LPLockdown - If You Like Giving Your Pages Away

Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe I'm naive but I didn't think I had to worry about mods and members being "sneaky" on this forum. I have to take precautions, when I visit those other forums I didn't know, nor thought I had to worry about mods/members actively collecting data for over a year now, on this forum.

Is collecting member data on WF, OK as long as your "sneaky" about it? Is this the general consensious among management and mods?
 


kyleirwin said:
As to how our blacklists are built, mostly logs from pixels on known "affiliate hang out" websites. That is no secret. But we don't simply drop all the IPs into a database and call it a day. All the collected user data (much more than just an IP) is run through our scrubbing algorithm that we have been developing and testing over the last 5 months , to ensure that desirable traffic isn't blacklisted. While it's not absolute perfection (I don't think any algorithm can be), it does do a very good job.
Click to expand...

LOL @ 150,000 Ip's from WF. In the last few years I've logged into WF several times a day from multiple cities/airports from my aircard or public Wifi. Check it.

Half of those might be mine.

That better be one hell of an algorithm.
 
I feel this isn't so much about you god-awful joke of a rebill script.... it's cos your a big-mouthed ugly ginger child who got mod status on a board and built buzz about yourself through trash talking. People just don't like you Nicholas.

Ha ha.. Sucks to be you.
 
LotsOfZeros said:
LOL @ 150,000 Ip's from WF. In the last few years I've logged into WF several times a day from multiple cities/airports from my aircard or public Wifi. Check it.

Half of those might be mine.

That better be one hell of an algorithm.
Click to expand...

Im sure part of the algo might contain something that checks an IP at one forum and seeing if it logs into another forum/blog/chat area. That could help weed out single IP usage or mishaps. However, it wouldnt weed out things like GoogleBot or spiders, unless you reverse whois them and weed them out that way or have a list of already known spider bot IPs and deduct them out.
 
eliquid said:
true
Click to expand...
Actually, it is a non sequitur. It doesn't make any sense. Jon's brand takes a hit from this. People are less likely to feel comfortable being on a forum where their data is being scraped by a mod. I'd be interested to hear what Jon thinks about this.
 
guerilla said:
Actually, it is a non sequitur. It doesn't make any sense. Jon's brand takes a hit from this. People are less likely to feel comfortable being on a forum where their data is being scraped by a mod. I'd be interested to hear what Jon thinks about this.
Click to expand...

I could see where at first glance a year ago maybe Jon didnt care, but now that it has caused a problem I can see someone wanting to have less involvement with it and fixing the issue, while still not really caring to much maybe.

Look at the government, happens all the time on both local and federal issues.
 
eliquid said:
Im sure part of the algo might contain something that checks an IP at one forum and seeing if it logs into another forum/blog/chat area. That could help weed out single IP usage or mishaps.
Click to expand...

What about people like myself who do not log into Warrior/DP or any other forums? Do I make it through? Just too many points of failure with that.
 
LotsOfZeros said:
What about people like myself who do not log into Warrior/DP or any other forums? Do I make it through? Just too many points of failure with that.
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not.. maybe his algo is really not as straightforward as if IP found then cloak.. maybe it works on a numerical ranking system like a lot of email spam programs.

Who knows except cakes and kyle
 
eliquid said:
Maybe, maybe not.. maybe his algo is really not as straightforward as if IP found then cloak.. maybe it works on a numerical ranking system like a lot of email spam programs.

Who knows except cakes and kyle
Click to expand...

Still leaves holes. I have been at my clients' sites logging in from their domains. I doubt it would weed out IP addresses coming from trusted Fortune 500 companies' intranets. Same goes for other members here who check WF from their desks at work.
 
LotsOfZeros said:
Still leaves holes. I have been at my clients' sites logging in from their domains. I doubt it would weed out IP addresses coming from trusted Fortune 500 companies' intranets. Same goes for other members here who check WF from their desks at work.
Click to expand...

But at the same time, why would a fortune 500 IP be hitting WF of all places? ( with the exception of something like google/yahoo/msn type companies ). The only people coming here are looking for affiliate marketing type info.. or possible skittles thread.
 
eliquid said:
also, do you visit cakes blog, or his chat?
Click to expand...

It's been a long time. Even if I did, then great, he's confirmed 5 of my possibly hundreds of IP addresses.

Hell, one easy way for me to get around any of this is for me to log into one of my client's servers via RDP and get on WF that way. Servers that are spread out over several hundred different IP addresses and physical geo locations.
 
LotsOfZeros said:
Still leaves holes. I have been at my clients' sites logging in from their domains. I doubt it would weed out IP addresses coming from trusted Fortune 500 companies' intranets. Same goes for other members here who check WF from their desks at work.
Click to expand...

This would just end up leaving a false positive though, which in the end happens sometimes with cloaking programs. Just the nature of the beast
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom