In post 0, chamber wrote:If you are going to embed an image, make sure its from a good source. If you are unsure copy the image and reupload it to a reputable image hosting source like tinypic, imgur, imageshack etc. If any images you hotlink trigger malware warnings because of the sites they are hosted on, you will be held accountable.
This doesn't sound like "blocking hotlinking" to me zor
In post 22, zoraster wrote:no. this is a much better solution than removing hotlinking altogether.
No, it's really not. You're punishing people that really don't know any better. That's dumber than we're claiming the people doing this to be.
This is really one of those things where if you want hotlinking, you need to understand the risks that come with it otherwise you just don't have it, or you host the images on the site and force them to go through some virus scanner on the way in or whatever.
We're saying you're accountable for what you post. And to my knowledge, chamber hasn't said they're going to ban you instantly if you do it or anything. I think that's fair.
And removing hotlinking is a TERRIBLE, terrible, terrible idea that will hurt the community until and unless we have some sort of image hosting on site. So yeah. If the options are (a) implement this change to minimize hotlinking from malware sites and (b) shut down hotlinking altogether, I'll pick b every time.
In post 27, zoraster wrote:We're saying you're accountable for what you post. And to my knowledge, chamber hasn't said they're going to ban you instantly if you do it or anything. I think that's fair.
And removing hotlinking is a TERRIBLE, terrible, terrible idea that will hurt the community until and unless we have some sort of image hosting on site. So yeah. If the options are (a) implement this change to minimize hotlinking from malware sites and (b) shut down hotlinking altogether, I'll pick b every time.
Well Zoraster, I majored in computer repair in college and something around 80-90% of the students didn't really know what they were doing when it came to fixing computers. Hell, I was the only one that could set up a dual boot of windows 2000 and xp. This is a group of people that were supposed to be computer saavy.
Now translate that to however many everyday people we have using this site. What is being suggested is that we hold that amount of ignorance accountable? It's just a terrible solution. Eliminating the source of the problem is a better approach to this. (Which is the fact that it's possible to hotlink to malware infected sites in the first place.) What's going to happen under this system is you're going to just spend ages stripping people of the ability to hotlink because of the constant wave of newbies who don't know any better.
Or you warn the newbie that they hotlinked to a site that had malware and describe how to avoid it. They're now on notice. If they continue to do it, remove hotlinking privileges.
Eliminating the source of the problem also removes the ability to embed photos onto the forum unless I'm mistaken. And that's not a good thing.
In post 29, zoraster wrote:Or you warn the newbie that they hotlinked to a site that had malware and describe how to avoid it. They're now on notice. If they continue to do it, remove hotlinking privileges.
Eliminating the source of the problem also removes the ability to embed photos onto the forum unless I'm mistaken. And that's not a good thing.
Unless you host them on site and only allow them to be posted that way.
Allowing hotlinked images is a risk, and it's easier to ban it than it is to try to tell a bunch of people how to do it right.
Is there a need on this site to be able to post images? Aside from avatars anyway, which can be uploaded.
Anyway I'm pretty sure on this other BB board I browse that it's possible to upload images when you post them onto a forum rather than hotlink. So it doesn't seem to me that it would be impossible to implement that as a feature to replace hotlinking.
Last edited by Zachrulez on Mon Jul 16, 2012 6:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
It's not really a need, it's just something we want around because it makes it a little more enjoyable. But let's not confuse that with a need.
Anyway, see 34.
My issue with the policy on top of it just being dumb on it's face is that you'll be scolding people who could very well have hotlinked from a site when it was clean and then through a series of bad luck from sites becoming infected after the fact they find themselves without hotlinking abilities.
*shrug* nobody would stick around if that's all we had. It's the bonus things that make the site good.
AGAIN, this is not that big of a deal either way. We're not going to be banning people willy-nilly cause they accidentally linked malware; I am guessing it doesn't happen that often anyway, and '*smackonthewrist* hey don't do that anymore, stupid' will pretty much solve the issue. *shrug*
In post 44, IceGuy wrote:Who needs formatting, ISOs and a search function anyway?
Well none of those carry any obvious security risks anyway.
ALSO FEEL FREE TO COMPLETELY IGNORE A PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE IN POST 34 ONCE AGAIN.
In post 45, quadz08 wrote:AGAIN, this is not that big of a deal either way. We're not going to be banning people willy-nilly cause they accidentally linked malware; I am guessing it doesn't happen that often anyway, and '*smackonthewrist* hey don't do that anymore, stupid' will pretty much solve the issue. *shrug*
It would amuse me if it turned out that the complaints about this are coming from people who are actually infected by Malware and not because the sites themselves have malware. The fact that the OP states only Chrome is blocking the pages makes me wonder. (I wouldn't say Chrome is any "safer" than the alternatives.) But yeah, I wouldn't assume anything about where Malware is coming from.
Last edited by Zachrulez on Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Well, you edited your post to insert it, so don't be surprised people missed it.
Anyway I'm pretty sure on this other BB board I browse that it's possible to upload images when you post them onto a forum rather than hotlink. So it doesn't seem to me that it would be impossible to implement that as a feature to replace hotlinking.
In post 4, Om of the Nom wrote:I came from a forum that was able to have images implemented in the posts as attachments. Is that possible to do on here?
Software side, yes. I don't know if the server could handle the extra load though.
Is there any way to filter IMG tags so they don't actually link the image if the url is not imgur, minus, flickr, etc? Or do an auto preview with a message about hotlinking?
So I'm reading the OP more and we're encouraging copying the images to a reputable source when the user is on a malware site so that the site itself doesn't get a malware warning.
So this just got stupider.
You're angry at the user, who is probably INFECTED WITH MALWARE BECAUSE THEY GOT THE IMAGE FROM A COMPROMISED SITE AND DON'T KNOW IT, and you want them to continue being infected, but while they are, just make sure you post it from a clean site?
