Make traffic count/increment only for agents with unique IPs.
tracked
Lucia Nightfire
Bots, whose owners have refused to declare them as scripted agents, continue to game traffic grid-wide and Governance has not been able to stop the problem and is probably too busy to combat the level of abuse.
This problem could be fixed overnight if the server would check to see if the IP of the account is already connected to the server. If there is more than one account with the same IP, then traffic will not be generated/incremented for any of the accounts.
This means if 100 accounts enter a parcel and each have the same IP, not one of them will generate/increment traffic. If one account is over a parcel generating/incrementing traffic and a second account enters the parcel with the same IP, neither account will continue to generate/increment traffic. Traffic generated by the previous account should be removed.
This was originally a feature request filed by Soft Linden, but I think this desperately needs attention again. It is such a simple concept, that implementation should be trivial. I say this as a scripter knowing the connotations of the word "simple". ;)
Log In
jackiewallace Resident
A new search and traffic system needed. At this moment the stats of the places are not realistic because the traffic generator games and bots. We don't know what places are really popular. The AFK places are problems too because they can fill the regions. So a new rule wanna good for AFK places -> AFK places can running only if somebody own a full region or homestead. These AFK places are generating false traffic datas because the residents haven't got activities, they are just parking there.
Zandrae Nova
looks at his household with three different SL players.
Nah. Find a better metric.
Darling Brody
NO!
Anyone on a VPN would be counted as one person.
Anyone in the same house, or campus of a university, at a workplace, etc would be counted as one person.
IP's are not unique enough to do this, but the machines MAC address is!!!
jackiewallace Resident
Darling Brody Easy to clone a MAC address...
Darling Brody
jackiewallace Resident True. However I am not talking about people deliberately trying to conceal who they are, I am talking about innocent people being lumped in with the bad ones because they share an IP address. IP's are not unique to one machine or even one person on the same machine. They can't be used to detect bots.
Peter Stindberg
Over here in Europe, it is rather common that multiple households in e.g. an apartment complex share the same internet-facing IP address. It's also very common that business parks share the same internet-facing IP address. Also, it is very common that IP addresses get dynamically reassigned once every 24 hours, so I could get the IP address that you had yesterday.
I understand where you are coming from, and I notice the things you describe, and if we talk 100's of accounts coming from the same address it might actually work. But I'd be careful with the low end of the threshold, as it might lead to false positives.
Lucia Nightfire
Peter Stindberg
What you cited has an extremely low chance of simultaneously occurring: Two or more users in the same geo-location, each having the same IP, each using the same platform (SL), each connecting to the same region/parcel at the same time frame.
The only exception might be with RL families playing SL together, but in that context I would think that their need for traffic might not be as important as the activities they engage in together.
This is nowhere near the problem of IP sharing/cycling one would have if they received the IP of someone who was recently estate banned.
Peter Stindberg
Lucia Nightfire It IS a small chance, but not as small as you seem to think. The student residence where our current working student lives at, houses 250 students, and they all have the same outward facing IP address. The business park where my company resides has around 70 on-site companies. If we assume an average of 5 people per company, we have 350 people with the same outward facing IP address. Sure, students and office workers are not the core users of SL, but the danger of false positives is real.
Your suggestion aims at hundreds of agents entering a parcel coming from the same IP. In that case, your suggestion WILL work. I just want to raise awareness about a too low lower limit of the threshold and its associated danger of false positives.
Lucia Nightfire
Peter Stindberg
Fair enough. We can ignore 2 agents over a parcel each sharing the same IP and see how it goes from there. ;)
Zy Butcher
Lucia Nightfire Even then, it is not like the feedback refers to 1 connection for IP, but that IP counts as +1 for traffic. This is reasonable.
Zandrae Nova
Lucia Nightfire
"What you cited has an extremely low chance of simultaneously occurring: Two or more users in the same geo-location, each having the same IP, each using the same platform (SL), each connecting to the same region/parcel at the same time frame."
Debunked: My roommates and I have the same IP. We play Second Life together, we're always on the same parcel together. There are 3 of us.
In my tiny social circle I know several (greater than five) other households that play together. Husband and wives with adult children, households of 3 or 4 roommates, etc.
SL Feedback
tracked
SL Feedback
Hello, and thank you for your detailed feature request regarding making traffic count only for agents with unique IPs. This idea has been brought up in the past and is currently tracked. We understand the importance of addressing bot-related traffic inflation and appreciate your insights on how this could be implemented. While we have no estimate on when this might be tackled, please keep an eye on future updates. Your input is invaluable in helping us improve Second Life, and we encourage you to continue sharing your ideas. Thank you!