Hacker News Reader

Comment by javagram | Hacker News Reader

Adding a captcha seems nice but will hardly prevent fake comments.

I doubt there is any online comment system that could prevent people’s names from being misused really. It’s not like we have a national ID card with private crypto keys issued to every citizen or something.

How are you supposed to verify someone’s identity online without going through a laborious and expensive process (e.g. an in person interview, or requiring upload of a state or military ID number that is then used to send a postcard to the address on file asking for verification) that would then be criticized as discouraging public comment?

View on HN

I think the problem here is that whoever submitted those fraudulent comments impersonated tens of thousands of Americans. They assumed the identities of unwilling Americans to push an agenda without their consent.

Whoever was responsible for pushing those fake comments deserves a couple decades in federal prison for mass identity theft. Instead, the FCC used those fraudulent comments to push an unpopular agenda forward, pretending that they were legitimate despite the mountain of evidence that they were not.

As far as I am concerned, Pai is an accomplice to the crime of identity theft, as he knowingly benefitted from it and used it to his advantage, despite not orchestrating it.

> whoever submitted those fraudulent comments impersonated tens of thousands of Americans

I think it was a lot more though. Something tells me I'll never know for sure.

> Whoever was responsible for pushing those fake comments deserves a couple decades in federal prison for mass identity theft.

I fully concur, and especially so if there's more than one person. Conspiracy laws, anyone?

> the FCC used those fraudulent comments to push an unpopular agenda forward, pretending that they were legitimate despite the mountain of evidence that they were not.

This is absolutely the problem here. Damn the cost to the economy and ISPs for uncertainty: this is a Very Serious Problem and Congress should seriously undo the changes that Ajit Pai has put forward. Or is the government not of, by, and for the people?

> As far as I am concerned, Pai is an accomplice to the crime of identity theft, as he knowingly benefitted from it and used it to his advantage, despite not orchestrating it.

I concur, but beware lynch mobs.

I'm not saying it is the solution but the government already has systems which let you log in securely and verify identity, such as the IRS and SSA websites. Neither of them are much of a hassle to sign up for.

I think a slight inconvenience to signing up is better than having your comment drowned out in useless noise.

>Neither of them are much of a hassle to sign up for.

When I signed up for the IRS's website I had to verify my mailing address by receiving a letter in the mail. It's not a huge hassle but it delayed my account creation by about a week, and someone could argue (fairly, imo) that this would create a large enough barrier-to-entry to dissuade people from leaving their opinions.

Recently, the federal government has been internally promoting https://login.gov as an single sign-on system for all government services to the public.

I don't know how good it is at preventing fake accounts, but in my experience, it does get the basics right, with no max password length or character restrictions, and 2-factor authentication through phone calls or texts.

> 2-factor authentication through phone calls or texts.

isnt this bad? Tying to your phone number (while more convenient) provides another vector of attack (social engineering the telecoms to get device changed)

Or if someone loses their phone then there’s a window of time where an attacker can just pop in their sim.

You need both the password and the phone number, so compromising the phone number via social engineering still requires the password, and thus can't be less secure than just requiring the password.

That's… why it's called two factor authentication? Or are you suggesting they'd let you reset your password with just the phone number?

It also supports TOTP codes.

In general having a good national ID or at least national single-sign on solution might be the answer. Edit: It could take advantage of the IRS and social security verification paths (I believe they require a SSN and verification of a previous year’s tax return values).

There would still be some fraud, just as social security and the IRS both suffer from identity theft and fraud today, but the barrier to entry might be higher and in theory having a unified system would allow citizens to manage their identity and safety more easily.

Considering the FCC is having to ask for permission just to add a captcha I doubt our government is capable of anything like this right now though.

>It’s not like we have a national ID card with private crypto keys issued to every citizen or something.

Good luck with that. Every so often it is suggested that voters should verify their identity when going to the polls. Just presenting a drivers license, passport, state ID or social security card should suffice. It's a similar policy as in many European countries. And every time, there is a huge number of people who oppose it. A very surprising amount of otherwise reasonable people fight tooth and nail against any forms of verification.

Which is actually really silly as you need to present such stuff to sign up as a voter in the first place.

Which you may have done several decades ago.

If they created a national ID card that was mandatory for all citizens to have at all times I would agree with your sentiment but without one an ID is often seen as a cost for voting. When you live in poverty it's very easy to simply decide not to vote, especially when you already have to travel take time off work. It seems like a lot of us on HN haven't experience or don't understand what it's like to be so poor that you don't need an ID and don't have a bank account.

You're also comparing European nation-states to the United States which isn't fair in this case. US states have a great deal of autonomy and latitude. Since they issue their own IDs they can, and do, have their own requirements. First make a mandatory national ID a thing then you can complain about unreasonable people.

I know there are lots of rational arguments, but it's still funny to picture a vocal, outspoken radical voter worrying that if ID was required, the government might be able to figure out they voted for the vocal, outspoken radical candidate.

(I assume it's the more outspoken, more radical voters who do most of the objecting to ID laws- as it is typically those voters that get involved in just about any policy fight)

I've never heard the idea that opposition is because of government finding out who you voted for. I've always heard it be a case of voter suppression.

Because there are a significant amount of people who don't have any. Seriously, there are a lot of elderly people who simply have no need for a driver's license, so they don't have one. And if they're old enough, it's possible their birth certificate is not easy to get, or may even require traveling across state lines to do so. Where's the money for that trip going to come from? And for people who work, they're not always able to just take a day off to go to the DMV. And the DMV is only open during... working hours.

> How are you supposed to verify someone’s identity online without going through a laborious and expensive process

In Poland they have ceded the identity verification to banks since they do this anyway when you open an account and are quite diligent because, well, they are banks :)

If I need to send on-line communication to the government which requires my identity to be confirmed, I can sign it by going trough my on-line bank as if I were making a money transfer (login, password, 2FA using sms code).

Id + live camera video doing a certain motion every week

Reply on news.ycombinator.com