How about implementing something like SO does with the CAPTCHAs?
If you're using the site normally, you'll probably never see one. If you happen to reload the same page too often, post successive comments too quickly, or something else that triggers an alarm, make them prove they're human. In your case, this would probably be constant reloads of the same page, following every link on a page quickly, or filling in an order form too fast to be human.
If they fail the check x times in a row (say, 2 or 3), give that IP a timeout or other such measure. Then at the end of the timeout, dump them back to the check again.
Since you have unregistered users accessing the site, you do have only IPs to go on. You can issue sessions to each browser and track that way if you wish. And, of course, throw up a human-check if too many sessions are being (re-)created in succession (in case a bot keeps deleting the cookie).
As far as catching too many innocents, you can put up a disclaimer on the human-check page: "This page may also appear if too many anonymous users are viewing our site from the same location. We encourage you to register or login to avoid this." (Adjust the wording appropriately.)
Besides, what are the odds that X people are loading the same page(s) at the same time from one IP? If they're high, maybe you need a different trigger mechanism for your bot alarm.
Edit: Another option is if they fail too many times, and you're confident about the product's demand, to block them and make them personally CALL you to remove the block.
Having people call does seem like an asinine measure, but it makes sure there's a human somewhere behind the computer. The key is to have the block only be in place for a condition which should almost never happen unless it's a bot (e.g. fail the check multiple times in a row). Then it FORCES human interaction - to pick up the phone.
In response to the comment of having them call me, there's obviously that tradeoff here. Are you worried enough about ensuring your users are human to accept a couple phone calls when they go on sale? If I were so concerned about a product getting to human users, I'd have to make this decision, perhaps sacrificing a (small) bit of my time in the process.
Since it seems like you're determined to not let bots get the upper hand/slam your site, I believe the phone may be a good option. Since I don't make a profit off your product, I have no interest in receiving these calls. Were you to share some of that profit, however, I may become interested. As this is your product, you have to decide how much you care and implement accordingly.
The other ways of releasing the block just aren't as effective: a timeout (but they'd get to slam your site again after, rinse-repeat), a long timeout (if it was really a human trying to buy your product, they'd be SOL and punished for failing the check), email (easily done by bots), fax (same), or snail mail (takes too long).
You could, of course, instead have the timeout period increase per IP for each time they get a timeout. Just make sure you're not punishing true humans inadvertently.
You said matching the user agent on ‘bot’ may be awkward, but we’ve found it to be a pretty good match. Our studies have shown that it will cover about 98% of the hits you receive. We also haven’t come across any false positive matches yet either. If you want to raise this up to 99.9% you can include a few other well-known matches such as ‘crawler’, ‘baiduspider’, ‘ia_archiver’, ‘curl’ etc. We’ve tested this on our production systems over millions of hits.
Here are a few c# solutions for you:
1) Simplest
Is the fastest when processing a miss. i.e. traffic from a non-bot – a normal user.
Catches 99+% of crawlers.
bool iscrawler = Regex.IsMatch(Request.UserAgent, @"bot|crawler|baiduspider|80legs|ia_archiver|voyager|curl|wget|yahoo! slurp|mediapartners-google", RegexOptions.IgnoreCase);
2) Medium
Is the fastest when processing a hit. i.e. traffic from a bot. Pretty fast for misses too.
Catches close to 100% of crawlers.
Matches ‘bot’, ‘crawler’, ‘spider’ upfront.
You can add to it any other known crawlers.
List<string> Crawlers3 = new List<string>()
{
"bot","crawler","spider","80legs","baidu","yahoo! slurp","ia_archiver","mediapartners-google",
"lwp-trivial","nederland.zoek","ahoy","anthill","appie","arale","araneo","ariadne",
"atn_worldwide","atomz","bjaaland","ukonline","calif","combine","cosmos","cusco",
"cyberspyder","digger","grabber","downloadexpress","ecollector","ebiness","esculapio",
"esther","felix ide","hamahakki","kit-fireball","fouineur","freecrawl","desertrealm",
"gcreep","golem","griffon","gromit","gulliver","gulper","whowhere","havindex","hotwired",
"htdig","ingrid","informant","inspectorwww","iron33","teoma","ask jeeves","jeeves",
"image.kapsi.net","kdd-explorer","label-grabber","larbin","linkidator","linkwalker",
"lockon","marvin","mattie","mediafox","merzscope","nec-meshexplorer","udmsearch","moget",
"motor","muncher","muninn","muscatferret","mwdsearch","sharp-info-agent","webmechanic",
"netscoop","newscan-online","objectssearch","orbsearch","packrat","pageboy","parasite",
"patric","pegasus","phpdig","piltdownman","pimptrain","plumtreewebaccessor","getterrobo-plus",
"raven","roadrunner","robbie","robocrawl","robofox","webbandit","scooter","search-au",
"searchprocess","senrigan","shagseeker","site valet","skymob","slurp","snooper","speedy",
"curl_image_client","suke","www.sygol.com","tach_bw","templeton","titin","topiclink","udmsearch",
"urlck","valkyrie libwww-perl","verticrawl","victoria","webscout","voyager","crawlpaper",
"webcatcher","t-h-u-n-d-e-r-s-t-o-n-e","webmoose","pagesinventory","webquest","webreaper",
"webwalker","winona","occam","robi","fdse","jobo","rhcs","gazz","dwcp","yeti","fido","wlm",
"wolp","wwwc","xget","legs","curl","webs","wget","sift","cmc"
};
string ua = Request.UserAgent.ToLower();
bool iscrawler = Crawlers3.Exists(x => ua.Contains(x));
3) Paranoid
Is pretty fast, but a little slower than options 1 and 2.
It’s the most accurate, and allows you to maintain the lists if you want.
You can maintain a separate list of names with ‘bot’ in them if you are afraid of false positives in future.
If we get a short match we log it and check it for a false positive.
// crawlers that have 'bot' in their useragent
List<string> Crawlers1 = new List<string>()
{
"googlebot","bingbot","yandexbot","ahrefsbot","msnbot","linkedinbot","exabot","compspybot",
"yesupbot","paperlibot","tweetmemebot","semrushbot","gigabot","voilabot","adsbot-google",
"botlink","alkalinebot","araybot","undrip bot","borg-bot","boxseabot","yodaobot","admedia bot",
"ezooms.bot","confuzzledbot","coolbot","internet cruiser robot","yolinkbot","diibot","musobot",
"dragonbot","elfinbot","wikiobot","twitterbot","contextad bot","hambot","iajabot","news bot",
"irobot","socialradarbot","ko_yappo_robot","skimbot","psbot","rixbot","seznambot","careerbot",
"simbot","solbot","mail.ru_bot","spiderbot","blekkobot","bitlybot","techbot","void-bot",
"vwbot_k","diffbot","friendfeedbot","archive.org_bot","woriobot","crystalsemanticsbot","wepbot",
"spbot","tweetedtimes bot","mj12bot","who.is bot","psbot","robot","jbot","bbot","bot"
};
// crawlers that don't have 'bot' in their useragent
List<string> Crawlers2 = new List<string>()
{
"baiduspider","80legs","baidu","yahoo! slurp","ia_archiver","mediapartners-google","lwp-trivial",
"nederland.zoek","ahoy","anthill","appie","arale","araneo","ariadne","atn_worldwide","atomz",
"bjaaland","ukonline","bspider","calif","christcrawler","combine","cosmos","cusco","cyberspyder",
"cydralspider","digger","grabber","downloadexpress","ecollector","ebiness","esculapio","esther",
"fastcrawler","felix ide","hamahakki","kit-fireball","fouineur","freecrawl","desertrealm",
"gammaspider","gcreep","golem","griffon","gromit","gulliver","gulper","whowhere","portalbspider",
"havindex","hotwired","htdig","ingrid","informant","infospiders","inspectorwww","iron33",
"jcrawler","teoma","ask jeeves","jeeves","image.kapsi.net","kdd-explorer","label-grabber",
"larbin","linkidator","linkwalker","lockon","logo_gif_crawler","marvin","mattie","mediafox",
"merzscope","nec-meshexplorer","mindcrawler","udmsearch","moget","motor","muncher","muninn",
"muscatferret","mwdsearch","sharp-info-agent","webmechanic","netscoop","newscan-online",
"objectssearch","orbsearch","packrat","pageboy","parasite","patric","pegasus","perlcrawler",
"phpdig","piltdownman","pimptrain","pjspider","plumtreewebaccessor","getterrobo-plus","raven",
"roadrunner","robbie","robocrawl","robofox","webbandit","scooter","search-au","searchprocess",
"senrigan","shagseeker","site valet","skymob","slcrawler","slurp","snooper","speedy",
"spider_monkey","spiderline","curl_image_client","suke","www.sygol.com","tach_bw","templeton",
"titin","topiclink","udmsearch","urlck","valkyrie libwww-perl","verticrawl","victoria",
"webscout","voyager","crawlpaper","wapspider","webcatcher","t-h-u-n-d-e-r-s-t-o-n-e",
"webmoose","pagesinventory","webquest","webreaper","webspider","webwalker","winona","occam",
"robi","fdse","jobo","rhcs","gazz","dwcp","yeti","crawler","fido","wlm","wolp","wwwc","xget",
"legs","curl","webs","wget","sift","cmc"
};
string ua = Request.UserAgent.ToLower();
string match = null;
if (ua.Contains("bot")) match = Crawlers1.FirstOrDefault(x => ua.Contains(x));
else match = Crawlers2.FirstOrDefault(x => ua.Contains(x));
if (match != null && match.Length < 5) Log("Possible new crawler found: ", ua);
bool iscrawler = match != null;
Notes:
- It’s tempting to just keep adding names to the regex option 1. But if you do this it will become slower. If you want a more complete list then linq with lambda is faster.
- Make sure .ToLower() is outside of your linq method – remember the method is a loop and you would be modifying the string during each iteration.
- Always put the heaviest bots at the start of the list, so they match sooner.
- Put the lists into a static class so that they are not rebuilt on every pageview.
Honeypots
The only real alternative to this is to create a ‘honeypot’ link on your site that only a bot will reach. You then log the user agent strings that hit the honeypot page to a database. You can then use those logged strings to classify crawlers.
Postives: It will match some unknown crawlers that aren’t declaring themselves.
Negatives: Not all crawlers dig deep enough to hit every link on your site, and so they may not reach your honeypot.
Best Answer
User agents can be faked. Captchas have been cracked. Valid cookies can be sent back to your server with page requests. Legitimate programs, such as Adobe Acrobat Pro can go in and download your web site in one session. Users can disable JavaScript. Since there is no standard measure of "normal" user behaviour, it cannot be differentiated from a bot.
In other words: it can't be done short of pulling the user into some form of interactive chat and hope they pass the Turing Test, then again, they could be a really good bot too.