worked for someone else's uncle. what's next? - page 8
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Even if the DC has a reputation, who can guarantee that with certain staff rotations the DC will be able to maintain it? Nothing lasts forever. Especially a reputation. Do you think it is not for sale? Everything has a price! Even reputation. Be careful when choosing - you cannot avoid cheaters. (A slightly off-topic example: the next Ukrainian presidential election).
If there is a security hole - it's foolish to trust that a brokerage house with a decent reputation, under certain conditions, will not take advantage of it.
Although: "Until the thunder rises, the man does not make a cross.
I will not say about warranty, I prefer probability. So the probability to get cheated by newly established, unknown brokerage company is a bit higher than the one working at the market for ten years and having at least some reputation. Nothing more.
And who can guarantee that the sausage will not kill anyone who eats it or the sacred bottle will not be methyl alcohol? Or an icicle might fall on your head (such a stupid thing happened today)? Will I sit at home and not eat or drink or sell anything? Wait for a guarantee? )
A security hole is something that a broker can open a trade for a client or a customer? If you do not take into account demo trading and not serious for brokerage companies lots with simple auto-execution. You send an order through the terminal or by phone - the dealing company opens a deal for you. Where is the hole?
The security hole is that the broker can open a trade for the client or the client? So in MT4 it has never been different, unless you take into account demo trading and non-serious for the brokerage company lots where you just auto-execute. You send an order through the terminal or by phone - the dealing company opens a deal for you. Where is the hole here?
Back to the beginning, to the key question, "How do you prove it wasn't you who made the silver transaction, but a third party did it for you?"
The negligent handling of the password is not a hole in the security of the software, it's a hole in the head
Basically - The above question in this formulation gives up the dts head.
Lack of even a semblance of an attempt to help - "let's see the IP from which the silver entry was made ....
Password negligence is not a hole in software security, it's a hole in the head
Yeah, when you see your fortune going down the toilet in front of you and without your involvement, you'll probably think of a safe with a TT and a hole in your head. And it's all down to someone else's brand-new keyer. In all this, the DC remains white and fluffy.Bite your tongue.
Well it's an endless conversation, an endless race
keirider, anti keirider, keirider v2, anti .......................................................................................................................AK-47 , armoured waistcoat, ..........................................................................)
As long as the head of state does not get involved in this arms race.
He seems to have a monopoly on arms contracts there.
Back to the beginning, to the key question: "How can you prove that you did not execute the silver transaction but a third party did it for you?"
This is an interesting question. Technically the trade must be able to be opened either by someone from the DC or someone on the trader's side. There is no proof of identity and there cannot be.
It would probably be logical for the logs to reflect which party exactly made the transaction. There should be exactly two parties, no more. Then, if it reflects that the transaction was made by the DC side, then the centre can't get away with it.
A third party can only be the initiator of the transaction either by the client or by the DC. But for that, you probably need to ensure that the line between the DC and the client is fully secured.
This is an interesting question. Technically the trade must be able to be opened either by someone from the DC or someone on the trader's side. There is no proof of identity and there cannot be.
It would probably be logical for the logs to reflect which party exactly made the transaction. There should be exactly two parties, no more. Then, if it shows that the transaction was made by the DC, the centre can't get away with it.
A third party can only be the initiator of the transaction from either the client or the DC. But to do this, you probably need to ensure that the line between the DC and the client is fully secured.
Here comes the quiet twig.
That thread is on a completely different subject...
As for this topic, after watching the video, I came to the conclusion of a bullshit story.
Of course, like many people, I accept the reality of the situation with either the dumbest trader(s).
1. Why a man and not a woman rolls the barrel.
2. The password is a circus.
3) They do not know what kind of silver the commission is, and the price is 5000 rubles.
4. "I "invited" a trader I know, and suddenly a trader opens a position...
I fell down a pattula... it was probably like this:
while my wife was pushing buttons on the other computer.
I had to ask a trader to open a trader's position and then I opened a position.)
5. pity there's no trading conditions, i think a huge lot would not allow the margin
All in all, so far it looks like a circus circus...