Everything posted by sedsarq
-
Ouchy's F2P Guide To Firemaking And Woodcutting! ~ FIXED ~
Burning yews is slow? :shock: The correct verb is "are" not "is". And it's slow for me. Well, not slow technically, but slower than willows. And I'm around that level (67). Then why did you write "it's slow" rather than "they're slow"? Hypocrite! :mrgreen: Are you referring to me or Zapsi? I was referring to Zapsi-paps, if he prefers the phrase "Burning yews are slow" then he should probably also prefer the phrase "And they are slow for me". I mean, grammalogically speaking. Grammatically speaking, he's just plain wrong. Gotta love the quote tunnel... Russian dolls, anyone? :D
-
Ouchy's F2P Guide To Firemaking And Woodcutting! ~ FIXED ~
Burning yews is slow? :shock: The correct verb is "are" not "is". And it's slow for me. Well, not slow technically, but slower than willows. And I'm around that level (67). Then why did you write "it's slow" rather than "they're slow"? Hypocrite! :mrgreen:
-
The End To Autoers And PJers Everywhere!
wouldn't they just re-program their macros to stop and log out by the 1499th log/ore/fish and then do the last one manually?
-
IP-based Account Locks
Yeah but... They can't change their IP to an occupied IP... can they...? Can two computers share IP?
-
IP-based Account Locks
Are you sure you read my previous post? Solution #1 answers most of, if not all, your questions. 1) Test period. All configurations in-game (didn't mention that part, I know). 2) Yup, you need a password to get in-game :) 3) If you for some reason should get locked out, I presented an idea for a recovery system. 4) The IPs wouldn't function as passwords. Hackers may find out people's accepted IPs, but the hackers wouldn't be able to add or delete any such IPs unless themselves are operating from an accepted IP, which the test period should make sure wouldn't happen. I should get some pictures, these things are messy to talk about :) No big issue. Even though I believe Runescape would do much better without these people, the recovery system (still mentioned, last post, Solution #1) would, after a month or so (during which they'll have plenty of time to realise the importance of reading instructions), get them their accounts back. Well then you should either: A) Not have enabled the function in the first place. B) Add your friend's IP(s) to the "Accepted IPs"-list before you go to your friend. C) Wait til you get home.
-
The Examine Player Option! ~Updated 3/15/07~ 147 SUPPORTERS!
I support!
-
IP-based Account Locks
OK, so the problems are starting to stack. Let's organise! Problems: 1. An already hacked account could let the hacker lock the real account owner out. 2. Peoples' IPs change, due to *Dial-up connection *The Internet Service Providers *Dynamic IPs. *The users' own actions (re-plugging, re-routing, software stuff, whatever) This poses the same problem as in (1), locking the user out. Solutions 1. I'm thinking that we could have a test period, 1-2 weeks perhaps, to set the accepted IPs. During this period it will work as before: if you have the password, you have the account. There would be a list where you could either type in manually the IPs to which you grant access, or you could simply press a button: "Add Current IP". Of course, you would also be able to remove IPs from this list. Now, in order to "pass the test" and limit the account access to only these IPs, each IP on the list has to accept the others. There could be two checkboxes next to each IP, "Accept" and "Decline". So what you would need to do is log on from a trusted computer, add either only your current IP to the accepted ones or several by manually typing them in, then log on from a different trusted computer and add that IP if you didn't do so already. From this second you would also have to accept the first computer's IP by clicking the "Accept" button. Now back to the first computer and accept the second one's IP. It wouldn't be as complicated as it might sound. Should you now notice an IP on the list you didn't add yourself, thus an IP provided by a hacker, you press the "Decline" button. In these cases where there would be a conflict, you simply deny the account IP locked access and you are only qualified to try for another test period once you have changed your password. Should you choose not to enter an IP to the list, or if the Accept/Decline-boxes have not been filled in from all involved computers, it would mean that you do not wish to use the feature. However, you would be able to at any time start a new test period. You should also be able to quit the feature at any time, returning to the current system, in the case that you're moving or getting a new computer or whatever the case may be. The system would require you to have at least two trusted IPs, but I believe that's solely a good thing. Should you however lose access to all your trusted IPs, there could be a recovery system where you e-mail or by some runescape.com-based contact system ask Jagex for a new test period. This would be granted only if your account has been inactive for a set time, maybe a month or so. 2. This is a bigger issue. Now I don't know a lot about these things, but I know that you can detect location from IP adresses. Shouldn't you then be able to lock your account not to an IP, but to a region? Like my character, Sedsarq, would only be accessible from Sweden or preferably only from Stockholm. This system, in case IP-adressing works this way, would be safer seeing that you would have less chance of getting locked out. Then again, should you have a hacker in your area you wouldn't notice much difference than from how it is now. Still an improvement, though. Please keep finding problems and alternate solutions! I really wish to make this viable, and if you dislike getting hacked then so should you!
-
IP-based Account Locks
Feels like I'm the only one writing in my own thread right now, but who cares :) I was just thinking, even though I feel it's off-topic so please don't make a big deal out of it, about the banning. Why would they ban IP adresses to begin with, and not just the accounts? Shouldn't the ban evasion issue be solved simply by making the account, not IP, unavailable for a few hours?
-
IP-based Account Locks
I think I've been unclear somewhere, or maybe I'm just tired and don't understand you guys :) What I meant was not IP Blocking, just locking. You select one, or preferably a few, IP adresses (computers) to have unique access to your account. I do NOT wish to block unfamiliar IP adresses who log in to your account. This way, you have nothing to gain as a hacker. Changing your IP in one way or another still doesn't grant you access to a victim's account, unless the hacker's new IP is one accepted by the victim (which I don't think happens unless it's the same computer..). So basically, what you do is that you reduce the amount of possible hackers to the people closest to you. I think most people have better friends than to hack your account. Just don't tell them your password ;) Although I do see a problem now for people whose IP changes automatically every time they log on. Losing their locked IP would obviously mean losing their account. My personal solution (in case I get a computer breakdown or in other ways unable to use my ordinary computer and IP adress) would simply be to have several accepted adresses. If one goes disfunctional I can still log on from somewhere else, and in-game I could add and delete accepted IPs from a list as I wish. But I suppose there should be some kind of recovery system, as there is with everything else in RS security. Or, for the automatic IP-changers, maybe there are programs out there to keep your IP static?
-
IP-based Account Locks
I'm not sure if I understand, but... use a firewall?
-
IP-based Account Locks
I tried what you said, and it did not work. Then again, I have cable, not dial-up. Anyhow, I believe the number of dial-up users, for whom this function apparently would be pointless, is a minority (and would still have the option of not locking the IP) and the bigger part of the Runescape community would benefit from its introduction. Even if I'm wrong and dial-ups are the most common way of connecting, it's still an improvement to the others... Right?
-
IP-based Account Locks
Polite Presentation: Hi everyone, Sedsarq here. This is my first time writing on these forums, even though I've been a Tip.It visitor ever since shortly after the creation of my Runescape account, which was... ages ago... (hey, I even remember the introduction of item banking!). Anyways, I came across an idea just now and was surprised actually that I didn't find any previous posts on the topic, neither here nor on the official forums. However my searching skills may not be what they should, I apologise for double posting if that should be the case. Also, the reason I went through the "trouble" of creating a forum account here just to present my idea is that I'm a free player and can't post on the official forums. Therefore I would be glad if a supporter with member status would post my idea there. Thank you! The Idea: Well, like the subject indicates, I believe the introduction of account locks, based on your computer's IP adress, would be an improvement to the game. This means you would only have access to your Runescape account from one, or a few, select computers and greatly decrease the risk of losing your account, stuff or money to hackers and password scammers. Jagex already tracks IP adresses, which you probably have noticed. When you log in they tell you which IP you last logged in from and when. So why not just add a lock function to this? The only change would be that a person sitting by a computer other than the one(s) accepted by yourself would simply be unable to log on to your account. This feature could of course be optional, but honestly I don't see how it could be other than positive for everyone. I'm not suggesting an annoying and time taking security improvement like the bank PINs. Here, you wouldn't have to enter anything, except maybe that you once click a "Lock IP"-button and never have to think about being hacked again. WHO'S WITH ME!? :D Well? Anything unclear? Did I forget anything? Thank you for reading and give me your comments!