@SmokeDetector This might be some of the "koa" spam posted today, given the question is mod-deleted, and the user is deleted. This doesn't look like the other questions though, so giving this fp until further evidence.
@Mast There's a question on Teams about this, in case you haven't seen it. I've posted an answer to it saying the same thing as above, but so far there's no agreement (at least based on voting) as to how the generic "system-level block" guidance should be interpreted.
@Nick It's part of a series of koa posts made recently meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/418986. I don't know exactly what's going on there, i.e. what the goal of posting all those questions is, but site mods seem happy with spam flagging them.
@SmokeDetector tpu- Doesn't really answer the question, and appears to be an excuse to link to their own papers on archive (both linked articles are by the same author, and the second one was uploaded last week.)
@Mast No evidence of spam, just plagiarism and NAAs. Looks like they're apparently working for Google Cloud Platform Support according to their profile, which I only noticed after handling all the posts...
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted website in body, link at beginning of body, potentially bad ip for hostname in body, potentially bad keyword in body, potentially bad keyword in title (141): pg slot ทุนน้อยก็รวยได้ by รา เฟรม on stackoverflow.com
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Link at end of answer, potentially bad ip for hostname in answer, potentially bad ns for domain in answer, potentially bad keyword in answer, potentially bad keyword in username (65): Запись в файл данных из feed by priyank ossisto on ru.stackoverflow.com (@Nicknamegoeshere)
@Makyen That pattern looks like it's already caught by Potentially bad keyword in answer and Potentially bad keyword in body Append -force to the command word(s) if you really want to add the pattern you provided.
Matched by the following: (?:zero|one|two|three|four|five|six|seven|eight|nine|ten)\b(?!.{0,25}three\W++four\W++five\W++six\W++seven\W++eight\W++nine)(?:\W++(?:p\W++)*+(?:zero|one|two|three|four|five|six|seven|eight|nine|ten)){8,}+(?!(?:[^<]|<(?!\/?code>))*+<\/code>) on line 23446 of watched_keywords.txt nine[\W_]*+one[\W_]*+nine[\W_]*+six[\W_]*+zero[\W_]*+one[\W_]*+five[\W_]*+five[\W_]*+seven[\W_]*+seven[\W_]*+four[\W_]*+zero on line 40714 of watched_keywords.txt
@SmokeDetector naa- completely unintelligible, doesn't answer the question asked ("without using eval()") even if I could tell what it was trying to say, because the one thing I can tell is that it uses eval.
