Not planned Make harder for banned members to re-register with Evercookie

AlexandrosD

AlexandrosD

Active member
Evercookie creator said:
What is the point of evercookie? Evercookie is designed to make persistent data just that, persistent. Bystoring the same data in several locations that a client can access, if any of the data is ever lost (for example, by clearing cookies), the data can be recovered and then reset and reused.
Click to expand...
See more @ http://samy.pl/evercookie/

Anyone can easily change their IP address and delete their session cookies, something that allows banned members to easily re-register.
It'd be awesome if evercookie gets implemented somehow in xenforo. An add-on would also do nice I suppose. Test it by yourselves. You can even change your browser. It can still detect you :D
I have just suggested g0rn, the creator of Multiple Account Detection add-on, to use evercookie with his last add-on.
 
Upvote 11
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
Heu par-contre je trouve pas ou configurer l'addon ? oO
Après sur la page de dl en français, un utilisateur dit que ça block aussi les utilisateurs chez free...

Et je remarque que l'addon est présent dans le forum archive de xenforo.
 
Dac, vais tout de même tester, j'aurais vite des retour de toute manière.

Pour la configuration tu ne sait pas où ça se passe stp ?
Il n'y à pas de doc, j'ai regardé tout partout et je ne trouve pas où sait.
 
Non il n'y à rien, j'ai même regardé dans spam, inscription, utilitaire, etc.
Il n'est peut être plus compatible.
 
^^
Par contre ca me met le doute ce qu'il y a d'écrit... dans mes souvenir il marcher aussi pour pouvoir utilisé le site, pas que pour l'inscription
Empêcher l'enregistrement provenant de serveurs proxy ?
si cela est activée, tout enregistrement à partir d'un serveur proxy sera probablement bloquer.
 
If the use of evercookie is restricted to banned members only then this function would affect only a very small percentage of your users. Less than 0.2% in my case.
For those webmasters that regard this tracking function for banned members as malicious or invasive, please think for a moment about the functions that you are used to having which are at least as malicious and invasive: miserable / discouraged users, normal cookie tracking, ip tracing, etc.
This proposed function is not more invasive as the tools that are already there. Its not the tool that is problematic, its the way it can be used. If its only designed to block banned users, then that's a very legitimate purpose, because you are merely protecting your website from abuse. Some of the bans may be for law breaches.
 
Cookies, "flash cookies", local storage, and anything else related won't completely stop someone from registering again. It's all based on client-side obscurity. It's nice when it works, but unfortunately won't catch those who are aware of it. I've resorted to using cookies due to malicious users constantly re-registering with a new IP, email, name, everything. It helps, but ultimately runs on obscurity.
 
Couldn't browsers in "incognito" mode bypass this? They delete cookies on exit. I use this to visit facebook, in fact, as I do not want their tracking "garbage" littering my other cookies.

It's technology like evercookies that continue to give cookies a bad name. While I would not mind forcing these on banned members only, I just do not like the overall idea of evercookies...
 
Well, you can always install a cheap spare browser and when you are banned, uninstall it completly and then re-install it.
 
As most admins in the EU know there is a law in Europe now that requires website owners to inform their visitors of the use of any cookies. That includes both essential and non-essential cookies. The law also requires that this distinction is made in the information provided to the visitor. There is also software available to make it easier to inform users and visitors of this. I think if Evercookies is included within that information, it should be ok both legally and ethically.

The arguments against it make little sense to me. As some have said, you have the right to protect your website from abusive behavior. You also have the right to use cookies as long as it's done ethically and according to the law. But it makes perfect sense for XF to play it safe and not risk possible lawsuits.
 
Top Bottom