6 ms·

How do you solve problems arising from bad actors without an object representing the user?

psanford 5y ago
We're just talking about software delivery here. Its the same as Debian not requiring you register before using `apt` to install packages (or every other linux distro).
- bduerst 5y ago
  The article gives specific examples like virtual meeting software that doesn't have users, just URLs. It's more than that.
  - hedora 5y ago
    The solution for that is easy: Don't share the new URL with someone that was a jerk in the past. (And don't make it easy to guess meeting URLs)
    - bduerst 5y ago
      How do you share a URL without a user representation to share with? How do you prevent others from sharing URLs with bad actors? Or meeting passwords? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoombombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoombombing
      - tedunangst 5y ago
        You send the url to your friends however you like. Email, chat, QR code. You don't send it to people who aren't your friends.
        bduerst 5y ago
        > How do you prevent others from sharing URLs with bad actors? Sure, but then the student who shares their interactive class URL (w/ or w/o password) on 4chan still isn't accounted for.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        krageon 5y ago
        Your argument boils down to "I came up with one scenario where this is bad, so it can't work at all" and I find this dissatisfying. If this hypothetical student "shared" their user account and then disavowed giving it out, you would have the same issues.
        bduerst 5y ago
        My original question is: >How do you solve problems arising from bad actors without an object representing the user? In response to the argument that user objects are no longer needed, even for something like virtual meetings. The scenario of zoombombing isn't something "I came up with", it's a real life scenario that having a user object helps prevent bad actors with. In the event of a user sharing their account, you would know who it was and be able to hold the bad actor accountable, as opposed to a meeting URL being shared. I think the better question is why you are so hostile to the idea of user accounts having utility.
        eighthave 5y ago
        Jitsi lets you set room passwords, and it is also very easy to create a new Jitsi room, so you can easily send a new URL around as needed.
        bduerst 5y ago
        >Sure, but then the student who shares their interactive class URL (w/ or w/o password) on 4chan still isn't accounted for. Emphasis added. You could create user-specific passwords, but that would require... users.
wpietri 5y ago
It depends on context, but often having an object representing the user is at best a speed bump to a bad actor. Social media's an obvious example here. I know Twitter does quite a lot to limit bad actors, but the outcome is still not great. The vast bulk of sites want to make signup easy, meaning user objects are cheap. Cheap user ids are easily disposed of and replaced. So if you need to keep bad actors out, user accounts may not help a ton.

We're just talking about software delivery here. Its the same as Debian not requiring you register before using `apt` to install packages (or every other linux distro).

bduerst 5y ago
The article gives specific examples like virtual meeting software that doesn't have users, just URLs. It's more than that.
- hedora 5y ago
  The solution for that is easy: Don't share the new URL with someone that was a jerk in the past. (And don't make it easy to guess meeting URLs)
  - bduerst 5y ago
    How do you share a URL without a user representation to share with? How do you prevent others from sharing URLs with bad actors? Or meeting passwords? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoombombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoombombing
    - tedunangst 5y ago
      You send the url to your friends however you like. Email, chat, QR code. You don't send it to people who aren't your friends.
      - bduerst 5y ago
        > How do you prevent others from sharing URLs with bad actors? Sure, but then the student who shares their interactive class URL (w/ or w/o password) on 4chan still isn't accounted for.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        krageon 5y ago
        Your argument boils down to "I came up with one scenario where this is bad, so it can't work at all" and I find this dissatisfying. If this hypothetical student "shared" their user account and then disavowed giving it out, you would have the same issues.
        bduerst 5y ago
        My original question is: >How do you solve problems arising from bad actors without an object representing the user? In response to the argument that user objects are no longer needed, even for something like virtual meetings. The scenario of zoombombing isn't something "I came up with", it's a real life scenario that having a user object helps prevent bad actors with. In the event of a user sharing their account, you would know who it was and be able to hold the bad actor accountable, as opposed to a meeting URL being shared. I think the better question is why you are so hostile to the idea of user accounts having utility.
        eighthave 5y ago
        Jitsi lets you set room passwords, and it is also very easy to create a new Jitsi room, so you can easily send a new URL around as needed.
        bduerst 5y ago
        >Sure, but then the student who shares their interactive class URL (w/ or w/o password) on 4chan still isn't accounted for. Emphasis added. You could create user-specific passwords, but that would require... users.

wpietri 5y ago

It depends on context, but often having an object representing the user is at best a speed bump to a bad actor. Social media's an obvious example here. I know Twitter does quite a lot to limit bad actors, but the outcome is still not great. The vast bulk of sites want to make signup easy, meaning user objects are cheap. Cheap user ids are easily disposed of and replaced. So if you need to keep bad actors out, user accounts may not help a ton.