TOPIC: Counterfeit Token Concerns

Disbeeleaf wrote: All that is needed here to prevent fakes is a number application on high value tokens, as we now have with the ROSP.

We don't need token shepherds, over reaching management of private trading, or additional complications and cost burdens.

You would think Obama was calling the shots for heaven's sakes.

Keep politics out of the forums, please.

This has been mentioned a couple of times, but I'm going to mention them again, because we might as well beat this into the ground.

The reason counterfeit tokens are easy to make is twofold:

1) Trade items, Relics, RoSP pieces, and the 1st Tooth of Cavadar all share the same gold backing as any common.

2) Nearly all of the images for all of the tokens are available on the website somewhere or in the tokendb without any sort of watermarking

These two factors together make counterfeiting all of the above as easy as printing a new sticker and peeling off the old one. Maybe add some laminate.

That being said -

Giving these tokens a different backing would at least cut the counterfeiting down to swapping Relic for Relic, etc.

Watermarking the images will make printing them at least a little harder.

Numbering them would be the final piece.

Obviously all of these could still be circumvented by a truly enterprising person, but removing the low-hanging fruit should be the first steps.

What to do about all of the existing tokens though? Exchange for secure copies?

bpsymington wrote: Keep politics out of the forums, please.

I would revise that to say, "Please keep political discussions in the Off-Topic forums."

Joshua Baessler wrote:
Watermarking the images will make printing them at least a little harder.

I am almost certain the images available to the public are not of the same resolution as those sent to the printer. The images on the website are low resolution, most printers want a minimum of 150 DPI, more usually 300.

Anyone with the wherewithal to delaminte, print, and relaminate can remove a watermark with free web based image editing tools, unless it is really big and ugly. Even then - all they need is access to 1 of or authentic tokens to get an image.

In conclusion, I don't think uglifying tokendb by watermarking everything will have any effect on rates of counterfeiting.

Forar wrote: While the tokens themselves are hardy and seemingly nigh indestructible, this would require extra efforts to make sure that any 'false positives' were checked regarding a damaged or otherwise malfunctioning (but Real) token.

Plus it could add further issues for sellers and resllers. I've found a few sites that'll sell sealed 10 packs.

Given them a manner of knowing for a fact what was in the sealed pack (especially if only the high value tokens are 'chipped') would have some unfortunate unintended consequences.

Some people have recently been talking about this years tokens chipping, and other token wear.

Tags for the Relic and up chips could still work. There are different levels of durability and reliability in tags. I've even seen RFID tags designed to go through an oven/furnace. I think the biggest issue (besides cost) is the metal core of our token's, but I've seen tags attached to the end of metal bolts before, so maybe it is not an issue.

If the tag was malfunctioning, I guess you would have to get the token validated the old fashion way by TD, and replaced.


But I'm not an RFID / NFC expert, I've just seen a bunch as other guys in the office have worked on software interacting with various tags.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote:
Watermarking the images will make printing them at least a little harder.

I am almost certain the images available to the public are not of the same resolution as those sent to the printer. The images on the website are low resolution, most printers want a minimum of 150 DPI, more usually 300.

Anyone with the wherewithal to delaminte, print, and relaminate can remove a watermark with free web based image editing tools, unless it is really big and ugly. Even then - all they need is access to 1 of or authentic tokens to get an image.

In conclusion, I don't think uglifying tokendb by watermarking everything will have any effect on rates of counterfeiting.

I was going to say the same thing. I don't think the TokenDB images could be used to make a high quality fake. I also think Druegar keeps the resolution down on purpose.

Druegar wrote:

bpsymington wrote: Keep politics out of the forums, please.

I would revise that to say, "Please keep political discussions in the Off-Topic forums."

Yes, thanks.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Joshua Baessler wrote:
Watermarking the images will make printing them at least a little harder.

I am almost certain the images available to the public are not of the same resolution as those sent to the printer. The images on the website are low resolution, most printers want a minimum of 150 DPI, more usually 300.

Anyone with the wherewithal to delaminte, print, and relaminate can remove a watermark with free web based image editing tools, unless it is really big and ugly. Even then - all they need is access to 1 of or authentic tokens to get an image.

In conclusion, I don't think uglifying tokendb by watermarking everything will have any effect on rates of counterfeiting.

The tokendb was one example. You can find high resolution images of all of the tokens on truedungeon.com if you know where to look.

Did anyone notice that Jeff placed a SAMPLE watermark across the token images for the newsletters this year? This is the reason.

Yes, a particularly dedicated person will find a way to remove the watermark. But that same person is going to find a way around most anti-counterfeiting measures. I'm just talking about making it difficult for the low-level, "I bet I can get away with this" thief.

Regarding RFID, I love this idea, but I believe Jeff receives the tokens from his distributor with the labels already on and it's iffy as to whether or not they offer RFID chips inside the chip itself. The only way I see this working is for Jeff to have blanks (of whatever color except gold) and RFID read-only stickers placed under the label or as part of the label, to be manually placed on the blanks in Carbondale.

How about using real precious metal in the tokens? Counterfitting real gold would at least be more costly to discourage counterfeits.

Jeff is looking into options, and some mirror the suggestions in this thread. I am confident TD can come up with something to protect collectors and players alike. I think it is fair to assume that as long as there is a large enough monetary demand for certain tokens, there is enticement to try and subvert the system.

Even if we come up with new ways to make the effort more difficult, someone may decide it is worthwhile to try. The good news is that as long as the counterfeit process is difficult enough, the sources stay small and therefor easier to identify, track down, and hopefully prosecute.

I certainly did not know it would evolve as far as it has when I was arguing with Jeff in 2006 to let me try "this new combo thing" but I guess I am glad you like them well enough to collect and care.

Dave

Disbeeleaf wrote: All that is needed here to prevent fakes is a number application on high value tokens, as we now have with the ROSP.

We don't need token shepherds, over reaching management of private trading, or additional complications and cost burdens.

You would think Obama was calling the shots for heaven's sakes.

Numbering the tokens is definitely not enough by itself. Why not? Because I sell you CoA #1254 on eBay. How do you know it is legit? For all you know Jeff never printed #1254, or possibly somebody else already has #1254 and you have a forgery.

I've been doing software development for almost 25 years now and this included some work for financial institutions. I'm pretty familiar with designing and implementing secure systems. As I said a numbered token is necessary to avoid counterfeits, but alone it is not sufficient. A simple registration system, however, is not that difficult, especially since we already have accounts here at truedungeon.com.

The important thing is that designing security measures isn't necessarily difficult, but it has to be well thought out. Many smart people have designed flawed systems simply by underestimating the amount of thought that needs to go into it.

Joshua Baessler wrote: Giving these tokens a different backing would at least cut the counterfeiting down to swapping Relic for Relic, etc.

I agree; if Relics had a different token color like Legendaries and Eldritch Relics already do then it would really help things.

Joshua Baessler wrote: Watermarking the images will make printing them at least a little harder.

I think that will be annoying and provide basically zero value. Anybody with even marginal Photoshop skills can remove a watermark from images as simple as these tokens. The skill required to circumvent the other measures being discussed is an order of magnitude greater.

Joshua Baessler wrote: Numbering them would be the final piece.

Absolutely, numbering is critical, along with an official or unofficial registration system.

Joshua Baessler wrote: Obviously all of these could still be circumvented by a truly enterprising person, but removing the low-hanging fruit should be the first steps.

Any security system could be circumvented, but token color, serial numbers, and registration would make it significantly more difficult.

What to do about all of the existing tokens though? Exchange for secure copies?

Unfortunately Jeff would need to offer an exchange program to convert the old tokens to the new ones. One big reason to limit the scope of this (in my opinion: Legendaries, Eldritch, and Relic).