Account suspension discussion [merged]

[Vault Girl.6792]

> @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> You know what's really weird? People asking ANet to use more common sense and due diligence than they did themselves, and then coming to the forums to complain about it.

 

So people should be banned for the lack of common sense? When did it become a crime? Anet would need to ban way more than 2000 players in this case.

[Ardenwolfe.8590]

> @"Vault Girl.6792" said:

> > @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > You know what's really weird? People asking ANet to use more common sense and due diligence than they did themselves, and then coming to the forums to complain about it.

>

> So people should be banned for the lack of common sense? When did it become a crime? Anet would need to ban more than 2000 players in this case.

 

No, I'm saying you can't ask ANet to be more responsible for your actions, or lack thereof, than you are for yourself.

[Jinks.2057]

Being banned for having certain programs on your computer and not cheating on the game is wrong.

 

The way Anet did this is not by grabbing the processes that were linked to Guildwars but ALL your processes.

 

HUGE breach of privacy and security. It'd be different if they just monitored what was linked to GW2 instead of grabbing everything and storing it on their servers. I have a major problem with that

[Yasi.9065]

> @"Kunzaito.8169" said:

> > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> >

> > Nope.

> >

> > A player's computer is not on Anet's property.

>

> I misread your response initially, revising:

>

> This is where you are trying to stretch the analogy too far. It's not going to fit every dimension of this situation physically and doesn't have to.

>

> ANet can monitor your computer at any time for any reason while you use their software as per the terms you agreed to when you created an account - see the user referencing the EXACT section of that EULA above. Don't like it? Uninstall.

>

 

You are missing the point. They didnt just monitor. Anet went that one step beyond that makes this whole thing distasteful and shady. They gathered data, they send said data to their server, and they did that unexpectedly nearly 6 years after I signed my UA without informing me about it. 3 out of 3 makes it spyware in my book.

[Legit Prep In.5893]

> @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > @"Legit Prep In.5893" said:

> > Just because some company (anet) writes some text into an enforced agreement without you are not allowed to play the game you purchased before being able to read all that nonesense, doesn't make it legal.

> >

> > Next time you may wanna turn over the cup at starbucks before you trink it, it may contain a "YOU CONSENT TO EXPERIMENTAL TESTINGS OF CHECMICALS IN WHATEVER YOU CONSUME HERE" , does that sound legal ?

>

> That depends did you or did you not consent to using that specific cup.

>

> The difference between your half baked analogy is you actually have to accept the terms of service before you can play. The onus is on you to do so, clearly several of you did not or even more simply put did not care even if you did.

 

The difference is, you had o pay before being able to read it

[Jinks.2057]

> @"Legit Prep In.5893" said:

> > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > @"Legit Prep In.5893" said:

> > > Just because some company (anet) writes some text into an enforced agreement without you are not allowed to play the game you purchased before being able to read all that nonesense, doesn't make it legal.

> > >

> > > Next time you may wanna turn over the cup at starbucks before you trink it, it may contain a "YOU CONSENT TO EXPERIMENTAL TESTINGS OF CHECMICALS IN WHATEVER YOU CONSUME HERE" , does that sound legal ?

> >

> > That depends did you or did you not consent to using that specific cup.

> >

> > The difference between your half baked analogy is you actually have to accept the terms of service before you can play. The onus is on you to do so, clearly several of you did not or even more simply put did not care even if you did.

>

> The difference is, you had o pay before being able to read it

 

I bought a hard copy and there's no way to read that stuff before buying.

[Kunzaito.8169]

> @"Yasi.9065" said:

> They gathered data, they send said data to their server

 

I wonder, if you had to come up with one single word to describe this process, what it might be... Here's a hint, it starts with an "m"...

 

> and they did that unexpectedly nearly 6 years after I signed my UA without informing me about it.

 

They didn't change the terms of the EULA. It applies as long as you continue to use the game. If they made you accept it again for every patch you're saying you would have suddenly had the epiphany that maybe this time they were gonna do some of that monitoring they told you they could do at any time and you would have declined?

[Jinks.2057]

> @"Sojourner.4621" said:

> > @"Kunzaito.8169" said:

> > > @"Sky Fell.7604" said:

> > > Really my issue boils down to this:

> > >

> > > This was lazy and intrusive.

> > >

> > > The Lazy:

> > > I'm sure 99% of the people banned deserved it.

> > > There's the 1% though.

> > > Anet's inability to do the due diligence of making sure the GW2 allocated memory and process were actually hooked into or modified makes the people who may have been incorrectly banned have no recourse.

> > > That casts doubt on all of them for me. There's no way to tell if the people using that application were using it for something else because of this lazyness.

> > >

> > > The intrusive:

> > > Most anti-cheats contain a small database of hashes locally on your PC.

> > > They then compare the running applications to that list and also check if their own application is being modified.

> > > They then send that data, usually encrypted, tot he servers.

> > > Anet did not do that here.

> > > They sent EVERYTHING running on your PC to their servers, encrypted in the equivalent of a wet paper bag handed to a vagrant.

> > >

> > >

> > > I'm aggravated because i had faith in them. Because I KNOW they're capable of better.

> >

> > See, this is an extremely reasonable critical response.

> >

> > Personally, I don't know whether it's possible for them to make those kind of detections or not, or whether that type of monitoring would be considered more invasive. But I think it's a valid question, at least as they look to improve their methodology in the future. We *all* (well, most of us) want to see hackers and cheaters rooted out on a more regular basis. It's not wrong to ask how we can do this better and more efficiently going forward.

>

> For three of the listed programs it is entirely unnecessary to do any further checks as they are hacks/cheats specific to, and only to, GW2. The final one on the list is an MMO botting program... it runs bots for FFXIV as well as GW2, but since botting is not actually allowed in either, I honestly don't reaaaally care if they weren't using it in GW2 technically, and think the bans are still justified even if it was for the "wrong" game. Cheat Engine, despite the name, does have many legitimate non-cheat uses, and so hook checks should have been done, additionally yes the hashes should have been checked locally and ONLY the hashes that matched should have been sent, encrypted, to ANet. That should and can be done better. Those are valid criticisms.

 

That's if they are telling the truth. I mean of course they are right? It's not like they would install spyware on your computer w/out your knowledge or anything right?

[Lambent.6375]

Edit: saw it on reddit

[Jerks.3172]

is that why chris deleted his posts about banning because he know he screwed up?

[Vault Girl.6792]

Just noticed that the reason for the ban is displayed as "Your Guild Wars 2 account has been suspended for modifying or tampering with the game". So, not for running a program that can potentially modify something, but for "_modifying or tampering_". It's not even correct, people were banned not for modifying things, but just for running Cheat Engine while playing, which is not the same.

[TexZero.7910]

> @"Legit Prep In.5893" said:

> > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > @"Legit Prep In.5893" said:

> > > Just because some company (anet) writes some text into an enforced agreement without you are not allowed to play the game you purchased before being able to read all that nonesense, doesn't make it legal.

> > >

> > > Next time you may wanna turn over the cup at starbucks before you trink it, it may contain a "YOU CONSENT TO EXPERIMENTAL TESTINGS OF CHECMICALS IN WHATEVER YOU CONSUME HERE" , does that sound legal ?

> >

> > That depends did you or did you not consent to using that specific cup.

> >

> > The difference between your half baked analogy is you actually have to accept the terms of service before you can play. The onus is on you to do so, clearly several of you did not or even more simply put did not care even if you did.

>

> The difference is, you had o pay before being able to read it

 

No you dont. Stop with the inherint missinformation. You can quite clearly access and read then entire User Agreement without ever once purchasing. https://www.guildwars2.com/en/legal/

 

> @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > You agreed to them being able to do this, without cause at any point the so choose.

> >

> > Don't like it ?

> > Contact support and ask for your account to be terminated.

> >

> > Else, read the User Agreement and Deal with it.

>

> wow what do you own stock in anet?

 

Hardly, i'm just not naive enough to blindly click accept to everything nor believe to this mythical "Right to Privacy Online".

 

> @"AliamRationem.5172" said:

> So, if you fail to read 5000 pages of legalese and blindly click "accept", that fact alone justifies absolutely anything we want to put into those terms of service, right? Hey, look! Section 753-D, subsection P, paragraph 42 _clearly_ states that you agree to have your leg amputated (which leg to be determined by ANet) and a prosthetic installed that runs banner adds for Guild Wars 2!

>

> Yeah, I'm sure that's how it works.

 

All terms are available to read online publicly, when signing up for the game/forums you are given a pop-up with a check box that denotes you approve. If they had spurious claims in there they wouldn't legally hold up. However, that isn't the case here. They have every right to monitor their game and your pc as it's a live service there's plenty of legal precedent for this so good luck taking it to court.

 

[Vault Girl.6792]

> @"Aeolus.3615" said:

> I dont get it.... explain to me

>

> If Anet detects/search software inside your computer? what does that means?

>

> IF Anet detects 3rd party tools messing up with mem stored values that's another and totally diferent story, wich makes valid ban.

>

> Now dont tell me that "Woops!, Iwas cheating on the wrong exe"....

>

> Still... if CE enventually worked that well on Gw2... shame on u Anet... lel

 

The problem is that Anet didn't check whether CE is changing anything in GW2. They just banned everyone who had it open, without even checking what process is getting monitored there.

[shippage.1983]

Lmao at all these people claiming they got banned for *accidentally* leaving Cheat Engine open. Here's why that's a load of BS:

 

"1516 accounts were suspended because we detected that the accounts were running Guild Wars 2 at the same time as one or more of the following programs over a significant number of hours during a multi-week period earlier this year. "

 

Keyword: "SIGNIFICANT number of hours". Now people say Cheat Engine has other uses, which is true. It is a memory dissembler and hex editor. However, how many legitimate uses does that have for Gw2 that doesn't include hacking? All I can think of is that you use Cheat Engine to look up hooks in the game and writing your own add-ons similar to ARCDPS.

 

However, 1500+ people got banned from this. You're really telling me that all these people are developers using Cheat Engine *legitimately* to develop programs? I highly doubt it. Merely having Cheat Engine installed isn't enough to get you banned like many have been claiming.

 

Most likely that these people are cheaters and trying to jump on the 'I'm innocent!' train to get unbanned, I see it happen with every ban wave in every game. This is nothing new. I think this is completely justified, enjoy your bans :)

[Deihnyx.6318]

> @"Jinks.2057" said:

> Being banned for having certain programs on your computer and not cheating on the game is wrong.

>

> The way Anet did this is not by grabbing the processes that were linked to Guildwars but ALL your processes.

>

> HUGE breach of privacy and security. It'd be different if they just monitored what was linked to GW2 instead of grabbing everything and storing it on their servers. I have a major problem with that

 

Monitoring involves... reporting stuff to the servers.

You don't even know if it's stored... not that it actually matters.

 

And you run on windows, and everytime you get crashes, when you send reports, that contains info about your environment.

 

Stop being so extreme with the wording. There's room to talk about whether all the bans are fair or not, but don't try to make it sound like it's a huge deal "omg never seen before and lets jump into the facebook blamewagon". If you care so much about privacy, use Tails, not Windows.

[Colly.4073]

You know the risks of 3rd party apps when you go to the website that contains them, you know the risks when you click the download button and you know the risks when you click INSTALL and then proceed to run the application. I'm sorry but if you chose to download, install and then run something that isn't approved by anet then your ban is justified whether you used it for 3 minutes or 3 weeks.

[Sojar.1495]

> @"Jinks.2057" said:

> Being banned for having certain programs on your computer and not cheating on the game is wrong.

>

> The way Anet did this is not by grabbing the processes that were linked to Guildwars but ALL your processes.

>

> HUGE breach of privacy and security. It'd be different if they just monitored what was linked to GW2 instead of grabbing everything and storing it on their servers. I have a major problem with that

 

Really? A huge breach of security? Why is that? Explain why it's a huge breach of security. I can literally copy paste a list of every active process I have running all over the internet. What security risk will I incur? Do tell!

[Scrivs.4501]

> @"AliamRationem.5172" said:

> So, if you fail to read 5000 pages of legalese and blindly click "accept", that fact alone justifies absolutely anything we want to put into those terms of service, right? Hey, look! Section 753-D, subsection P, paragraph 42 _clearly_ states that you agree to have your leg amputated (which leg to be determined by ANet) and a prosthetic installed that runs banner adds for Guild Wars 2!

>

> Yeah, I'm sure that's how it works.

>

 

That is exactly how it works. If **_you fail_** to read something and just blindly agree to it, which then happens to yield negative results for you, then whose fault is that? You don't put your signature on a contract without reading the contract first, do you?

You were given the opportunity to voluntarily decline the agreement and thereby prevent any negative consequences from happening to your person. But you didn't. You chose to blindly agree and accept out of sheer laziness (not wanting to read the user agreement first) and for sheer personal gain (just wanting to use the product no matter what consequences it may have).

 

This reminds me of PokemonGo players being angry about the app collecting and using their GPS locations, while they explicitly gave the app THEIR PERMISSION to gain access to their GPS location.

 

Or Facebook users being angry about the company collecting and using their photos, GPS location, audio recordings etc. etc., while they explicitly gave the app THEIR PERMISSION to access their photos, camera, microphone, GPS location and all the rest of it.

 

You can't first permit someone to do something bad to you just so that you can use their product, and then whine and complain about them having done something bad to you.

 

So in the case of your example, if you choose to EXPLICITLY AGREE TO, and ACCEPT to have your leg amputated in order to be able to play a video game, then what do you think is going to happen?

 

In other words, if a company first requires you to give them access to a whole heap of personal and sensitive information before they will allow you to have access to **_their_** product, then you really only have two options: either to give them that access, or to decide to not use their product. It is that simple. You have obviously gone with option #1, and have thus forfeited your right to complain about anything that you have thereby agreed with.

 

So stop being so immature and take reponsibility for your actions. THINK about what you're doing.

[Vault Girl.6792]

> @"shippage.1983" said:

> Lmao at all these people claiming they got banned for *accidentally* leaving Cheat Engine open. Here's why that's a load of BS:

>

> "1516 accounts were suspended because we detected that the accounts were running Guild Wars 2 at the same time as one or more of the following programs over a significant number of hours during a multi-week period earlier this year. "

>

> Keyword: "SIGNIFICANT number of hours". Now people say Cheat Engine has other uses, which is true. It is a memory dissembler and hex editor. However, how many legitimate uses does that have for Gw2 that doesn't include hacking? All I can think of is that you use Cheat Engine to look up hooks in the game and writing your own add-ons similar to ARCDPS.

>

> However, 1500+ people got banned from this. You're really telling me that all these people are developers using Cheat Engine *legitimately* to develop programs? I highly doubt it. Merely having Cheat Engine installed isn't enough to get you banned like many have been claiming.

>

> Most likely that these people are cheaters and trying to jump on the 'I'm innocent!' train to get unbanned, I see it happen with every ban wave in every game. This is nothing new. I think this is completely justified, enjoy your bans :)

 

Well, I wasn't closing CE because I didn't even know it can be used to cheat in MMO and not only single-player games. So it was open for days. I have no idea whether the other 1515 players were cheating and what programs they were using, but I'm 100% sure I was not, and Anet shouldn't ban those who didn't. In case of programs, developed to cheat in GW2, it's safe to assume the person is cheating. Cheat Engine, however, could be used for other games.

[Vault Girl.6792]

> @"Colly.4073" said:

> You know the risks of 3rd party apps when you go to the website that contains them, you know the risks when you click the download button and you know the risks when you click INSTALL and then proceed to run the application. I'm sorry but if you chose to download, install and then run something that isn't approved by anet then your ban is justified whether you used it for 3 minutes or 3 weeks.

 

Nothing except GW2 itself is approved. So should I ask Anet every time when I want to run Photoshop? Or Excel? Or Word? What if I open a browser? I understand if people get banned for things designed to cheat in GW2, but for unrelated programs?

[Colly.4073]

> @"Vault Girl.6792" said:

> > @"Colly.4073" said:

> > You know the risks of 3rd party apps when you go to the website that contains them, you know the risks when you click the download button and you know the risks when you click INSTALL and then proceed to run the application. I'm sorry but if you chose to download, install and then run something that isn't approved by anet then your ban is justified whether you used it for 3 minutes or 3 weeks.

>

> Nothing except GW2 itself is approved. So should I ask Anet every time when I want to run Photoshop? Or Excel? Or Word? What if I open a browser? I understand if people get banned for things designed to cheat in GW2, but for unrelated programs?

 

3rd party apps which are directly related to gw2 such as the ones listed by Gaile and a plethora of others that are floating around. If you chose to use any of them then i'm sorry but it's "tuff".

[Vault Girl.6792]

> @"Colly.4073" said:

> > @"Vault Girl.6792" said:

> > > @"Colly.4073" said:

> > > You know the risks of 3rd party apps when you go to the website that contains them, you know the risks when you click the download button and you know the risks when you click INSTALL and then proceed to run the application. I'm sorry but if you chose to download, install and then run something that isn't approved by anet then your ban is justified whether you used it for 3 minutes or 3 weeks.

> >

> > Nothing except GW2 itself is approved. So should I ask Anet every time when I want to run Photoshop? Or Excel? Or Word? What if I open a browser? I understand if people get banned for things designed to cheat in GW2, but for unrelated programs?

>

> 3rd party apps which are directly related to gw2 such as the ones listed by Gaile and a plethora of others that are floating around. If you chose to use any of them then i'm sorry but it's "tuff".

 

No, not all of them are directly related. GW2MHRexe most likely is. I have no idea what it does, but, I guess, it's designed for GW2 only. But how is Cheat Engine related to GW2? It can be used to read/modify anything.

[Deihnyx.6318]

> @"Nezekan.2671" said:

> > @"TexZero.7910" said:

> > > @"Nezekan.2671" said:

> > > You CANNOT justify an illegal action with legal jargon in your contract, at least that's not how it works in Germany and most European countries. Not sure about USA since I practice law in Germany. So what Anet says about it in their terms of service is absolutely irrelevant and void. If they are spying on me without my consent, they will have to compensate me. I have in fact seen this in other games and the developers had to compensate the players.

> >

> > Except you gave consent the moment you created an account. Sorry, not sorry.

> >

> > You may want to go read their legalese and perhaps consult someone with more time and knowledge in the field than yourself if you actually study and practice law.

> >

> > What Anet has is legally binding, whether you like it or not.

> >

> >

>

> You cannot make an illegal action legally binding. I.E if I'm selling you illegal drugs and you don't pay me I can't claim we had a legally binding contract. Its the same here, but on a much lower scale.

>

> Companies can write anything they like in their terms of agreement, but it can be challenged. I have seen it before. Contracts are not absolute. They can be challenged and its the fundamental aspect of law to do so. And this is not just about spying, steam does it as well, its about taking an action based on that and terminating your access to the game.

>

> I can guarantee you that I can at least get a refund on the game.

 

So you'd rather have this game filled with cheaters than let them monitor your game? Ok.

Try to get refunded based on this "illegal action" you think this is. Let us know what happens, danke!

[Ravezaar.4951]

Haha...................

[Linken.6345]

> @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > > @"Kunzaito.8169" said:

> > > > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > >

> > > > Nope.

> > > >

> > > > A player's computer is not on Anet's property.

> > >

> > > I misread your response initially, revising:

> > >

> > > This is where you are trying to stretch the analogy too far. It's not going to fit every dimension of this situation physically and doesn't have to.

> > >

> > > ANet can monitor your computer at any time for any reason while you use their software as per the terms you agreed to when you created an account - see the user referencing the EXACT section of that EULA above. Don't like it? Uninstall.

> > >

> >

> > You are missing the point. They didnt just monitor. Anet went that one step beyond that makes this whole thing distasteful and shady. They gathered data, they send said data to their server, and they did that unexpectedly nearly 6 years after I signed my UA without informing me about it. 3 out of 3 makes it spyware in my book.

>

> Yes and this is why Gaile updated her original post. They are now in damage control mode and I'd like to see some people lose their jobs with a VERY public apology.

>

> Even then I don't think they can ever be trusted again.

 

Lose their jobb for what exactly doing something you gave them premission to do?