[Cibor]

I'm sure it would be great to have that

[morph]

Yes - it would be great. Could be abused though.

[ra1d]

This would be such a nice feature, extremely useful and I would definitely get my hands on it.

Question: Would you also be able to whitelist IPs that are from banned countries? (Not that I am from a banned country, but in case someone is...)

[Xerotic]

I probably wouldn't use this feature (I think it would be most useful for those who use a VPN), but I definitely think it is a good idea that others could use.

Potential for abuse? Sure, but banned members will always find their way back regardless.

[Seifer]

Although not that useful to me, what happens if someone is using a shared vpn and someone else on the ip breaks the rules? would it get re-banned?

[Regan]

I don't think it would be used that much, and shown by the thread replies I see the same reaction as mine.

or as Minimalist you could trial run it see how many people really are interested.

also very interested to see what you have to say about what V For Vendetta said.

[$lick]

Sign me the fuck up, that's some good shit.

[Omniscient]

Do you plan to charge for any IP change? Some static IPs may be changed from time to time so if someone comes to you and asks to change the IP, will they be charged extra $10?

A likely setup would be $10 for the IP addition. Then $10 for any extra IP's. And only $5 for an IP change swap (old IP is overwritten).

I asked if he is willing to replace a current IP with another one for free or for a fee.

Probably for $5 instead of the $10.

I think it'd be sweet if you did a limited trial run while you worked on an automated system to handle the whitelists.

Shouldn't be too much to code this. I'd create a system for automatic ordering and then I'd setup a separate system for me to quickly add IPs to whitelist. I'd review each IP and order before adding to whitelist. At least initially. There are still some firewall adjustments I need to make before I can make this 100% work.

Question: Would you also be able to whitelist IPs that are from banned countries? (Not that I am from a banned country, but in case someone is...)

Probably not because I use GEO IP targeting at multiple layers.

Although not that useful to me, what happens if someone is using a shared vpn and someone else on the ip breaks the rules? would it get re-banned?

The IP would be blacklisted. Possibly the account(s) would be closed as well.

Okay so, lets say a user wants to whitelist his VPS (let's take AWS as it's one of the most common ones), and he/she is UB3R on HF. They pay you $10 to whitelist the IP, and then the UB3R account NEVER logs into HF using his/her account, and instead makes a new account. What would happen then? This is the only abuse I can see so far, and I am unsure how this would be solved

Slightly complex situation. In your scenario the IP was never used by the original buyer of the whitelist. Which means the IP won't be in logs for the user but the IP is still associated to the buyer in purchase logs. Considering this would require Ub3r I suppose there would be enough account history to review the accounts and make the best assessment I can. Certainly I can't make a line in the sand rule for every situation.

[tim]

I would pay you for something like this, yes. It'd help me out TONS as I use VPNs for other sites etc.

[$lick]

Hackforums is the only reason I don't run a VPN 24/7, so I am hyped for this.

[Nicholai]

In terms of VPN services, might be a little off-topic here, it's in the end up to the user to be the responsible for their actions. Would it be possible to see a count of possible members that is using the IP-address provided? A feature like this could be useful, in case someone would buy a server to host a VPN on, to make sure that no one else is using that IP-address.

[V For Vendetta.]

Slightly complex situation. In your scenario the IP was never used by the original buyer of the whitelist. Which means the IP won't be in logs for the user but the IP is still associated to the buyer in purchase logs. Considering this would require Ub3r I suppose there would be enough account history to review the accounts and make the best assessment I can. Certainly I can't make a line in the sand rule for every situation.

Okay so let's assume the following:
For example person A is an uber on HF and whitelists the IP 0.0.0.1 (assuming it is blocked by HF and the IP is on a VPS).

Person B signs up to HF using the IP 0.0.0.1, and decides to scam, scamming for thousands of dollars during his time or gets banned/closed for breaking the rules.

Both person A and person B will get banned/closed correct? Or is it a case by case basis at your discretion?


Note: Person A never logs into the VPS 0.0.0.1 with his HF account.

[Egregious Jr.]

Good idea, but only for ub3r members. Or else it will get completely abused by multi-accounters.

[webdev77]

Unfortunately I connect to HF from multiple locations (3 normally). It be nice to have, but I probably wouldn't be willing to pay $10 per IP considering they would change too often.

[$lick]

Unfortunately I connect to HF from multiple locations (3 normally). It be nice to have, but I probably wouldn't be willing to pay $10 per IP considering they would change too often.

You would still be able to connect and use HF like normal, I think it's just for VPN ips that are blocked by default.