are clearly AI generated and make no
sense or repeat content from other issues. We noticed that the users who
create a lot of the "spam AI" issues that are created in Airflow are also
creating similar issues for Iceberg.

We got to the point that we are closing and reporting such issues to GitHub
and we are blocking all such users without spending too much time on it
with messages similar to this:

```
This looks totally AI-generated. useless issue report that brings no value
and makes no sense. We are generally blocking users that sends a lot of
spam AI reports generated by bots.. as of yesterday so we will report your
account and block it unless:

a) you explain how you generated reports
b) prove you are human
c) explain why you created the issue
```

My guess is that some company released and is testing an "agentic AI" that
is "github-targeted" - where people can run the AI agents on their behalf.
It does not look like regular bot-spam.
I think we should all generally crowd-source reporting it to Github - and
hopefully they will find a way to battle those without involving
maintainers.

I hope it will not last too long.

J.



---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
Date: Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues
To: <de...@airflow.apache.org>


You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and "report
content")

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>
> This is how its done:
>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amogh Desai
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > There are several reports from this user
> >
> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >
> >
> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> >
> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Pavan
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> > > >
> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if any
> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > Amogh Desai
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be a
> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with
> > just
> > > > the
> > > > > issue title changed.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently. If
> > > you'd
> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an
> > > existing
> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is
> > > > > something
> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage to
> do
> > > > > > something
> > > > > > > about it
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests
> > for
> > > > > > Airflow,
> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related
> > > > content,
> > > > > > but
> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
> > > > examples:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and
> not
> > > much
> > > > > > >> activity
> > > > > > >> > before
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub
> -
> > > > > > hopefully
> > > > > > >> we
> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > J.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

You can also report it directly from the issue (... at the top and "report
content")

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 7:46 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Elad, I just managed to report this user.
>
> This is how its done:
>
> https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amogh Desai
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > There are several reports from this user
> >
> > https://github.com/atharv9017
> >
> >
> > I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
> >
> > בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
> > gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Yes, still issues are coming.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Pavan
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> > > >
> > > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if any
> > > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > > Amogh Desai
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I came across another strange issue:
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be a
> > > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with
> > just
> > > > the
> > > > > issue title changed.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I even got to this stage:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently. If
> > > you'd
> > > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an
> > > existing
> > > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is
> > > > > something
> > > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage to
> do
> > > > > > something
> > > > > > > about it
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Agreed.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <
> jarek@potiuk.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests
> > for
> > > > > > Airflow,
> > > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related
> > > > content,
> > > > > > but
> > > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
> > > > examples:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and
> not
> > > much
> > > > > > >> activity
> > > > > > >> > before
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub
> -
> > > > > > hopefully
> > > > > > >> we
> > > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > J.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>]

Elad, I just managed to report this user.

This is how its done:
https://docs.github.com/en/communities/maintaining-your-safety-on-github/reporting-abuse-or-spam#reporting-a-user

Thanks & Regards,
Amogh Desai


On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 12:05 PM Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org> wrote:

> There are several reports from this user
>
> https://github.com/atharv9017
>
>
> I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.
>
> בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
> gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:
>
> > Yes, still issues are coming.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Pavan
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> > >
> > > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if any
> > > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
> > >
> > > Thanks & Regards,
> > > Amogh Desai
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I came across another strange issue:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be a
> > > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with
> just
> > > the
> > > > issue title changed.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I even got to this stage:
> > > > >
> > > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently. If
> > you'd
> > > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an
> > existing
> > > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is
> > > > something
> > > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage to do
> > > > > something
> > > > > > about it
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Agreed.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests
> for
> > > > > Airflow,
> > > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related
> > > content,
> > > > > but
> > > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
> > > examples:
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and not
> > much
> > > > > >> activity
> > > > > >> > before
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub -
> > > > > hopefully
> > > > > >> we
> > > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > J.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Elad Kalif <el...@apache.org>]

There are several reports from this user

https://github.com/atharv9017


I didnt find a way to report the user account to github.

בתאריך יום ד׳, 22 בינו׳ 2025, 06:41, מאת Pavankumar Gopidesu ‏<
gopidesupavan@gmail.com>:

> Yes, still issues are coming.
>
> Regards,
> Pavan
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
> >
> > I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if any
> > contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> > please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
> >
> > Thanks & Regards,
> > Amogh Desai
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I came across another strange issue:
> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be a
> > > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with just
> > the
> > > issue title changed.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I even got to this stage:
> > > >
> > > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently. If
> you'd
> > > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an
> existing
> > > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is
> > > something
> > > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage to do
> > > > something
> > > > > about it
> > > > >
> > > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Agreed.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests for
> > > > Airflow,
> > > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related
> > content,
> > > > but
> > > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
> > examples:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and not
> much
> > > > >> activity
> > > > >> > before
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub -
> > > > hopefully
> > > > >> we
> > > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > J.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Pavankumar Gopidesu <go...@gmail.com>]

Yes, still issues are coming.

Regards,
Pavan

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 4:35 AM Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.
>
> I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if any
> contributor sees any such SPAM message,
> please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.
>
> Thanks & Regards,
> Amogh Desai
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I came across another strange issue:
> > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be a
> > copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with just
> the
> > issue title changed.
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I even got to this stage:
> > >
> > > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently. If you'd
> > > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an existing
> > > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is
> > something
> > > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage to do
> > > something
> > > > about it
> > > >
> > > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Agreed.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests for
> > > Airflow,
> > > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related
> content,
> > > but
> > > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some
> examples:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > > >> >
> > > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and not much
> > > >> activity
> > > >> > before
> > > >> >
> > > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub -
> > > hopefully
> > > >> we
> > > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > J.
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Amogh Desai <am...@gmail.com>]

I saw a couple of such SPAM issues too.

I also recall some SPAM comments on pull requests as well, so if any
contributor sees any such SPAM message,
please report it on Slack so that we can delete it and report it.

Thanks & Regards,
Amogh Desai


On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:45 AM Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I came across another strange issue:
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be a
> copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with just the
> issue title changed.
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > I even got to this stage:
> >
> > > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently. If you'd
> > like to add additional information you can add a comment to an existing
> > ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is
> something
> > > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage to do
> > something
> > > about it
> > >
> > > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> > <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Agreed.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests for
> > Airflow,
> > >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related content,
> > but
> > >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some examples:
> > >> >
> > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> > >> >
> > >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and not much
> > >> activity
> > >> > before
> > >> >
> > >> > There were quite a few more.
> > >> >
> > >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub -
> > hopefully
> > >> we
> > >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> > >> >
> > >> > J.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Zhe You Liu <zh...@gmail.com>]

I came across another strange issue:
https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45837. It appears to be a
copy-paste of https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45661 with just the
issue title changed.

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 6:50 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> I even got to this stage:
>
> > We've received a few new tickets from your account recently. If you'd
> like to add additional information you can add a comment to an existing
> ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is something
> > going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage to do
> something
> > about it
> >
> > Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka
> <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Agreed.
> >>
> >> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests for
> Airflow,
> >> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related content,
> but
> >> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some examples:
> >> >
> >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> >> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >> >
> >> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and not much
> >> activity
> >> > before
> >> >
> >> > There were quite a few more.
> >> >
> >> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub -
> hopefully
> >> we
> >> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> >> >
> >> > J.
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

I even got to this stage:

> We've received a few new tickets from your account recently. If you'd
like to add additional information you can add a comment to an existing
ticket, or wait a few minutes before opening a new ticket.

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:49 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is something
> going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage to do something
> about it
>
> Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Agreed.
>>
>> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests for Airflow,
>> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related content, but
>> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some examples:
>> >
>> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
>> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
>> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>> >
>> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and not much
>> activity
>> > before
>> >
>> > There were quite a few more.
>> >
>> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub - hopefully
>> we
>> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
>> >
>> > J.
>> >
>>
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>]

There are few more that I still saw after sending it. There is something
going on bypassing GitHub filters.  I hope they will manage to do something
about it

Last one is https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45867

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 11:46 PM Vikram Koka <vi...@astronomer.io.invalid>
wrote:

> Agreed.
>
> Thanks for flagging these Jarek!
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests for Airflow,
> > The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related content, but
> > they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some examples:
> >
> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> > * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
> >
> > All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and not much
> activity
> > before
> >
> > There were quite a few more.
> >
> > I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub - hopefully
> we
> > can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
> >
> > J.
> >
>

Re: Very strange (AI generated) issues

[Vikram Koka <vi...@astronomer.io.INVALID>]

Agreed.

Thanks for flagging these Jarek!


On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 2:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:

> Seems that we have a flood of AI generated feature requests for Airflow,
> The issues look somewhat legitimate, with somewhat related content, but
> they are wordy and make no sense when you read them. Some examples:
>
> * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45858
> * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45856
> * https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/45854
>
> All of them done by accounts with short history in GH and not much activity
> before
>
> There were quite a few more.
>
> I suggest we close such issues AND report authors to GitHub - hopefully we
> can help to battle the AI-generated traffic flood.
>
> J.
>