Originally Posted by vijayninel (Post 2194816)

While the demands for auditing of mods here are well intentioned, they do not take into account the practical difficulties of implementing such a system in a volunteer run site. If such a auditing were to be tried here under the current circumstances then it will fail and end up hurting the users more than anyone else.

I can see such a system working here if the system is automated. It could work like this.

1. When a mod is submitted then a software checks it for basic vulnerabilities. Something like the W3C Markup Validation Service.

2. If a vulnerability is detected then the mod falls under moderation pending approval.

This of course means that a software has to be developed that can spot such vulnerabilities and this technology is currently not well developed.

Originally Posted by Disasterpiece (Post 2194827)

Then you would give the user the illusion that the mod is safe, whereas the mod quality wouldn't change compared to the present quality.

Not sure if this procedure would have an actual benefit.

Originally Posted by vijayninel (Post 2194836)

Not at all. Users will have to be informed that the software check is only basic and cannot spot all potential problems. The users will have to be informed that the mods being used are still their own responsibility.