New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
As a customer, I've never had an issue with it.
As a curious customer I would like to know if I had any complaints against my name though even though I'm 100% sure I don't. I just would love to know if the below has ever happened to me, I've been with some pretty shitty hosts in my time..
Shitty hosts can be reported (by customers, or other providers) and be banned from making reports / retroactively have their reports pulled for abusing the system. This is the best means of dealing with systematic abuse that we could have hoped for as FraudRecord is now.
I personally don't hate FraudRecord as a provider, we only query it from time to time to see if we should be worried about orders that seem fishy to our team when we manually screen orders; often finding that the user has been from a known ROKSO or other malicious use.
I like the theory behind it, but it has too many opportunities for false/vindictive records. The fact that Jonny boy can nail any customer he doesn't like, and there is no actual verification of the issue is a tad scary. I haven't looked at the admin side recently, but can a host submit a report for someone who is not even a customer if they have enough details on them (like ip, email, etc)?
We need a fraud record for hosts too.
Great tool, keeps massively problematic people out.
39.58% peoples who is listed on Fraudrecord voted no.
@ATHK feel free to PM and you can signup and I will run a check for you?
Thanks @wych! I'm not too fussed I'm an honest person so it doesn't bother me much
I doubt you would have a record, at least based on what I have seen of you on the forums
.
Not sure if sarcasm lol..
I'll PM you tomorrow so we can look at it for the lolz, I also expect you to fake my record... For the lolz of course
A database is still small, otherwise is helpful for ideintifying long time spammers, fraudsters.
Question for Providers:
If you query FraudRecord with a prospective customer's information and one of the fields in your query matches an existing record, you get the record back.
Does FraudRecord show you which fields in the record match your query?
How much information does FraudRecord provide when a hit is returned?
Background:
Customer name collisions are quite common. There are many real people named "John Smith" or "Nguyen Nguyen", for example. If a provider gets a hit, is it up to the provider to run additional "limited field" queries to determine whether the hit matches the provider's prospective customer?
Edit:
The answer is Yes - the matched fields are shown, making it easy for a provider to see that if the prospective customer's name is the only match, then perhaps it is a mere coincidence.
You can see example reports on FraudRecord's website, by the way.
Thanks to cncking2000 for pointing that out in a PM, and also for helping me look up my own record (which has no hits).
It makes me worried - as a client - that it works like this, though. I'd like to think I'm a fairly good customer, and have never had issues signing up anywhere; I would hate for that to change because somebody decided to label me in some way. I can understand the whole system, and I agree that it seems effective, but I think there needs to be a way to retrieve your record (as others have said in this thread) similar to a criminal records check.
I know some people are thinking, "only bad clients would worry about this," but the reality of it is that there are malicious people out there, and some of them own hosting businesses. While you see this system as a mechanism to prevent abuse on your side, I see it as a way to potentially create abuse from a host's side. Please correct me if I'm wrong about anything here.
Edit: One usage I see it very fit for, would be customers instantly cancelling and posting bad reviews. I wouldn't want to take certain people as clients because of this. Like, people buying an unmanaged VPS, expecting it to be managed, and spamming complaints all over the internet.
Currently the only way for a common consumer (one without knowledge of the protocol) is to ask a reputable provider that you trust to provide your report. I'm sure businesses may spring up that will do this for you, but I would be careful as to who you pass your information over to (as they would need your information to query the system, hence me saying "reputable provider that you trust.")
If I were in web hosting, I'd try to get a hold of leaked lists of clients from hacked hosts (and possibly other leaks as well) and dump all those clients into FraudRecord while not using it myself. I'd do it under one or several bogus/shell hosting company.
Suddenly no one can order anywhere except for with me! I jack up my prices 200% and buy a medium-sized Caribbean island.
It's good.
But a few business are using it as a place to vent there frustration..
"customer ordered, didn't pay" is what I am seeing quite a bit.
Have they not thought maybe it's there system?
Here is a prime example of why hosts like GVH should never be given Fraud Record.
From a recent thread on WHT.
So based on this report even Datashack will reject.
I actually found this to be more interesting:
I have no problem with the report they filed with Fraud Record. I have every problem with a host respecting it...
@Jar
Extremely dangerous client? Really....
I looked, but could not find the referenced thread on WHT, which might have made a difference. I do not know the basis for Datashack's refusal.
I am not a provider, but based solely on the quote above, I would not want you as a customer either.
Think about it. that should be a negative review of that company, posted by themselves. The report is fine, giving it value is not fine. I would blame datashack for not using fraud record properly if this story is true.
Exactly my point , So you are saying, bollocks to the client, it must be true and I would not want him either.
I am not saying the client is right but it was an overly vicious report against a client who was simply impatient and got a bit arsy by posting his story on WHT. G** Jonny took the huff and wrote that awful report.
He was a typical impatient client who took his story to WHT, was he in the wrong, maybe, but it does not justify the report content and wording used.
But again this is my whole point, far too many are accepting of the reports, they stated they did indeed reject and refund the client solely based on the report at fraud record.
And thanks to @emg and @W1V_Lee, I shall not even approach FraudRecord.com.
Hello MaxMind my old friend!
Fraud Record is not bad, it was just brought up the wrong way.
Maybe not, but I personally find MaxMind more reliable.
I disagree with a number of your points.
"They have done it on the cheap."
Who are 'they'? FraudRecord was built by one person and is maintained by one person. It is a free community service.
"There is no easy way for a consumer to check that their name is clear or see whatever fraud reports"
This is false. You can easily go to the FraudRecord website, create an account and search for yourself ( http://www.fraudrecord.com/report-manager/index.php?action=make-query ). This is by far the most transparent and easily accessible process out there. Looking up a criminal record or full detailed credit report is more difficult (and/or more expensive) than this.
"There is no review or appeal process. "
They do have review/removal process. It is clearly linked on their website: http://www.fraudrecord.com/removal-process/
"Threatening a FraudRecord report becomes a tool that bad businesses can use as a threat to impose prior restraint on their customers to discourage them from posting honest reviews. "
The opposite is true as well. We've encountered numerous fraudsters and spammers who threatened to write negative reviews and publicly trash our reputation if we did not remove a negative FraudRecord report.
"There is no aging process."
Perhaps that would be a good feature to add in the future, but for now it is irrelevant. FraudRecord is a young service and any removal of reports due to age wouldn't be appropriate for at least a couple more years. Perhaps it would be better if a customer could reply to their report, so they can give their side to the story within the FraudRecord report.
FraudRecord has plenty of room for improvement, but I will say this:
FraudRecord has been by far our most effective tool in preventing the setup of ROKSO spammers and 'booter' operations. These individuals buy dedicated servers or virtual private servers across dozens of companies often with false information, but with FraudRecord we are able to catch a great number of them. Anything that is effective in thwarting professional spammers or network abusers is good in my book.
I read your post carefully, and concede the essence of your points. Before I wrote my original statements, I had looked at the FraudRecord's website, and not found much. Since then, I found more, and learned more.
I do not agree that it is easy to look up a fraud report - you must register first. A better approach might be to enter your email address, receive an automatic email from them, click on a link confirming that you own the address, and see your report.
There is a significant difference between criminal records/credit reporting, and FraudRecord on all three sides; it is not a fair comparison, but I'm sure you realize that.
Thank you for your considered response.
I wonder if the order system will tell the rejected customer that he is listed on Fraudrecord and provide information on how to get removed in-case of false positive listing. We at LET know about the Fraudrecord system but outsiders might don't know such system exists.
Just fyi, that GVH report turned out to be true. That client is really dangerous, it received 2 other reports from other reputable hosts, and even legally threatened fraudrecord as well. I have reviewed the case and decided to keep the reports.
As a provider, I've found FraudRecord to be extremely helpful in cutting out a heap of orders from known spammers. Spammers take up a lot of time and you can never fully clean IPs. Sometimes customers are listed for stupid reasons - like ordering but not completing payment- but we actually bother to read what a customer was listed for before making a decision as to whether to accept them.
Does it add confidence when the Owner of that service feels it's ok to try and justify the service telling us about other reports made against the person. Continuing to use very poor language that the client is "really dangerous" and refers to someone as "it". @Harzem should only ever display neutrality and never, ever comment publically on reports he holds.
This is a display of the very reason why regulation exists to ensure consumer protection when companies or more specifically random unknowns on the internet think they have a great idea.