User talk:JSafe
August 2024
[edit]
Hello, JSafe. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Multi-factor authentication, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:
- avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
- propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting your suggestions;
- disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
- avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
- do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.
In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:47, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hello Sam,
- I understand your concerns but they are not applicable here. I have no gain from these updates. Just providing accurate information and removing wrong information.
- 1. The update on the patents removes information that is not applicable. The current content talks about 2-Factor authentication patents under the subject of multi-factor authentication. Why would you want to keep irrelevant information. I provided the patent number and text that shows multi-factor authentication. Does it get any more accurate than that? Have you checked?
- 2. I am an Expert Witness in Authentication and one question that comes up over and over again is the definition of a factor in multi-factor authentication, which is different than the factors in 2-Factor and 3-Factor authentication. I wanted to clarify so everyone can understand as Wikipedia is used for learning (at least I do). I freely shared my expertise and have nothing to gain by helping Wikipedia readers. Why would you want to keep people confused?
- I will respectfully ask for the edits to be restored. All the changes are accurate and beneficial to Wikipedia readers. JSafe (talk) 16:36, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sam, if you'd like to verify the US 8677116 patent that describes multi-factor authentication, you can go to Google Patents
- https://patents.google.com/patent/US8677116
- And within the patent description, search for the words
- verifiable “fingerprint”
- It explains how multiple factors about the user and multiple factors about the device (mobile phone) are used for multi-factor authentication.
- The Wikipedia edit is factual information. JSafe (talk) 17:57, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, you're stating that you have no conflict of interest to declare, and that you're not the subject of the additions in question? Sam Kuru (talk) 18:40, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I definitely have no conflict of interest. Just trying to set the record straight and help clarify confusion. JSafe (talk) 18:48, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- No confusion, just wanted to give you an opportunity to be honest. Given your self-identification when editing as the IP making similar claims 10 minutes before this account was created, your username promoting another "product" from the same person, and adding more links to the same person's sites, I just assumed. I think it would be best to limit yourself to the article's talk page, given the appearance of a conflict of interest, and back up your proposed changes with reliable, secondary, published sources independent of this person. Without that, we fall short of our prohibitions of original research. Thanks!Sam Kuru (talk) 19:45, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- I understand. But I think a patent published by the United States Patent Office is an independent and reliable source of information.
- Don't you agree? JSafe (talk) 19:49, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- I do not. Patents are primary documents that require interpretation. This would require reliable, secondary, published sources as noted above. These would need to directly support the claims you made in your edits. As noted, the article's talk page would be the appropriate place to further discuss your proposals. Sam Kuru (talk) 20:02, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- No confusion, just wanted to give you an opportunity to be honest. Given your self-identification when editing as the IP making similar claims 10 minutes before this account was created, your username promoting another "product" from the same person, and adding more links to the same person's sites, I just assumed. I think it would be best to limit yourself to the article's talk page, given the appearance of a conflict of interest, and back up your proposed changes with reliable, secondary, published sources independent of this person. Without that, we fall short of our prohibitions of original research. Thanks!Sam Kuru (talk) 19:45, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I definitely have no conflict of interest. Just trying to set the record straight and help clarify confusion. JSafe (talk) 18:48, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, you're stating that you have no conflict of interest to declare, and that you're not the subject of the additions in question? Sam Kuru (talk) 18:40, 16 August 2024 (UTC)