Hot Summer Deals are Here!
Celebrate with up to 99% off on 17,100 resources
03
Days
11
Hours
40
Mins
22
Secs

Discord Information for Ultimate API

Duck

The Local Duck
Supreme
Feedback score
6
Posts
9
Reactions
144
Resources
4
Looked over the Ultimate API, and I don't think it had this, but it'd be nice to have stuff like the linked Discord Tag and Discord ID added to the Member object. This would definitely help added automatic product verification for users in discord servers, etc. As Geek said, it would also be nice to have other linked accounts, such as GitHub, etc.

thank you
the chubby nuck
 
Type
Suggestion
Last edited:
PebbleHost
High performance, consistent uptime and fast support. Minecraft hosting that just works.

JustGaminq

CEO @ D3luxe
Supreme
Feedback score
5
Posts
387
Reactions
102
Resources
0
Upvote. Definitely, something I would like to see added to the API.
 

Harry

Rustacean
Management
Feedback score
10
Posts
1,606
Reactions
876
Resources
0
Would be pretty easy to add. My only concern is that it wouldn't encourage two-way verification.

I'd much rather end users of the API start a conversation when identity verification is needed, as that would require the member to respond onsite. For instance, it's plausible that someone has 2FA enabled on MC-Market but not on Discord. In that situation, and when only verifying by ID, you wouldn't be able to catch the Discord account having been compromised. Two-way verification also has the added benefit of notifying members when someone is trying to verify identities as them (and so they can take appropriate action if the requests aren't originating from them).

But equally, that decision is up to the implementer and probably not a good reason to hold back functionality.
 
Last edited:

Duck

The Local Duck
Supreme
Feedback score
6
Posts
9
Reactions
144
Resources
4
Would be pretty easy to add. My only concern is that it wouldn't encourage two-way verification.

I'd much rather end users of the API start a conversation when identity verification is needed, as that would require the member to respond onsite. For instance, it's plausible that someone has 2FA enabled on MC-Market but not on Discord. In that situation, and when only verifying by ID, you wouldn't be able to catch the Discord account having been compromised. Two-way verification also has the added benefit of notifying members when someone is trying to verify identities as them (and so they can take appropriate action if the requests aren't originating from them).

But equally, that decision is up to the implementer and probably not a good reason to hold back functionality.
You make some good, valid points, and I agree with them. I do agree that starting a conversation with the user when identity verification is needed is probably the best option. However, it would also be nice to have the discord id, so random users can't just say they're this one user, and then that one user gets a random conversation opened. I don't really know how to word that, sorry if it's hard to understand, but it would be nice to have both options, with only the linked discord id being able to start a conversation.
 

BOOP

Director of Ops @ Zelphra
Supreme
Feedback score
23
Posts
2,384
Reactions
1,095
Resources
0
My only concern is that it wouldn't encourage two-way verification.
I'd argue the contrary. With the current system, conversations can be used as a form of verification. With the discord ID available, you could do both. If the ID matches, open a conversation and ask for further verification. Otherwise, just disregard completely.
 
Last edited:

Geek

Mom of BBB
Support
Feedback score
11
Posts
897
Reactions
267
Resources
1
Regardless of the use, would you be willing to expand this suggestion to be broader to return the additional contacts of a user that they have set? This would include their Spigot, Github, etc.
 

BOOP

Director of Ops @ Zelphra
Supreme
Feedback score
23
Posts
2,384
Reactions
1,095
Resources
0
Regardless of the use, would you be willing to expand this suggestion to be broader to return the additional contacts of a user that they have set? This would include their Spigot, Github, etc.
I think this is the best course of action. If fields are added/removed in the future, it should automatically be reflected in the API.
 

Harry

Rustacean
Management
Feedback score
10
Posts
1,606
Reactions
876
Resources
0
As an update on this, we will be adding an optional field that returns a Discord identifier as a part of the member fetch endpoints within a coming update. However, that identifier will be sourced from our onsite Discord integration system, rather than the manually-inputted identity field. As a result, if the field is non-null, the returned identifier belongs to a Discord account that the MC-Market member has at some point in time verified through their oAuth system.

Though, we won't be returning the username/discriminator pair since we have no way to ensure we're returning the most up-to-date pair given they aren't static.
I'd still suggest the two-way verification I mentioned above if you're wanting to verify identities for a transaction/deal that's taking place.

Regardless of the use, would you be willing to expand this suggestion to be broader to return the additional contacts of a user that they have set? This would include their Spigot, Github, etc.
Are you able to come up with any use cases for these? I don't think we've discussed this internally yet.
 
Top