On 7/6/2011 9:31 AM, Stuart Dallas wrote:
On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 3:01 AM, Kirk Bailey
<kbailey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:kbailey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
On 7/3/2011 4:53 PM, Stuart Dallas wrote:
Only allowing them to access the URL once is a bad idea.
If their download fails, is corrupt, or any number of
other things go wrong (think accelerators, browser
accelerators, etc) then you end up with a lot of support
mail. Better to give them access for a short period of time.
Ok, so it just got more complex- if we let them do it twice,
ior three times, we have a more complex design specification;
if we let them do it unlimited times, we just defeated
thepurpose of the exercise. How about this: if it fails, the
customer can email us, adn we can reply with a copy as an
attachment; a ripoff artist will not be in the log, and a
complaint of failure to download gets them nothing.
I don't see how it got more complex.
IT IS SIMPLER TO IMPLEMENT IF IT WORKS EVERY TIME A LEGITIMATE CODE
IS PRESENTED IN THE URL.
If there is a list of valid passwords and it does not change, the
password will work every time. A clever hacker makes 1 purchase and
uses this over and over to steal other products- not good. We need
to remove the password after it is used.
IF the first time it is used the password code is deleted from a
file, it cannot work a second time. That is a mild increase in
complexity.
If we want it to work more than once, then we argue- how many is
enough? And how do we track uses? If they got product the first
time, the second ( and third, and fourth...) permitted uses are
there waiting for a cleve hacker to steal product. And if we build a
mechanism to verify successful delivery or product prior to deleting
the password, it is more complex still. So we need to take time to
think about this in detail.
If we allow it once, and delete is as part of the vend process, we
also can offer a contact link should they have problems with the
download.
You need to verify that the user has paid for the file(s) they are
trying to access, all this does is add an expiry timestamp to that
access rather than a counter.
I'm not sure what you're purpose is with this exercise, but
usually this sort of thing aims to provide customers with the
digital assets they've purchased in a way that's easy for them to
understand and use, limits expensive support costs, and protects
the assets from being downloaded without first being purchased.
And for me, the priorities are in that order.
What do you think you gain by limiting the link to a single use?
If you think you're preventing them from passing it on to other
people, then yes you are, but if you do that then they'll simply
send the digital file instead so you're actually trading a poor
user experience and increased support costs for practically no
benefit.
-Stuart
--
Stuart Dallas
3ft9 Ltd
http://3ft9.com/
--
end
Very Truly yours,
- Kirk Bailey,
Largo Florida
kniht
+-----+
| BOX |
+-----+
think
