RE: Anti-Phishing Proposed Solution

cwow2 2 months ago

That would actually make Rep useful for something for once!

0.00 ALIVE

2 votes

dlmmqb 2 months ago (edited)

So u r saying world-travel-pro can have 76 reputation and keep false flagging while having rewards declined so we can't even reduce reputation.

Anyone with high reputation once gone anti hive can stop our ability to reduce their reputation while continuing to exploit phishing flagging feature.

0.00 ALIVE

15 votes

gwajnberg 2 months ago

high HP doesn't mean trust as well...

0.00 ALIVE

dlmmqb 2 months ago (edited)

A sum of all reporters should be more than x HP like passing a return proposal isn't easy.

So here flagging (reporting) with having a dynamic HP requirement. Passing it won't be easier so it takes collective TRUST.

0.00 ALIVE

cwow2 2 months ago

Wait. Cant the 3 biggest people on hive just pass any proposals anyways?

0.00 ALIVE

valued-customer 2 months ago

One really. That's why there's 0 accounting for any disbursements of DHF funds, and the principals of VP have absolutely refused to provide receipts to disprove credible allegations of theft by fraud.

All of us, the ~1964 users of Hive that aren't the ~36 whales that completely control Hive governance, should vote the Return Proposal until all proposals provide accounting for all disbursements of DHF funds. VP has spent $M's of our money with zero accounting, and we're just begging for thieves to steal our money at this point.

0.00 ALIVE

cwow2 2 months ago

I dont know the exact number. But it doesn't take a lot of whales to pass proposals x)

0.00 ALIVE

valued-customer 2 months ago

Too much pandering and too many riding on coat tails have all but disabled the Return Proposal from preventing the exact problem that is occurring, the profligate spending of funds intended to develop Hive for frivolous and larcenous purposes.

We all should be voting only the Return Proposal until the bleeding of our stake ends and all proposals commit to providing factual accounting for their disbursement of our money.

Without GAAP we might as well be throwing our money out the window, and have achieved exactly the results doing that would.

0.00 ALIVE

valued-customer 2 months ago

The reporting system does not require flagging. Perhaps that's the snag you're hung up on. Whether people flag or not, they can simply report the link as suspicious. Once enough folks have reported the suspicious link, attention from more eyes will likely enable flagging.

0.00 ALIVE

valued-customer 2 months ago (edited)

No he can't. He'd have to have >4 accounts to exceed the threshhold for triggering the report, all above 76 rep, with the threshhold at ~250.

"Anyone with high reputation once gone anti hive can stop our ability to reduce their reputation..."

How is that relevant? A single account with high rep cannot trigger the report when the threshold is set ~250.

0.00 ALIVE

dlmmqb 2 months ago

Let that sink in, you will see flaws in this system on your own.

0.00 ALIVE

valued-customer 2 months ago

Do you require that you increase the power of substantially staked accounts on Hive? I see no other reason you insist on linking reporting to stake. Several high rep accounts can report a suspicious link if you use rep as a metric. Any whale can report a suspicious link, and 10k minnows could not, if you insist on a high stake threshold for reporting.

Why do you insist on stake as a metric?

0.00 ALIVE

cwow2 2 months ago

Good counter point <3

0.00 ALIVE

dlmmqb 2 months ago (edited)

If u r talking about reputation score, anyone can get hacked with 60 or more reputation and it will take alot of downvotes to reduce it to negative score (till then, more accounts would be compromised).

This is a stake based system to protect the nature of decentralization.

If you are talking about few people reporting it, then have high requirements and u can follow proxy (same proxy proposal and witnesses but a sperate proxy feature to not merge with those 2) reports of anyone thus your REPUTABLE reporters can also fit in this current model. Sorry I am not understanding u currently. Do u mean reputation score? If yes, it's not effective in this wide spread airdrop scams and memo transfers. Some users recover account in 5 days at max so we have to negative reputation them which is a very serious punishment.

0.00 ALIVE

valued-customer 2 months ago (edited)

"This is a stake based system to protect the nature of decentralization."

Stake has utterly failed to decentralize Hive.

"...have high requirements..."

Then only whales can trigger the report.

Using reputation score enables longstanding users to trigger the report when at least a couple people report it. Using stake enables 1 whale to do so, potentiating manipulation for financial benefit.

"anyone can get hacked with 60 or more reputation..."

How does that game the reporting system? With the threshold at ~250, they'd have to have 3 accounts to overcome the threshold, even if the accounts were >80 rep.

0.00 ALIVE

dlmmqb 2 months ago

Then only whales can trigger the report.

Minnows can join proxy voting similar system for reports with collective power exceeding whales.

0.00 ALIVE

valued-customer 2 months ago (edited)

So, 10's of thousands of minnows would be required to exceed the high threshold?

Silly. Why? Also, all the minnows, dolphins, and orcas combined cannot exceed the majority of stake maintained by ~36 whales continuously since the platform advented in 2016.

0.00 ALIVE

urun 2 months ago

yeah is a retarded idea. Blacklist over multiple frontends and use swarm brain. This dude has no idea how the internet works. like buy 200k hive and scam ppl for a lot of cash to make it worth to outvote scams. LMAO

0.00 ALIVE

valued-customer 2 months ago

"This dude has no idea..."

I think he knows perfectly well. I think he's doing this on purpose.

0.00 ALIVE

dlmmqb 2 months ago

I see no utility in applying stake as a metric

I brainstormed all of edge cases and any system except stake can have some ways to game around the system. This is more edge cases proof.

0.00 ALIVE

valued-customer 2 months ago

How can rep be gamed in this usecase?

0.00 ALIVE

dlmmqb 2 months ago

The purpose of the post above was to spark a debate regarding anti-phishing solutions at the frontend level. If you suggest that these solutions should be reputation-based, I do not have a problem with that ATM. Currently, we need frontends to consider the fact that implementing anti-phishing measures at the frontend level will not kill the spirit of decentralization.

I see some flaws in the reputation system, but I either do not want to debate them or I am not a skilled enough debater regarding that specific point at the moment.

Since both you and I agree that frontends should take action, let us keep pushing this narrative so we can lower the phishing rate.

Thanks for understanding!
@valued-customer

0.00 ALIVE

15 votes

valued-customer 2 months ago (edited)

The devil is in the details. You haven't responded when I asked how rep can be gamed in this use case. You have neither addressed how using stake can be gamed in this use case when I point out ways that can happen. What is the real reason you are adamantly insisting on using stake as a metric rather than rep?

You insist on using a metric that will enable more centralization of power regarding phishing attacks on Hive, while trying to claim using rep won't work, that is not supported by facts. You don't lack debating skills, you lack factual basis for this insistence on stake instead of rep. Why?

0.00 ALIVE