Public Safety Reassessment

[Black Angel]

I think also perhaps a better way to explain and educate people as well is a good way to go about this. Give tips on how to handle transactions as well as how to deal with help from people you don't know also will go well with protecting users from questionable and proven devious users.

Anyway, i agree that education is key, and even with your point about it not being anyones business, but I am not going to assume ill will over something that doesn't affect me and isn't my business, and could result in me looking like a jerk if I was wrong about it. You know?

But a note on education though, the old saying "You can lead a horse to water" applies here." I mean how many guides have we seen advising people not to use "1234" as a password, and yet people still do anyway.

Most of the articles I've seen regarding the "worst passwords" show the same few passwords or variations of them.

Despite the articles on this subject, and forums/sites destroyed over it, people still use "1234" as a password.

I think that we will still have the issue of users in this situation regardless of what happens, but it is still good that FP is stepping up.

Edit: I apologize if this or my posts were off topic, I was only responding to the person I quoted on the topic itself.

 

[Rick Ace]

I've updated the guideline to be more specific:

The swift response and clarification was remarkable. :great:

don't ask me why he took it out

I believe it was removed because FP wouldn't be able to confirm a person's identity and call it proof. That's really the job of law enforcement. I think the best judgement would need to be used for FP.

 

[John]

How exactly is it going to be proved that someone hacked someone outside of FP?

 

[R44]

How exactly is it going to be proved that someone hacked someone outside of FP?

Screenshots of log files (with plain text to back them up)?

 

[MasterA]

How exactly is it going to be proved that someone hacked someone outside of FP?

The person reporting will need to provide enough evidence to back up his claim. We will give the person accused of the action the benefit of the doubt. We will not perform any action unless we believe that the evidence is good enough to support the claims made by the report.

 

[D]

How exactly is it going to be proved that someone hacked someone outside of FP?

Screenshots of log files (with plain text to back them up)?

Both could be easily manipulated 🙁

 

[R44]

How exactly is it going to be proved that someone hacked someone outside of FP?

Screenshots of log files (with plain text to back them up)?

Both could be easily manipulated 🙁

Yes - but then it comes down to the trustworthiness of the user and the IP logs of the (if applicable) malicious access.

It's pretty hard to fake an IP unless you know the ip ranges for the area you're trying to do. And you'd cross reference it and stuff.