Hisashi Posted June 22, 2023 Share Posted June 22, 2023 (edited) Hello, It could add to the system, a setting that forces users to change their email preventing access, when a certain address is added to the prohibition filter. I found some users with temporary email and added these addresses to the filter. Edited June 22, 2023 by Hisashi Marius 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfie Posted June 24, 2023 Share Posted June 24, 2023 Not to be a downer to this idea as I think it's a really good one, but I'm wondering how this would best be implemented. 1. When someone signs in? If someone is already signed in, then they wouldn't get flagged. 2. While active on the site? That could add a lot of CPU overhead to keep checking. 3. When the filter is added? What if the filter is immediately deleted because it was entered incorrectly? How would it go back and undo any accounts accidently flagged? 4. As a task? That could take awhile depending on how many members the site has. After all, it might be multiple new filters to compare existing accounts to. Again, I like this idea. I'd also like to be able to flag a user to change their email address via the ACP without needing a 3rd party app to do it. Hisashi 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hisashi Posted June 24, 2023 Author Share Posted June 24, 2023 (edited) 19 hours ago, Wolfie said: 1. When someone signs in? If someone is already signed in, then they wouldn't get flagged. Any user can be flagged within the account, this is nothing new. An example of this is the Terms & Privacy Policy 19 hours ago, Wolfie said: 2. While active on the site? That could add a lot of CPU overhead to keep checking. The IPS software handles this kind of task very well, it wouldn't be new if that was the issue either. 19 hours ago, Wolfie said: 3. When the filter is added? What if the filter is immediately deleted because it was entered incorrectly? How would it go back and undo any accounts accidently flagged? All tasks you perform in ACP must be done with care, in any case the user would only be forced to check the email again, you are not killing him. ---- Also, it could simply be a button on the user's profile in the ACP, the manual process could be annoying but it's better than nothing. I don't want to have to notify the user that their account will be blocked because they are using temporary email on my site, I want to let him make his choice whether to activate the account again or not. Edited June 24, 2023 by Hisashi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adriano Faria Posted June 24, 2023 Share Posted June 24, 2023 17 minutes ago, Hisashi said: Also, it could simply be a button on the user's profile in the ACP, the manual process could be annoying but it's better than nothing. Wolfie and Hisashi 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfie Posted June 24, 2023 Share Posted June 24, 2023 1 hour ago, Hisashi said: Any user can be flagged within the account, this is nothing new. An example of this is the Terms & Privacy Policy That's one thing checked per member per page, vs one or more (potentially 100 or more) per member per page. Imagine having a site like Neowin. Over 400k members and known to have upwards of 73k people online at one time (record high). Lowballing, I have no doubt that the site sees 1,000+ people online at a time daily. So imagine if 750 are guests, with 250 being actual members. Those 750 guests use up resources even though it doesn't have to do some checks as it would with a member. So there are some resources in use already. Then with the 250 members and undoubtedly (lowballing) 100 email filters being checked against each user each time they load a page. That's even more resources just to check if the member's email is suddenly part of a filter. Again, I'm actually in favor of your suggestion, but I've learned to consider potential resource usage. So when I was listing times it to check, it was to show potential problems with those times. It's food for thought, not a discouragement of the suggestion. If IPS were to implement the suggestion, it'd mean that they know how to pull it off in the most efficient yet effective (or effective yet efficient) way possible. I was only giving you something to think about. 😊 (Again, I like the suggestion.) 1 hour ago, Hisashi said: All tasks you perform in ACP must be done with care, in any case the user would only be forced to check the email again, you are not killing him. Everyone makes mistakes, no matter how careful they are. 1 hour ago, Adriano Faria said: I was thinking about your app when I did my response (I know you didn't respond to me). But I guess you saw my comment where I mentioned about not needing a 3rd party app. 🤣 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts