Why was the slab cracking thread pulled?

[greaterfool]

arch: while taking down the thread is OK with me, penalizing meth for that thread is similar to "shooting the messenger". he has brought up an issue that CGC needs to address in some manner, that perhaps their holders and labels are not tamper-proof.

 

what is CGC going to do with regards to their holders to make them more secure (and less fragile)?

[Guest]

security through obscurity. yeah baby. works like a charm. just ask microsoft.

[chrisfuccione]

So let me get this right. Meth started a post showing a glaring defencey with the CGC slabs that someone can take ou the comic and put in the comic. CGC responce has been to 1) "ban for the night METH as a type of punishment and2) take down the post to review and clean it up. Shouldn't Meth be classifyed as a hero for revealing this MAJOR flaw in thier slabs? CHRIS

[wolfling40-migration]

I think an apology is in order.

I am the one who started this "offensive" thread. If you look back on my initial question, you will find that it was based, with quotes, on another thread and posed what I (and others) considered a valid query.

I find it sad that the moderator of this forum should pull the entire thread instead of cutting out those parts that were not salient -- or in this case, too sensitive.

I think that the upshot now is, "Yes, you can successfully tamper with CGC cases, although there is little evidence that this is occuring or will occur in the future."

If Meth hit too close to the bone, then remove his posts -- don't throw the baby out with the bathwater, though.

Thanks,

 

Mark in Taiwan

[Joanna]

I read the other thread, and this one and you know what? I'm finding myself on Arch's side in this. The thread was too much like a "how-to" manual. It's one thing to say "It can be done." It's another to give detailed instructions (with photos) showing how it can be done.

 

Now, I'm not saying Meth was purposefully doing anything underhanded. Quite the opposite, in fact. It seemed to me he was trying to show that there is a genuine security problem. And he showed by demonstration.

 

I guess I just don't think we need the demonstration. Anyone can read the posts. It's not just the people who write messages and who we have come to know (in the cybersense). Anyone can read, including someone looking for the next big scam. Sure someone else can think it up, but the truth is, most people who live their lives dishonestly don't have the smarts to figure out complex schemes like that. It's easy to steal a scan from Heritage and sell AF 15 under a newbie false name. That doesn't take brains, just a crooked nature. But figuring out how to breach a slab without harming it -- well, of everyone here, only Meth figured it out. Granted, most of us probably didn't try, but given the clear instructions Meth posted, a dishonest individual could've gone with it.

 

So why destroy the whole thread? Because many of the posts contained details, it wasn't just Meth's. There were a lot of theories being thrown around. Better not to give any ideas. Hopefully, the folks at CGC did pay attention and will do something about the problem. They know about it now. The thread did its job. That was the real point of it, wasn't it? To alert CGC to the problem? Mission accomplished.

 

-- Joanna

[wolfling40-migration]

Being in the media, I know that the more you try to cover up something, the bigger it gets. Now people are starting to get interested in the possiblity of alterations and the disscussions grow. If the lords of the board had just let it go, it would have sunk down off page one and into relative obscurity.

I also don't think that sweeping weak points under the rug is a good solution to improvement. Meth did CGC a service. If I were in charge there I'd be saying, "Get on this right away. We need to introduce measures that make this impossible."

Moreover, for the vast majority of people this was educational on how to SAFEGUARD yourself, ie, what to look for, for possible tampering. I learned something there too.

To pretend that the problem of tampering does not exist is putting your head in the sand (and burying us too by burying the thread).

 

Mark in Taiwan

ps. I assume that this thread will be canned soon as well.

[Guest]

This discussion has parallels in the infosec world...

 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=infosec+full+disclosure

 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&safe=off&q=security+through+obscurity&btnG=Google+Search

 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&safe=off&q=bug-reporting+standards

[Joanna]

Getting rid of thread wasn't about sweeping anything under the rug or covering up. Arch explained very clearly that it was the "how-to" quality of instruction that needed to be deleted. This thread hasn't been deleted, and that's because it's a discussion, not a step by step process. It seems to me that discussions are always allowed -- whether pro or anti CGC. That's been proven time and again. And how 'swept away' is a topic that has a multi-page thread like this one?

 

If I were in charge there I'd be saying, "Get on this right away. We need to introduce measures that make this impossible."

 

We have no way of knowing that they aren't saying that right now. Changing the cases will be expensive and will take time. It's not like they can announce a new case today, just because someone brought up tampering a day ago. For all we know, they're already working on a design that won't crack so easily. Adding anti-tampering to it would be an intelligent thing to do. Or there may be no plans at all. We simply don't know.

 

-- Joanna

 

[wolfling40-migration]

True.

I am all for the person owning the ball taking it home when he wants. If I were CGC, I'd probably have done the same thing. Still, it bothers me that the entire thread was axed, not just the "how-to" sections.

Can I still ask the question I last asked on the forbidden thread? That was: Given that it is possible to counterfeit, how prevalent do you think this is? Do you think it is a valid concern or just so unlikely to be dismissed out of hand?

 

Mark in Taiwan

[Darthdiesel]

Given that it is possible to counterfeit, how prevalent do you think this is? Do you think it is a valid concern or just so unlikely to be dismissed out of hand?

 

It is not prevalent at all. It can be done and with the few egregious exceptions on ebay where "fishy" sellers are putting up "elite" class collectibles, you know something's up from several tell tale factors. Is it a valid concern? Yes for the inexperienced and those too greedy and too busy to read between the lines and check everything going on before plopping down a considerable sum in the hopes of flipping for more $$$.

 

Now let's get rid of this stupid thread too:

 

how to open a slab without detection and illustrations too:

 

Step 1 Insert screwdriver into corner crack and turn.

Step 2 ...............

[chrisco37]

I don't believe that, at this point, this is a prevelant practice. This is the first time I can remember this issue being brought up. Surely, one of us would have come across this at some point, if it was commonplace. While it is possible, as Meth's post demonstrated, I still think it would be extremely difficult to pass off on someone with any 'knowledge' of CGC. I think that I, as well as many of the board, would be able to tell if this had gone on. Wouldn't there be glue or something noticeable?

 

Chris

[BronzeBruce13]

I missed the vast majority of the original thread... could someone give me a synopsis?

 

I realize that the slab and well have evolved over time. Originally the maroon modern labeled slabs had no well at all. Basically, it was just the comic sandwiched between the flat plastic of the slab. I sort of recall that maybe there was an "in-between" evolution before we arrive at today's sealed inner well. I heard someone mention that recent slabs have had the label contained within the extended plastic off of the inner well. I just reviewed many of my own blue labels (none that arrived any more recent than a month) and I could see no evidence of this. Can any one confirm?

 

What I'm trying to determine is what style (or evolution) of the slab is potentially vulnerable to the technique that was demonstrated.

 

ALSO... this now ties in with the New Collector's Society feature allowing one to reference info about a book. It seems to me that revealing the "graders thumbnails comments/notes" would be essential now (especially if this slab tampering technique is valid and feasible).

 

If you have a suspect book and can look it up and determine that the CGC Graders pointed out a slight miscut, one color-breaking stress at the top stable and a blunted lower right corner... then you can compare that "comic fingerprint" to the book in question. If it has a different series (and presumably greater number) of defects... we can avoid or expose the possibility of tampering. Of course saving the scan as someone suggested would be useful, but not realistic... and we can't go back in time on the slabs that are possibly vulnerable and add scans that don't exist.

 

Posting scans might be a logistic and financial nightmare for CGC if it was done across the board. However, moving forward, a rough market value "line in the sand" could be established and a book reaching this mark could qualify for its scan to be saved and attached to the CS Serial Look up. Perhaps on any book above $500/ 1,000 value? I realize that depending on the market the same book could qualify and not qualify, but imperfect as it may be... I would rather see it.

 

I also wonder if CGC would consider a new service in which they would include the scans of all new CGC books on a CD coming back with your order? Maybe these can be officially coded/marked (with a CGC logo and serial) and can be used for sales/auction purposes as well... maybe many of us would be willing to pay a reasonable charge for this service so it would further make it worth CGC's while to offer it? Not only could this instill confidence that the book you are buying is undoubtedly the one that left CGC... it could also save sellers tons of time scanning the books too. Hmmmmm. Collectors too could assemble a digital verification of thier books for future reference, and to pass along if the book is sold.

 

Any thoughts?

 

I also would still respectfully love to hear from CGC concerning several other related Collector's Society feature questions/ideas that have been brought up on other threads and are still unanswered.

 

[comicparadox]

I'm just sorry I missed the thread. Would have made a good read.

[fantastic_four]

I've got the entire thread that was deleted and all picture attachments saved on my web site. Once the dust settles, if somebody like Meth doesn't do it first and it seems like a good idea--one that wouldn't hurt CGC, which in turn would hurt the collecting community as a whole since their service is valuable--I'll make his research available to anybody that wants to see it.

 

In the meantime, I generally agree with Joanna/Architect that the info does more harm than good, so I'm not posting anything until I'm convinced it's a good idea. Meth did a great thing by posting it publicly instead of using it for personal gain. Like Joanna said, CGC is aware of the problem now, and hopefully they'll fix it.

[Darthdiesel]

I also wonder if CGC would consider a new service in which they would include the scans of all new CGC books on a CD coming back with your order? Maybe these can be officially coded/marked (with a CGC logo and serial) and can be used for sales/auction purposes as well... maybe many of us would be willing to pay a reasonable charge for this service so it would further make it worth CGC's while to offer it? Not only could this instill confidence that the book you are buying is undoubtedly the one that left CGC... it could also save sellers tons of time scanning the books too. Hmmmmm. Collectors too could assemble a digital verification of thier books for future reference, and to pass along if the book is sold.

 

Bruce, I believe they have a comparable service in effect at $3 per scan....on the online submission form this is a service you can request...I was sure you were aware of it. Maybe they took it away since my last submission. I don't know if it is a CD, but I think they send you the scan or host it somewhere for you to take and "make your own" for your future marketing use.

[Darthdiesel]

Why isn't this darn useless thread "censored" yet??? OK...

 

Step 2... gently insert hook nose pliers into one corner post and pry apart slowly, stopping at any sight of plastic strain...

 

 

[BronzeBruce13]

Thanks JR... I would like to see what was posted.

 

If the tampering is truly feasible, even if they modify the slabs that are going to be produced in the future to prevent it... where does that leave us with the thousands upon thousands of slabs that are out there now??? Perceived value and resaleability of our pre "new tamper-free slabbed" books will likely be harmed. It might be much more difficult to sell the more valuable (pre "new tamper-free slabbed" books) without reslabbing... effectively re-certifying the grade first.

 

If this becomes a reality... I would not be happy to have to pay that expense, nor even the shipping to and from if it was offered free even. My feeling is CGC should have (if they did not) taken these slabs in the very beginning to capable engineers, known incarcerated scam artists for hire and/or a few average, but creative people... I hope they challenged a variety of people to see if anyone could find a way to compromise the slab... maybe they did? Anyone know?

 

Any theories how they could even hope to address that particular problem?

[BronzeBruce13]

No Darth... I never saw it. I submitted through a friend until I recently joinined the CS.

 

That's good that the servce is in place to some degree. CGC may have to revise it and make it a bit more affordable and add the logo and serial some way to authenticate it...then the service would really be multi-functional. It could be marketed in a way that makes it a no-brainer service for a seller on both a functional and customer confidence level.

 

 

[Darthdiesel]

Bruce,

 

I wouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water yet... not every wannabe fraud has the tools, ron popeil vacuum sealer and industry grade plastic welder that can found in meth's laboratory/workout room/rap recording studio...

 

I think though it is possible, it is still hard to get it to that level where collectors will be defrauded. After reading the thread, I checked my newest slabs and the corners are impossible to pry open? My red modern labels are just as tough to breach and you would need to be proficient and dexterous to manage replicating meth's feat last night AND successfully resealing the slab to sellable condition where no one would notice. I don't think it is as easy as meth would have us believe.

[Guest]

I didn't read the whole original thread so I have one big question. Has he (meth) or anyone else actually gone ahead and completed the procedure he outlines to a satifying level of perfection? Or is this just an intellectual exercise at this point?