Hijacked users should be held responsible for scams there hijacker causes.

[✔ P I X E L A T E D ✔]

Quick question. 

 

Should a user who was hijacked, that led to (for example) a chargeback which the hijacker used the stolen account, be responsible for the stolen items - so marked until he pays back. Generally, IRL this would happen, because of the users mistake (of clicking some link) why should someone else have to pay? 

 

[λngelღмander]

Well, although it sickens me to know there are people stupid enough to get scammed, I don't know if we should go so far as to hold them accountable for their stupidity. In the end, it's the asshole scammers fault.

[Liddojunior]

No. 

 

Well the only real problem is users not checking out users before doing cash trades. (or trades that a scam is possible)

Users not keeping up to date with information on steam and tf2 trading. Phishing links would be a fail if these user's were aware and not jump on offers that are too good to be true.

 

While it is the users fault for getting hijacked (and/or being scammed), they don't have control of their account and can't be responsible that they get SR marked

.

But I wouldn't agrue against a caution tag saying the user has been hijacked before and should be cautious when trading with them as they might be hijacked once again.

 

Having a system where a user can claim he has been hijacked and having the user marked on SR with a caution tag ASAP before the hijacked account uses it for scams, will be better than punishing the hijacked account. 

 

SR is slow and needs ways of improving scam prevention over their current punishment model. 

Show scam reports pending on the SR Page 

Make it so that you can quickly mark them with caution tags with pending investigation/reports. 

etc

 

Most users look at a page and see clean SR page when they have like 2-7 pending reports that mark the scammer after he has cashed out the goods. 

[✔ P I X E L A T E D ✔]

TBH I know this would never happen, its got too many problems. I just want to see whether you think we don't do this because we are too kind (we forgive them for there mistake) or because we can't, without Valves help theres not real reason why'd they paid back (unless for SR's sake).

 

Also, not every scam (of this kind) can be pinned on the buyer not checking out the user, a recently hijacked user can have zero signs of showing he's/she's been hijacked if he's/she's fast enough.

[Teeird]

No, just no.

[KingOfHeart]

I say Caution Tags for anyone who is hijacked.

To remove this caution tag, you must pass some kind of test to prove this will not happen again.

[There]

http://forums.backpack.tf/index.php?/topic/6046-up-to-what-extent-is-a-raped-girl-to-blame/

[FreeZie hc™]

No they shouldnt be held accountable and for example if you got your credit card stolen and the person who got it spent money the loss would be with the credit card company not the person who it got stolen from. But either way that is legal stuff, trading for money is NOT supported by steam everytime you click an empty trade they remind you have that, therefore you are taking a risk doing any paypal trade.

[Heated Bread]

I think they should be marked for their error.  For example, a steamrep tag that essentially says "this user was dumb enough to get themselves hijacked, thereby demonstrating a lack of personal responsibility for their own account".  If you can't be trusted to keep your account secure, I think that would be information that others would like to know ahead of time before dealing with you.

[Teeird]

I think they should be marked for their error.  For example, a steamrep tag that essentially says "this user was dumb enough to get themselves hijacked, thereby demonstrating a lack of personal responsibility for their own account".  If you can't be trusted to keep your account secure, I think that would be information that others would like to know ahead of time before dealing with you.

This is most stupid thing I've read all night.

 

Should people who get legitimately scammed get marked too?

[Heated Bread]

This is most stupid thing I've read all night.

 

Should people who get legitimately scammed get marked too?

 

Calm down.  There's no need for rudeness.

 

I am left to wonder why you would you bring scamming into this unless the point of my post was completely lost on you.  It's a matter of account security.  Steamrep is a tool that points out untrustworthy people.  I'd say someone who got hijacked is someone who's trustworthiness is questionable.  How do I know someone is actually the real account owner unless I have a prior relationship with them?  If they're been hijacked before, it could happen again.  For all I know, they're not currently in control of their account.  Some users even get repeatedly hijacked because their PC was infected.

 

If someone has been hijacked, I am going to be way less likely to trust them because they've demonstrated that they are unable to keep their own account secure.  Hell, some users even fake hijackings to get their items duped (this is already known) or presumably to commit other malicious acts without being held responsible.  Tagging for that may even discourage such behavior.

 

You shouldn't discount the idea so easily.  It may have some merit.

[Teeird]

Calm down.  There's no need for rudeness.

 

I am left to wonder why you would you bring scamming into this unless the point of my post was completely lost on you.  It's a matter of account security.  Steamrep is a tool that points out untrustworthy people.  I'd say someone who got hijacked is someone who's trustworthiness is questionable.  How do I know someone is actually the real account owner unless I have a prior relationship with them?  If they're been hijacked before, it could happen again.  For all I know, they're not currently in control of their account.  Some users even get repeatedly hijacked because their PC was infected.

 

If someone has been hijacked, I am going to be way less likely to trust them because they've demonstrated that they are unable to keep their own account secure.  hell, some users even fake hijackings to get their items duped (this is already known) or presumably to commit other acts without being held responsible.  Tagging for that may even discourage that kind of behavior.

People get phished because lack of knowledge/awareness.

People get scammed because lack of knowledge/awareness.

 

What you're suggesting is giving SteamREP more rights to screw over innocent traders. No thanks.

[Heated Bread]

People get phished because lack of knowledge/awareness.

People get scammed because lack of knowledge/awareness.

 

What you're suggesting is giving SteamREP more rights to screw over innocent traders. No thanks.

 

If they're so innocent and ignorant, then they probably didn't have much business mingling in with high level traders yet.  It's people like them that are the enablers of the kind of assholes that plague legitimate traders and make steamrep necessary to begin with.  I can tell you have a negative opinion of steamrep and you're bringing that baggage along for the ride here.

[Teeird]

If they're so innocent and ignorant, then they probably didn't have much business mingling in with high level traders yet.  It's people like them that are the enablers of the kind of assholes that plague legitimate traders and make steamrep necessary to begin with.  I can tell you have a negative opinion of steamrep and you're bringing that baggage along for the ride here.

I'm 100% on education of self protection against scams. Even "high level" traders get hijacked/phished from time to time.

 

Your argument is so asinine I don't even know how to respond to it, I'll just stop.

[Heated Bread]

I'm 100% on education of self protection against scams. Even "high level" traders get hijacked/phished from time to time.

 

Your argument is so asinine I don't even know how to respond to it, I'll just stop.

 

Show me a case where somebody got hijacked by not being stupid.  I can only think of one.  I heard that a certain well known guy had his account hijacked because steam support handed his account to the hijacker on a silver platter.  They were apparently to blame, even though the hijacker was able to get a hold of enough personal information to make it happen.  That's the exception and not the rule.

 

The rule is that 99.9% of people who are hijacked got in that situation by being total morons.

 

There is however one potentially serious problem with giving a tag out for people who have demonstrated an inability to maintain the security of their accounts, and I am kind of surprised nobody has mentioned it yet.  Tagging for it could cause some victims to attempt to lie and conceal information about their hijacking in order to hide the fact that they were hijacked due to a personal lapse in judgement.  Obviously in the hope of avoiding the tag.

[Woifi The Viking]

Show me a case where somebody got hijacked by not being stupid.  I can only think of one.  I heard that a certain well known guy had his account hijacked because steam support handed his account to the hijacker on a silver platter.  They were apparently to blame, even though the hijacker was able to get a hold of enough personal information to make it happen.  That's the exception and not the rule.

 

The rule is that 99.9% of people who are hijacked got in that situation by being total morons.

 

There is however one potentially serious problem with giving a tag out for people who have demonstrated an inability to maintain the security of their accounts, and I am kind of surprised nobody has mentioned it yet.  Tagging for it could cause some victims to attempt to lie and conceal information about their hijacking in order to hide the fact that they were hijacked due to a personal lapse in judgement.  Obviously in the hope of avoiding the tag.

Puddington was hijacked a simliar way than mattie. The director was hijacked, as well as some other top backpacks.

 

Polar Bear was hijacked when he was pretty sleepy and phishing links weren't so popular.

 

And there are still many people who never heard anything of a phishing link.

[Heated Bread]

Puddington was hijacked a simliar way than mattie. The director was hijacked, as well as some other top backpacks.

 

Polar Bear was hijacked when he was pretty sleepy and phishing links weren't so popular.

 

And there are still many people who never heard anything of a phishing link.

 

Just because someone is high profile doesn't mean they're incapable of acting foolishly.  I can only see that you gave one example similar to mattie's case, and I am taking your word on that because there was no proof provided. 

 

Naming those other people simply because they were hijacked doesn't mean anything, and you're even saying Polar Bear was phished.  See, that's a lapse in judgement.  The vast majority of people get hijacked because they downloaded something that infected them or they were phished.  Cases like mattie's are a rare exception.

 

You are responsible for your own account and everything that happens on it.  That's the way it should be.  If you can't fulfil that obligation, then maybe you shouldn't be placing yourself in situations that others might rely on you.

[Woifi The Viking]

Just because someone is high profile doesn't mean they're incapable of acting foolishly.  I can only see that you gave one example similar to mattie's case, and I am taking your word on that because there was no proof provided. 

 

Naming those other people simply because they were hijacked doesn't mean anything, and you're even saying Polar Bear was phished.  See, that's a lapse in judgement.  The vast majority of people get hijacked because they downloaded something that infected them or they were phished.  Cases like mattie's are a rare exception.

 

You are responsible for your own account and everything that happens on it.  That's the way it should be.

Yes sure mattie's case is very rare, I never said anything different.

 

What lapse in what judgement?

 

But ~98% of the people who got hijacked won't get hijacked again the same way again because they know now what happens.

[Heated Bread]

What lapse in what judgement?

 

Entering your account details into a website without that lovely green secure indicator next to the URL, especially when the link was given to you to click on by someone else.  I can't see this as anything but a laspe in judgement, whether or not you try to defend it with ignorance.  Same goes for downloading a keylogger.

[Woifi The Viking]

Entering your account details into a website without that lovely green secure indicator next to the URL, especially when the link was given to you to click on by someone else.  I can't see this as anything but a laspe in judgement, whether or not you try to defend it with ignorance.  Same goes for downloading a keylogger.

Ah that you meant. Well most steam links don't have that green little thing and I'm not sure if everyone noticed it.

[knavesmith]

Ah that you meant. Well most steam links don't have that green little thing and I'm not sure if everyone noticed it.

All login pages have that green thing and (I assume) all phishing links take you to a copy of a login page without a green thing.

[Woifi The Viking]

All login pages have that green thing and (I assume) all phishing links take you to a copy of a login page without a green thing.

I know.

[F CHARLIE]

@ heated bread

No one knows what the next thing will be but we know there are very smart people trying to figure out how to steal peoples stuff. Phishing is a common scam now but wasn't once. When you have been preyed upon you can't be held accountable.

 

I believe tierd would be ok with steam rep if it worked well (see most second and third world police). Imagine if they were vigorous and very responsive.

[Slocumruls]

Imagine that when you report your account as hijacked through a pre-existing support account they actually stop it from doing things until the claim has been investigated. wouldn't that be amazing.

[Heated Bread]

Imagine that when you report your account as hijacked through a pre-existing support account they actually stop it from doing things until the claim has been investigated. wouldn't that be amazing.

Wouldn't that also open up a potential for abuse?  Let's say for example that I create a new support account and pretend to be someone who I want to screw with.  I then claim "my account was hijacked!" and now suddenly their account gets automatically gimped until they sort it out with support or until support figures out that I'm not who I claim to be.