RE: Anti-Phishing Proposed Solution

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Anti-Phishing Proposed Solution

View the full context

valued-customer in Hive Learners • yesterday

I see no utility in applying stake as a metric. It would make far more sense to me to use rep. There are several stakeholders with far more stake than any reasonable stake threshhold that could maliciously manipulate such a mechanism profitably. Reputation is not so potentially manipulable, and is a more meaningful metric regarding trust. Rep threshhold could be set to, say ~250, which would require at least three high rep accounts to report a link as sketchy, while dozens of accounts possess enough stake to surpass any reasonable threshhold based on stake.

Otherwise this is a great idea, that may well keep people safer on Hive.

Thanks!

yesterday in Hive Learners by valued-customer

0.00 ALIVE

1 vote

Sort:

Trending

[-]

cwow2 yesterday

That would actually make Rep useful for something for once!

0.00 ALIVE

1 vote

[-]

dlmmqb yesterday (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 yesterday

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

0.00 ALIVE

[-]

dlmmqb yesterday (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

14 votes

[-]

valued-customer yesterday

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

[-]

cwow2 19 hours ago

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

0.00 ALIVE

[-]

valued-customer yesterday (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 yesterday

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

0.00 ALIVE

14 votes

[-]

valued-customer yesterday

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 19 hours ago

Good counter point <3

0.00 ALIVE

[-]

dlmmqb yesterday (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

14 votes

[-]

valued-customer yesterday (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 yesterday

Then only whales can trigger the report.

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

0.00 ALIVE

14 votes

[-]

valued-customer yesterday (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

[-]

dlmmqb yesterday

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

14 votes

[-]

valued-customer yesterday

How can rep be gamed in this usecase?

0.00 ALIVE