Dear emax,
as I understood you, correct me if I'm wrong, you don't only want to prohibt a stranger from changing your model configuration, you want to prevent somebody from stealing your RC because it's password locked.
My last posting shows some efficient solutions, no need to have an extra department to handle such concepts. See the analogy to forum-registrations and 'send new password' functionality.
What I wanted to say is that (in my opinion) you have two different options:
1. Create a simple process with limited effort for users and the manufacturer, which will prohibit somebody from changing your model configuration in the field, but will not be very "secure" regarding you goal to prevent stealing by a password locked RC (password reset can be done by the user without interacting with Jeti/dealer)
2. A process to prevent stealing, which is as secure as possible. Even if you find a secure way to reset the password (in case of whatever happened), without sending the RC to Jeti, it should only be possible to perform it by involving Jeti. It may not be complex for the user, but at least Jeti will have a lot of effort (see below).
In my opinion there is no smart process in between. Jeti will have the effort to manage the process, handle user request (standard, exceptional), maintain user data for ownership proof, ... whatever is need to provide this "service".
As stated in the last sentences of my first post, I understand the need to have a simple password to prevent somebody from changing your configuration in the field. But: I didn't say that because it hasn't happened to me, it could never happen to others. Instead I proposed to have exactly this simple user password which can be reset by everybody = then Jeti isn't involved in those cases, they don't have any daily effort, they just have to implement a simple password set / change/ reset routine. In some parts you are reading a little bit what you want to read / putting words in my mouth I didn't say...
Personally I wouldn't like to see Jeti spending a lot of effort in implementing/running a totally secure process, for preventing a situation which probably may happen to a very small amount of users. I don't have figures about how many percent of the RCs get stolen, but from -my fealing- it isn't much.
I agree that with the -100 I was overreacting a little bit. Requests like theese push some of my alarm buttons, covering a situation which might affect 0,x to x% of the users, but compared to other features spending a lot of effort for it. Another example, who will pay the Jeti people checking/changing every ownership proof when RCs are being replaced because of defects, or people selling their equipment, or whatever ocures during daily life (just a few thoughts)? And by the way, I want to see you not being able to fly (only for a few days), because e.g. you forgot your password and the Jeti database isn't up to date, so you're not able to reset your password (worst case, Murphy's law). Probably I can hear you hundreds of km away
So, like PW said, ask 10 people and you will get 15 different opinions, this one (simple approach) is mine. If you're attending the forum meeting, perhaps we (if i can make it) can continue this discussion together with a beer
Sascha
edit: typo