[Asuna_mybb_import7736]

Banning a member just because he sent a false donation...Don't you think its plain stupid?

He was exploiting a vulnerabillity.

[Ex094]

Banning a member just because he sent a false donation...Don't you think its plain stupid?

He was exploiting a vulnerabillity.

Maybe but we are not sure about this yet, IF bluedog and 1llusion have been informed about this then they might tell us the real reason

[Linuxephus™]

Banning a member just because he sent a false donation...Don't you think its plain stupid?

Banning a Member for making a false donation would indeed be plain stupid.
No argument to that.
Banning a User who has yet to make Member status, viz., that 25 post count that usually indicates they've earned that right to be referred to as a Member, no, that's not stupid, that's standard protocol by the rules we moderate.
Notwithstanding, there was previous cause to Ban him for dual accounting (Noobster/Nooby).
You'll find the specifics of that in Staff Headquarters along with the pertinent Screenshots accordingly. Of which my default action with Nooby directly (after banning his Noobster account) was to warn him at 90%.
However, after ILoveYou's thread here, I took into the account the immediate circumstances including the User's HC Coin count and moved to ban the User on all counts.
And naturally, if I'm wrong and I'm missing something, which is entirely possible, then it's my arse that takes the consequences. And I'm never above admitting to being wrong and making it right.
Yet that remains to be seen as of yet if a mistake in judgement on my part was actually made.

[1llusion]

Well, I'd say pentesting time. I'll spam a little donations to bluedog to see what is going on. Thank you for the reports!

[Linuxephus™]

Well, I'd say pentesting time. I'll spam a little donations to bluedog to see what is going on. Thank you for the reports!

Duly noted and thanks.
At least this way all of us will know beyond any further educated guesses.
And if I made a mistake, don't hesitate to post it here publicly.
Until then...The Game Is Afoot!

[bluedog.tar.gz]

Well, I'd say pentesting time. I'll spam a little donations to bluedog to see what is going on. Thank you for the reports!

Thanks, let me know. I currently do not have alot of time.
This weekend I will look into it while having a eye out on HC.

[LightX]

Well, I'd say pentesting time. I'll spam a little donations to bluedog to see what is going on. Thank you for the reports!

Feel free to spam some donations my way as well!

[1llusion]

I've done some pentesting and I can't see any hole in the donation system. What exactly was the user doing wrong? There isn't really any information except that he donated HCC and that he had 11 HCC and later 13 HCC.

[Linuxephus™]

I've done some pentesting and I can't see any hole in the donation system. What exactly was the user doing wrong? There isn't really any information except that he donated HCC and that he had 11 HCC and later 13 HCC.

If you peruse the image I screenshot and then uploaded on page 1, you'll note the User "donated" 4 HCC to at least 4 Members, including me. Except he didn't have the Coins to "donate" (4x4=16) because when he started his "donating", he started with 11 HCC and finished with 13 HCC.
Thus, if it wasn't a vulnerability like I thought, then it was an attempt at Social Engineering with at least 1 successfull target made.
Which is where the charge of "faking a donation" came into play.
Also keep in mind for the public record I made note of his HCC count (11 HCC) before and during the process that the User spammed the "donations", screenshot the events, and gave it no further thought until another Member (ILoveYou) publicly posted the charge, which is what I was awaiting to have the proper means to follow protocol on the matter.
No vulnerability, I'll take your expert word on that with absolute certainty and no doubts thereof. Yet it remains the User accomplished at least 1 successfull endeavor. Which I still think may have been a "bug" in the system as it coincided with the same period of time that Bluedog was pushing updates for install.
Nonetheless, if it was neither of those, then it was a Social Engineering exploit used with the human factor being the weak point.



Additional information: To this very date, no single individual has donated a single HCC to the User, nor has the User at that point in time made a comment to earn HCC (made note of on Page 1).
And I stated at least 4 Members were "donated" to, the exact count is 6 Members who were "donated" to, with-out the User actually having the HCC to "donate" that much (6x4=24).