This is marketing copy so I assume that the sentence was deliberately constructed.
> We know a third of web traffic comes from bots with their insatiable appetite for attacks.
I read that run-on "with their" as a universal quantifier. There are no bots in that sentence that do not have an insatiable appetite. They could have added that quantifier to indicate the subset of bots they refer to:
> We know a third of web traffic comes from THOSE bots WITH AN insatiable appetite for attacks.
or even, simpler:
> We know a third of web traffic comes from bots with AN insatiable appetite for attacks
That's how I read the grammar. Language can be slippery, and can be made slipperyer. If we read it different ways we read it different ways.
To your question, of course those things are bad, and of course people use bots to do this. They also use web browsers and humans to do it. Some bots are bad. Some people are bad.
> We know a third of web traffic comes from bots with their insatiable appetite for attacks.
I read that run-on "with their" as a universal quantifier. There are no bots in that sentence that do not have an insatiable appetite. They could have added that quantifier to indicate the subset of bots they refer to:
> We know a third of web traffic comes from THOSE bots WITH AN insatiable appetite for attacks.
or even, simpler:
> We know a third of web traffic comes from bots with AN insatiable appetite for attacks
That's how I read the grammar. Language can be slippery, and can be made slipperyer. If we read it different ways we read it different ways.
To your question, of course those things are bad, and of course people use bots to do this. They also use web browsers and humans to do it. Some bots are bad. Some people are bad.