I have a problem with the "Data Safety" section.
There are about 200 apps in my GooglePlay developer account.
In all applications, the "Data Safety" section was initially filled out incorrectly, I did not take into account the "AdMob" advertising factor, which collects user data.
Now I want to correct the situation and change the status in the "Data Safety" section. However, I have concerns that with such large-scale changes, not only those applications where I have already fixed everything, but also those where I have not yet managed to make corrections at the time of the start of the review, will inevitably fall under the test. As a result, I will receive a lot of criticism and the account will be banned. Can someone suggest a way out?
Does it make sense to disable applications for a while - transfer them to the "Unpublish" status, make changes to the "Data Safety" and "Adversity ID" sections, and then submit them for verification in small batches?
First of all having 200 apps on one account is very risky with Google play, you may got banned just because you have that many apps.
You can export a data safety form from an correct app using Export to CSV then Import from CSV to other apps. this is much much quicker than filling all safety report by yourself.
I do not recommend unpublishing your apps, because the Admob ads will be restricted.
Related
I have a Lotus Notes database design that I'm working on in which a user will request a data change that requires manager approval.
My concept is to automatically email the relevant manager with the details of the request using the NotesDocument.Send(True) to attach the form. This form displays the relevant information and has two buttons, to either approve or refuse the request without having to open the original document in the front-end. This is all fine and doesn't present any problems.
However, I've recently been told that the users will soon be switching to Outlook. Is there a way of doing the same. The users will still be using Notes for all our bespoke systems, just not for mail or calendar, so I can potentially add links to the document.
One thought I had was to supply two links to the document, with different parent views, and then have the QueryOpen code use NotesDocument.ParentView to ascertain what action to take. The downside to this is that the UI focus will switch to Notes.
Any other suggestions, such as links/buttons that will email back to a mail-in database with a subject like "REF 0012345 APPROVE" or "REF 0012345 REFUSE"? Can that be written in a Notes email doc to go to outlook?
You can create an HTML email including two (or more) buttons. On click you call an agent by Url and have the action and the target as parameter.
Look for the following command in the designer help:
?OpenAgent
For sure the http task has to run on the domino server.
Best
Thilo
I'd go with the approach of two links going to an agent, with one link ending in ?OpenAgent&Approve&Ref=xxxxxxxx and the other ending in ?OpenAgent&Refuse&Ref=yyyyyyy.
Here's why...
I'm not saying this will happen in your organization, but in a lot of organizations the move to Outlook for email has been the prelude to reducing the number of Notes clients that are installed. The Domino servers live on for years, but there are fewer and fewer clients. It gets to the point where it is only installed for users who need the client for business-critical applications. As time goes on, fewer and fewer people have Notes clients and eventually, the question will come up about why all managers need to have the Notes client. Since you're designing this now, you might as well take that into consideration and provide for the day when most managers will not necessarily need a Notes client.
I am many errors on my Maps API Console.
I am the website owner, not the developer or webmaster.
Got an email from Google about new pricing. Below is the email.
Today we are announcing important changes, including our new name - Google Maps Platform, a simplified product structure, pay as you go pricing for all, and more. Please take a few minutes to review the announcement to familiarize yourself with the upcoming changes.
We would like to highlight a few updates that may impact your implementation. Beginning June 11th, we are launching our new pricing plan and providing all users access to support. We’ll continue to offer a free tier — all developers will receive $200 of free monthly usage of our core products.
How does this affect your current account(s)?
Based on your usage over the last 3 months and our new pricing plan, we estimate that your monthly cost will exceed the current $200 free tier.
I am trying to figure out why I have so many API calls.
I am seeing in the console, that in the "Google Places API Web Service" I have alot of "Zagat content in the Places API" calls, and they all result in error.
I am trying to figure out how this is happening, but not finding any info online. I see that the "zagatselected" parameter was discarded May of 2017. I can not figure out what is causing these errors.
Everything has been working fine, I have my own API key, and have for a long while. The only reason I am really looking into this, is because Google will now start charging me monthly.
Is it possible you expose your Maps API key to the client, don't have any restrictions on it, and someone else is calling the API/raising those errors?
If you have a snippet of code like this....
<script src="https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/js?key=[APIKEYHERE]&libraries=geometry,places&callback=initialize">
...on a public web page, it would be easy for someone else to take the API key and use it themselves, unless you add a IP or referrer restriction to only allow it to be used client-side from your website. You can set up restrictions on who can use your API key following these instructions.
I suspect that the new Google Maps and Places API pricing scheme (which significantly lowers the number of free Places API calls) might cause some less ethical users to use keys they can scrape off websites.
I'm trying to get reCaptcha working on my website.
I found out I have to register my domain for this first, since I already have a google account this is quite easy, but the very last checkbox made me think:
How does google determine who the owners are?
And what kind of alerts will those be? E-Mails?
I'm a bit worried that some random person will get an E-Mail one day not knowing what to do with it since I'm not the only one working on that domain. And if they just mean my google account I'm registering this with...that doesn't make sense because they should've written "you" instead of owners then. - although your site is making this even more confusing. :D
I'm aware this is not directly a programming question.
I'm open for suggestions for a better Stack-exchange platform to ask this question at, there are too many - I couldn't find any other that seem to fit.
In the reCAPTCHA admin settings, there is a textbox where you can enter a list of email addresses for owners. This will grant them access to manage the reCAPTCHA settings and send them alerts, if enabled.
Recently, I have received a message from Google Play Developer saying that one app was removed:
This app has been removed from Google Play for a violation of the
Google Play Developer Program Policy regarding Ad Walls and
Interstitial Ads. For additional information, please review the
interstitial ads help article, then correct your app's ads and
resubmit. Additional details have been sent to your account owner's
email address.
So I've heard that if I get 3 strikes like this one, my account will be terminated. Is that true?
Also, I am only using Admob ads.
Google's policy here states that
Removals
Don’t impact the standing of your Google Play Developer account.
Once your app is removed, the published version of your app won’t be available on Google Play until a compliant updated is submitted.
The message you quoted says that your app was removed, so you don't have much to worry. You just have to be more careful about following the Ads guidelines. They don't want you to keep publishing many apps that don't follow the rules.
Also, they don't define exactly how many Suspensions you can have:
Suspensions
Count as strikes against the good standing of your Google Play Developer account.
Egregious or multiple policy violations can result in suspension, as can repeated app rejections or removals.
But 3, as you mentioned, seems a fair number in a short period. Remeber: your apps won't be suspended for nothing, so take care to follow correctly the instructions.
It says right there that "Additional details have been sent to your account owner's email address". So that would be the place to look to get the specifics.
There are a variety of reasons that your app may have been reported. For instance, you should probably let people know that there are ads at all. Is your app rated as "kid friendly" but the ads are not?
I'm going to guess that it has something to do with placement. For instance, if people are clicking your ad accidentally because it's too close to another actionable item, that will get you in trouble.
It could also be because someone is clicking the ad repeatedly, during testing, or to be a joker. And it's raising a flag.
You really need to do your own research to find out what the problem is.
Once you've done with that, correct the problem and try again.
I employ email validation to grant people full use of the site. The trouble is, sometimes these emails get spam-boxed, or never arrive, so I get many people complaining that they cannot confirm their account.
Was wondering if there are other (creative) ways to offer secondary validation option to users who didnt get the validation. Its a free site, so I dont want to ask for credit cards, or mobile #s.
The purpose of this is to make abuse of the site less rampant, since we ban a lot of people, and they come back with dozens of accounts to prove something. Spam/robot registrations are not an issue (right now).
What we started doing recently was letting members send us an email to a special email address. We give them a hash code, and all they have to do is put that code somewhere in the subject or the body of the email, and send it to us. We have a cron job running in the background that gets those emails, parses the subject/body looking for the hash, and if found activates the account.
It doesn't work 100%, because some ISPs also block their users from sending us emails, but no solution would work 100%.
Based on your comment in Rob S.' answer, it sounds more like you want to identify situations where the same browser is creating multiple accounts rather than confirm that what's at the other end is human.
Dropping a cookie in the user's browser can be very helpful in finding the repeat offenders, especially those not savvy enough to clear their cookies or visit while in private mode. Some forum software like vBulletin does this and can notify the administrators when it happens.
Another alternative might be browser fingerprinting, which is where you use a bunch of the information provided in the HTTP exchange. An example of this is the EFF's Panopticlick.
Just got a "fun" new way to annoy your banned people a bit.
once you ban them (I guess you close the account and ban the IP). Then log their browser agent string with their IP and screen resolution.
If there is a match when showing the website to them. Just remove the registration link/page. Dont even show the link to the page, as it might piss them off. Dont explain why its gone. Just keep it gone, eg. for 3 weeks or 2 month.
That way they dont have a cookie on the browser to remove, they cant find the registration so they cant know WHY they cant make a new account.
Secondly, if on a school or something (dont know how old they are), the other existing users will still be able to login to their accounts as its ONLY registration that has been removed. Not login.
How about that? is that clever enough?
Basically what you're looking to do is separate the humans from the robots. There are two primary ways to do this:
1) Require users signing up to check boxes and type a word spelled out in an image captcha. These are usually very difficult tasks for a computer to complete.
2) Allow users to sign-up using their account from a different site such as OpenID or Google assuming that anyone who has one of these accounts is a real person.
I recommend combining both methodologies.
Good luck!
There are unlimited ways of doing this.
You mention mobiles and free, but if you have access to a SMS-gateway, you can receive SMS-messages for free (but might need to pay some sort of monthly subscription though). But show a dynamically generated code the the current user. Store this code in "his session" and do an ajax check each 15-30 sec to see if the sms-code was received by the gateway. If so, accept the account and let them registrate. This would requiere the gateway + your users to have a personal mobile. Enough about mobiles...
Make a question or more that is randomly generated. Use pictures/tokens instad of tekst so that the user has to press the correct image in correct order to perform some sort of answer.
Could be like a jackpot-machine with 3 cells where the images are randomly placed and generated inside dynamic named files, so that robots cant analyse the names to guess the right answer.
You mention e-mails to be easy to spoof. Yes indeed, but what if the emails would come lets say each week containing some sort of "important info" that the user would need to read/use on the website to continue. Once the account hasnt been used for a certain time (lets say 3 month, kill it)... and you could also say to have a "free account" you must accept that we send you 1 mail pr. month that you need to activate within 1 week. If you dont, we are free to close/delete your account details.
... and many more
I dont know what you want to "protect", but if its for gaming, then dont let the gamers have "extra levels/weapons" until they have provided a certain amount of these codes OR paid for access OR validated by phone or something.
Thats my first 3 ideas, I think the possibilities are unlimited. The main issue here is, make it too hard to validate yourself and the users go away unless your site is REALLY worth it.
You might think of the much used "Free forever (but limited)" approach way of selling stuff these days on the net. The users can make as many accounts they want, but the licens is still only "single/small/basic". Once you get more experienced, you get more features or you might just upgrade by paying... at this time you know WHO is real and WHO isnt.
My point is, dont over protect. Just design with the mind of spammers will always find a way in, no matter how good you protect it. Those giving up first are your real users/customers.
I would rather spend time on making this product/website/game so great that EVERYONE wants to pay for an account after a while.
Lastly from real life... there are COMPANIES in China with kids employeed to play World of Warcraft with one purpose. Harvest virtual gold and sell it on Ebay to other western players who pays with real dollars. Its not allowed according to the gamelicens and their accounts/gameslicenses are constantly getting banned. But it gives them so much income so they have calculated with this and they just buy new licences and continue.
So if EVEN Blizard(WoW creators)
doesnt have enough power/money to keep
fakes out of the game, how do you
expect to do much better? :o)
Usefull answer?