Account suspension discussion [merged]

[Sojourner.4621]

> @"Nightlark.4029" said:

> > @"Evon Skyfyre.9673" said:

> > Wonder how the makers of these programs are taking the labelling of their packages.

> 3 of the listed programs are specifically for GW2, and another is for botting in MMOs with a version specifically for GW2. Pretty sure the makers of those 4 programs don't care how they are labelled, since they make changes to try to avoid having their software trigger cheat detection (more so for the botting one, since other MMOs have better cheat detection in place than GW2).

 

It's telling that on the site of the botting one, the owner has already put up a newspost saying basically, paraphrasing of course, "We'll make sure you don't get caught by this scanning method next time."

[Ardenwolfe.8590]

> @"Twoodi.5849" said:

 

>

> Depends on your morals, if you are fine with companies spying on you thats on you, but you cannot expect everyone to feel the same way.

>

Please don't go there. And I really hope I don't need to explain why. That said . . . quit. No one is forced to play a game where they're so unjustly spied upon. And yes, I'm fine with it. I agreed to it when I clicked, "I agree."

 

And so did you.

 

[mercury ranique.2170]

To address some issues with data and coverage. Everything you do online is monitored and logged. It is how computer programs work. You press a button, and it has consequences that need to be documented. In case you need a back up copy, or in case you need to undo your action. So it is accepted that a computer program logs everything.

We also agree that bad people are a thread to gw2. Hackers, gold sellers, scammers, and even people using faul language, we want arenanet to stop them.

They have two ways to do so.

1: someone is offended by your behavior. Arenanet sees the report and investigates. They have stated to look only close to the incident and not beyond. This is a matter of trust, but I believe them.

2: they use an algorithm (or a query) to track behavior that is not allowed. A computer searches and might flag you for inappropriate behavior. Then arenanet investigates and if needed suspend you.

 

They claim to check every account they suspend manually. Personally, I doubt it. When they block 2000 accounts, they don’t, but they do look at the automatic algorithm, if 2000 accounts are suspected and 200 are manually proofed to be wrong, i think it is safe to assume the rest is bad as well.

 

My issue is not with privacy. I believe my privacy is safe with arenanet. I actually told a woman whom I was intimated with, that if a gm was reading it, he would have had a great time. He is not there to judge you. He has a set of rules to check if we behave according to them. He only do so if there is a suspicion that we did wrong.

 

I do have an issue with the no appeal remark. Everyone has a right to an appeal when banned. I am ok when you filter them and handle them later. But read someone’s defense and check it again.

[Laila Lightness.8742]

> @"mercury ranique.2170" said:

> To address some issues with data and coverage. Everything you do online is monitored and logged. It is how computer programs work. You press a button, and it has consequences that need to be documented. In case you need a back up copy, or in case you need to undo your action. So it is accepted that a computer program logs everything.

> We also agree that bad people are a thread to gw2. Hackers, gold sellers, scammers, and even people using faul language, we want arenanet to stop them.

> They have two ways to do so.

> 1: someone is offended by your behavior. Arenanet sees the report and investigates. They have stated to look only close to the incident and not beyond. This is a matter of trust, but I believe them.

> 2: they use an algorithm (or a query) to track behavior that is not allowed. A computer searches and might flag you for inappropriate behavior. Then arenanet investigates and if needed suspend you.

>

> They claim to check every account they suspend manually. Personally, I doubt it. When they block 2000 accounts, they don’t, but they do look at the automatic algorithm, if 2000 accounts are suspected and 200 are manually proofed to be wrong, i think it is safe to assume the rest is bad as well.

>

> My issue is not with privacy. I believe my privacy is safe with arenanet. I actually told a woman whom I was intimated with, that if a gm was reading it, he would have had a great time. He is not there to judge you. He has a set of rules to check if we behave according to them. He only do so if there is a suspicion that we did wrong.

>

> I do have an issue with the no appeal remark. Everyone has a right to an appeal when banned. I am ok when you filter them and handle them later. But read someone’s defense and check it again.

 

I think no apeal part was to prevent support being flooded with tickets they are barly able too keep up with it anyway

[mercury ranique.2170]

> @"Laila Lightness.8742" said:

> > @"mercury ranique.2170" said:

> > To address some issues with data and coverage. Everything you do online is monitored and logged. It is how computer programs work. You press a button, and it has consequences that need to be documented. In case you need a back up copy, or in case you need to undo your action. So it is accepted that a computer program logs everything.

> > We also agree that bad people are a thread to gw2. Hackers, gold sellers, scammers, and even people using faul language, we want arenanet to stop them.

> > They have two ways to do so.

> > 1: someone is offended by your behavior. Arenanet sees the report and investigates. They have stated to look only close to the incident and not beyond. This is a matter of trust, but I believe them.

> > 2: they use an algorithm (or a query) to track behavior that is not allowed. A computer searches and might flag you for inappropriate behavior. Then arenanet investigates and if needed suspend you.

> >

> > They claim to check every account they suspend manually. Personally, I doubt it. When they block 2000 accounts, they don’t, but they do look at the automatic algorithm, if 2000 accounts are suspected and 200 are manually proofed to be wrong, i think it is safe to assume the rest is bad as well.

> >

> > My issue is not with privacy. I believe my privacy is safe with arenanet. I actually told a woman whom I was intimated with, that if a gm was reading it, he would have had a great time. He is not there to judge you. He has a set of rules to check if we behave according to them. He only do so if there is a suspicion that we did wrong.

> >

> > I do have an issue with the no appeal remark. Everyone has a right to an appeal when banned. I am ok when you filter them and handle them later. But read someone’s defense and check it again.

>

> I think no apeal part was to prevent support being flooded with tickets they are barly able too keep up with it anyway

 

True, but it should not take many effort to filter out the tickets about the suspension, specially cause they have a list of those accounts suspended. So filter them out and handle them in a slower pace....

[Shagaliscious.6281]

I want to know why IP's weren't banned. A certain leader for a guild that I will go unnamed (DUSK) is already back in game playing on his alternate account.

[usnedward.9023]

> @"Evon Skyfyre.9673" said:

> One thing I would really be interested in seeing is a month from now, an honest, no spin, post from Anet, stating this debacle was or was not worth it. Okay they removed X amount of players for 6 months. Many probably have alternate accounts and are already playing again (I know of players with 54 characters or more so...). So overnight many have just laughed and moved on. Some are caught in the net by mistake and will hopefully be set free. But my question is, was the PR nightmare this is becoming, worth it? The tech community is saying there were so many other ways to handle this. But to be fair, that is their take on it. They know their skillsets not Anet's. (Not being snarky, everyone has their limitations). Reddit exploded and that as many will attest is never a good thing. (Ask EA about BF2, Disney, back peddling at light speed, "You have no idea, the power of the Reddit side"). Players like myself loyal from the very beginning of Guild wars, walking away. Being labeled as a company that uses "Spyware" shrouded in legalese, to play big brother. I have even talked to those in the legal profession. They would only say they are glad they are not involved, it could become a real hornets nest. Now fast forward to the GDPR https://www.bna.com/countdown-gdpr-compliance-n57982090871/ hitting 05/25/2018. I would feel safe in saying many will file a report. Will it go anywhere? Who knows. But, Anet's name will be smeared more by the outcry and resulting news items pouring out because of it. It might even be a test case. So back to my original question. Was it worth it? We'll probably never know. The saddest result is, many will say "Arena who?" And never try one of their games. Word of mouth is wicked. Trust is easy to lose, almost impossible for companies to regain.

 

Wrongo on alt accounts. My alt acc was banned I never played on but rare occasions. It was not banned in the original ban and I think only banned (3 days later) when I mentioned my alt account on forum. Maybe they went back and did a sweep by customer name, IP or something. Is it worth it you ask? Yes the more they get rid of the better off the game will be. You can read previous posts I made for why I did what I did and it is not an excuse but hey I get it. The good thing is ANET stated they will not un-ban my accounts and I have asked for total deletion as I have no intention on continuing with MMOs. Nothing personal at ANET or players but after 15 years of MMOs I need to find a better use of my time.

 

[usnedward.9023]

Here is what I want **ALL** of you to do that say "you did not cheat" or "violate" ToS. Put in a ticket and you will get your response similar to mine and then come back and SHARE your response:

 

_Hello Edward,_

 

_During our investigation, we have detected that you had the program "Nabster" running with your account. This program goes against our Terms of Service and Rules of Conduct. As such your account access has been temporarily suspended. We will not be reducing or removing the suspension on the associated account.

Regards,_

 

_Senior GM Heart_

_Guild Wars 2 Support Team_

[Mokk.2397]

Companies that monitor their own software is not spying .It is not your software because you happen to buy it.You only bought the rights (license) to run said software but you do not own it.If at any point that you violate the users agreement ,specifically section 8i of ANET user agreement ,no matter how small you may think ,you should be suspended without appeal.You chose to use such third party software You can pay the consequences. Just be happy you didn'y get an outright ban and deal with it.

That being said any anti virus program could be considered spying because it scans files and memory .They can also send back information about suspicious applications and files with heuristic scans.But this is not considered "spying" ? Apples and oranges you may say ,but when you install any program it comes with conditions and if you agreed to those conditions and install, its your responsibility to understand those conditions and how they apply to you.

I would like to add that it's silly to ban IP addresses because not all IP addresses are static .Some are dynamic (they change). If ANET banned every address they thought was suspicious soon nobody would be able to access the game.

 

[Deihnyx.6318]

> @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> > A hack resulting of a leak would likely cause a lot more damage with... I don't know... text logs from in game? personal info such as irl name? email?

>

> Tbh, irl names arent even THAT important.

> Knowing every process being run on a computer - on the other hand - makes it way easier to attack that computer, thats just a fact even amateurs should realize. Anet created a security risk with their behaviour, and they did it in a way thats unsavory and distasteful because it also was an infringement on everybodies privacy.

>

> And btw, we still dont know what Anet EXACTLY did with that data.

>

> The lack of concern about the security risks and infringement on privacy just plainly worry me. So what if other companies do the same or even worse? That doesnt make ANY of it right.

 

About privacy, you accepted to be monitored while playing the game when you signed the ToS. There is really nothing else to say.

The second scenario assumes that anet kept all hashed processes from everyone and is going to be hacked, causing a leak.

Also, even having a salt does not necessarily protect you, if the formula (for example md5) is known and the salt is unique per client, anet still need to keep track of which client is using which salt in order to generate a set of hashes for the unauthorized programs per client.

 

Again, while yes in theory it could be possible to make use of such things, I think we're getting to paranoiac levels of concern. It's a WHOLE OTHER DEBATE in general. It doesn't only apply to this case, but also how do we know that our logs are safe today? How do we ensure that a leak isn't going to reveal my personal name + address?

And not focusing on anet, how do you know that your banking data is safe is a leak happen at Microsoft, at Sony? At all these online stores that you go to everyday? Is all the data being transferred to them safe?

 

But bringing that up NOW as an argument to fight a ban wave is plain hypocrisy, unless people were absolutely unaware of it all of that and have now disabled javascript, avoiding google, facebook, and have started a big fight for their privacy rights with all these companies, with microsoft and all.

Anet shouldn't be burnt at the stake for it while sharing information with servers (the LARGE portion of it being for non malicious intents) has become a standard today, and when the MAIN purpose is to make everyone's experience better in their game!

[Nightlark.4029]

> @"Mokk.2397" said:

> True overlays like Discord do not read anything from the game but bypasses the game entirely to overlay on the screen. TacO and arcdps ,with certain plugins, reads the memory and adds information to the screen .Which violates section 8i of the user agreement. All other third party programs mentioned by ANET are clear violations.

Actually, Discord and other "true overlays" hook into and intercept drawing calls from the game (in GW2, typically the Present method in D3D9) in order to properly draw on top of what the game has drawn. ArcDPS reads memory and uses a similar drawing hook, and hooks for getting user input -- in addition to reading memory, ArcDPS also writes to GW2 memory to add hooks for when certain events happen.

 

TacO is the most benign of the programs you mention, the only memory it reads from GW2 is from MumbleLink which ANet added to allow other programs to access certain information (basically, it is an official way to get information about the game); in addition to that, TacO doesn't hook any drawing calls for its game, it just draws on top of the entire screen, which is why the TacO overlay doesn't work when you put GW2 in a true fullscreen mode (not just the maximized borderless window).

 

> @"Mokk.2397" said:

> It is possible to incorporate sub routines in a program that monitor the memory ,including video memory ,CPU ,GPU and can detect whether a third party program is altering any addresses in the memory,CPU,GPU or video memory .This information can be sent back to ANET for analysis .Based on how a third party program manipulates certain addresses it can be determined which third party programs are being used. It is not necessary to scan your entire computer. Antivirus programs do this all the time .This is not in violation of privacy rights because the program designer has the right to monitor their own program.

Issue is that the scanning ANet added looks at _everything_ running on the computer, not just the ones relevant to GW2.

 

---

 

> @"mercury ranique.2170" said:

> They claim to check every account they suspend manually. Personally, I doubt it. When they block 2000 accounts, they don’t, but they do look at the automatic algorithm, if 2000 accounts are suspected and 200 are manually proofed to be wrong, i think it is safe to assume the rest is bad as well.

Bad assumption. Look up "face recognition racial bias" for an example. I'm sure the engineers who designed those algorithms thought they had a great algorithm when they were testing it during development.

[Yasi.9065]

> @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> > @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > > @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> > > A hack resulting of a leak would likely cause a lot more damage with... I don't know... text logs from in game? personal info such as irl name? email?

> >

> > Tbh, irl names arent even THAT important.

> > Knowing every process being run on a computer - on the other hand - makes it way easier to attack that computer, thats just a fact even amateurs should realize. Anet created a security risk with their behaviour, and they did it in a way thats unsavory and distasteful because it also was an infringement on everybodies privacy.

> >

> > And btw, we still dont know what Anet EXACTLY did with that data.

> >

> > The lack of concern about the security risks and infringement on privacy just plainly worry me. So what if other companies do the same or even worse? That doesnt make ANY of it right.

>

> About privacy, you accepted to be monitored while playing the game when you signed the ToS. There is really nothing else to say.

 

Wrong. Read it please without bias.

 

> @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> The second scenario assumes that anet kept all hashed processes from everyone and is going to be hacked, causing a leak.

 

Again, wrong. Simply by having gw2 client send that data to their server regularly and over an extended period of time they exposed that data.

 

> @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> Also, even having a salt does not necessarily protect you, if the formula (for example md5) is known and the salt is unique per client, anet still need to keep track of which client is using which salt in order to generate a set of hashes for the unauthorized programs per client.

 

So what? Nobody said its easy to legally keep hackers away from your software. Anet went with the most lazy approach, and the one doing most damage to innocent bystanders.

 

> @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> Again, while yes in theory it could be possible to make use of such things, I think we're getting to paranoiac levels of concern. It's a WHOLE OTHER DEBATE in general. It doesn't only apply to this case, but also how do we know that our logs are safe today? How do we ensure that a leak isn't going to reveal my personal name + address?

 

Again, your irl name and address isnt even the most interesting part about your computer. Dunno why you keep thinking that.

 

> @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> And not focusing on anet, how do you know that your banking data is safe is a leak happen at Microsoft, at Sony? At all these online stores that you go to everyday? Is all the data being transferred to them safe?

 

THOSE have to get certified regularly either for me to buy something there, or by law (online banking). Dont compare apples and shoes please. Also, its nice of you to mention Microsoft, since THEY at least warn you upfront about the data they gather. For each case, not just hidden away in some broad UA statement.

/edit: Probably because they already lost several suits concerning this.

 

> @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> But bringing that up NOW as an argument to fight a ban wave is plain hypocrisy, unless people were absolutely unaware of it all of that and have now disabled javascript, avoiding google, facebook, and have started a big fight for their privacy rights with all these companies, with microsoft and all.

 

I was aware of it, I take countermeasures. But thats beside the point. I couldnt care less about the suspensions, except to find it *hilariously* laughable that Anet:

a) thinks CheatEngine is mainly used for cheating

b) wasnt even able to check for handles and

c) didnt even ban way more offensive software

 

As if someone that creates hacks and bots for mmos plays around with CheatEngine for long, just plain hilarious.

 

> @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> Anet shouldn't be burnt at the stake for it while sharing information with servers (the LARGE portion of it being for non malicious intents) has become a standard today, and when the MAIN purpose is to make everyone's experience better in their game!

 

Yes, Anet should be burned for it, because they crossed a line there. They went and snooped around in my underwear drawers, put me under general suspicion without me giving them any reason and exposed my computer system to security risks.

 

And THATS what Im angry with and take offense at. Those that got caught? Well, except the false positives and those using CheatEngine not on gw2... they deserve what they got for being so stupid.

[morrolan.9608]

> @"Mokk.2397" said:

 

> It is possible to incorporate sub routines in a program that monitor the memory ,including video memory ,CPU ,GPU and can detect whether a third party program is altering any addresses in the memory,CPU,GPU or video memory .This information can be sent back to ANET for analysis .Based on how a third party program manipulates certain addresses it can be determined which third party programs are being used. It is not necessary to scan your entire computer. Antivirus programs do this all the time .This is not in violation of privacy rights because the program designer has the right to monitor their own program.

 

According to anets own statement they did not do this, hence why people are calling anet out on doing this badly apart from the lack of transparency with using spyware.

 

 

[morrolan.9608]

> @"Mokk.2397" said:

> Companies that monitor their own software is not spying .

 

They didn't just monitor their own software though.

 

> @"Mokk.2397" said:

> That being said any anti virus program could be considered spying because it scans files and memory .They can also send back information about suspicious applications and files with heuristic scans.But this is not considered "spying" ? Apples and oranges you may say ,but when you install any program it comes with conditions and if you agreed to those conditions and install, its your responsibility to understand those conditions and how they apply to you.

 

If they committed an illegal act its essentially irrelevant if it was covered by the EULA. I would extend that to cover unethical acts as well, as what anet did is at the very least unethical. There was an ethical way to go about doing this and anet chose not to go that way.

 

 

[Mokk.2397]

Well all I know that if your put your entire life on your computer or phone and expect it not to be analyzed then you really need a reality check.Whether its malicious or not data gathering is here in this " Information age" we live.If it's for your convenience that you have everything attached to the internet by PC or mobile that,s on you and no one else.

I myself won't leave any information about myself personally ,whether its pass codes ,bank information,home addresses ,phone numbers ,photos.etc. on my computer.I won't even use the cloud for storage.It just makes it harder for the bad people or anyone for that matter. But that's just me .So really i couldn't care less if someone scanned my computer. Guess being paranoid pays off in the end.

[Malediktus.9250]

> @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> > Also, even having a salt does not necessarily protect you, if the formula (for example md5) is known and the salt is unique per client, anet still need to keep track of which client is using which salt in order to generate a set of hashes for the unauthorized programs per client.

>

> So what? Nobody said its easy to legally keep hackers away from your software. Anet went with the most lazy approach, and the one doing most damage to innocent bystanders.

>

 

But no damage has been done at all. I wish people with zero knowledge about this would stop talking.

 

Also did you ever heared of "The end justifies the means."? They cannot let thousands of cheaters go unpunished just because some clueless people blow this out of proportion. There are literally thousands of areas where complains about privacy would be justified. This case isnt.

[Stratcaster.9307]

'We targeted programs that allow players to cheat and gain unfair gameplay advantages, even if those programs have other, more benign uses.

Programs Detected:

CheatEngine

Nabster

GW2MHRexe

UNF

MMOMINION'

---------------------

Don't be bad. Bad gets banned.

[morrolan.9608]

> @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > > @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> > > Also, even having a salt does not necessarily protect you, if the formula (for example md5) is known and the salt is unique per client, anet still need to keep track of which client is using which salt in order to generate a set of hashes for the unauthorized programs per client.

> >

> > So what? Nobody said its easy to legally keep hackers away from your software. Anet went with the most lazy approach, and the one doing most damage to innocent bystanders.

> >

>

> But no damage has been done at all. I wish people with zero knowledge about this would stop talking.

 

So those people who say had Cheat Engine for legitimate uses who got banned are irrelevant? This sure is a great community.

 

[Rajani Isa.6294]

I’ll agree the that CheatEngine needs to be treated more delicately than the others do to its use as utility outside hacking games.

 

It would be nice to know if the processes were compared to a list client-side first, only sending on the pozitive results or did it just scan, collect, and upload to be compared later.

[Malediktus.9250]

> @"morrolan.9608" said:

> > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > > > @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> > > > Also, even having a salt does not necessarily protect you, if the formula (for example md5) is known and the salt is unique per client, anet still need to keep track of which client is using which salt in order to generate a set of hashes for the unauthorized programs per client.

> > >

> > > So what? Nobody said its easy to legally keep hackers away from your software. Anet went with the most lazy approach, and the one doing most damage to innocent bystanders.

> > >

> >

> > But no damage has been done at all. I wish people with zero knowledge about this would stop talking.

>

> So those people who say had Cheat Engine for legitimate uses who got banned are irrelevant? This sure is a great community.

>

 

Their fault if they run such a program (it should be common sense honestly) alongside of a multiplayer game. It would be way more intrusive to detect if CE was actually used on the game, so I prefer it this way. In a way Anet actually honored peoples privacy by not digging deeper and just looking at the surface.

[Obtena.7952]

> @"Zaraki.5784" said:

> > @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > > @"Jason.5983" said:

> > > > @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > > > @"Jason.5983" One is still better than none, but again . . . good luck with convincing ANet otherwise.

> > >

> > > I am doubtful I need to convince them.

> > > I have heard of some suspensions being lifted, and the backlash here in the discussion speaks for itself.

> > >

> > > Damage to a companies reputation can have effects on sales, and so forth.

> >

> > The ironic part is all this thread tells me is how good this game is, and how far people will go to convince ANet to let them play this game again if suspended from it.

> >

> > But damage control and so-called reputations is a whole 'nother topic.

>

> Nah the point of this thread has shifted from what you said to "anet are bad people for spying us".

>

> > @"Obtena.7952" said:

> > > @"Twoodi.5849" said:

> > > > @"Jason.5983" said:

> > > > > @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > > > > > @"Jason.5983" said:

> > > > > > > @"Ardenwolfe.8590" said:

> > > > > > > @"Jason.5983" One is still better than none, but again . . . good luck with convincing ANet otherwise.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I am doubtful I need to convince them.

> > > > > > I have heard of some suspensions being lifted, and the backlash here in the discussion speaks for itself.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Damage to a companies reputation can have effects on sales, and so forth.

> > > > >

> > > > > The ironic part is all this thread tells me is how good this game is, and how far people will go to convince ANet to let them play this game again if suspended from it.

> > > > >

> > > > > But damage control and so-called reputations is a whole 'nother topic.

> > > >

> > > > That element is humorous in all games. I remember seeing it back in Runescape when I was a bit younger - it was mostly teenagers crying and claiming they wouldn't do it again.

> > > >

> > > > I would imagine most of the people who were banned recently, likely bought another account or are planning on it. Perhaps a certain amount left the game, for another or maybe they stopped playing games. I think if someone is willing to take that risk to bot, they feel it's a valid enough reason, be it gaining gold, which would probably mean they are somewhat addicted to the game and are quite likely to return, or literally for black market money, where it's foreseeable that some have still made more money than they have lost in time and money for a new account.

> > > >

> > > > That's a bit of a sad side of all this. People are also aware of the hashing, and I would imagine there is some technical way to hide your processes (there always is), meaning perhaps this method would be less efficient when used in the future. Can obviously contrast this to other methods of anti-cheating.

> > >

> > > The sad side of this is the people in the forums blindly defending ANET and claiming false bans are okay because ANET can do whatever they want

> >

> > It's not blindly defending ... it's simply accepting responsibility and acknowledging the space in which we play. Anet owns the accounts. They CAN do what they want with them. Accept it. That's NOT just an Anet thing either.

>

> I don't know if you truly realized what you said....no matter what ToS are, if a game company ban people _**without reasons**_ even if they can legally do that, be sure that people will stop buying their products and said company will fail the more the news spreads.

 

I didn't say anything about Anet banning people without reasons ... and in this case they didn't.

[CETheLucid.3964]

> @"morrolan.9608" said:

> > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > > > @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> > > > Also, even having a salt does not necessarily protect you, if the formula (for example md5) is known and the salt is unique per client, anet still need to keep track of which client is using which salt in order to generate a set of hashes for the unauthorized programs per client.

> > >

> > > So what? Nobody said its easy to legally keep hackers away from your software. Anet went with the most lazy approach, and the one doing most damage to innocent bystanders.

> > >

> >

> > But no damage has been done at all. I wish people with zero knowledge about this would stop talking.

>

> So those people who say had Cheat Engine for legitimate uses who got banned are irrelevant? This sure is a great community.

>

 

CheatEngine has legitimate uses. Having CheatEngine running while you're playing GW2 or indeed any online multiplayer game is stupid. CheatEngine being on your system isn't what got anyone banned. Having CheatEngine running while GW2 was running is what flagged accounts for a ban.

 

Savvy?

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > > @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> > > Also, even having a salt does not necessarily protect you, if the formula (for example md5) is known and the salt is unique per client, anet still need to keep track of which client is using which salt in order to generate a set of hashes for the unauthorized programs per client.

> >

> > So what? Nobody said its easy to legally keep hackers away from your software. Anet went with the most lazy approach, and the one doing most damage to innocent bystanders.

> >

>

> But no damage has been done at all. I wish people with zero knowledge about this would stop talking.

>

> Also did you ever heared of "The end justifies the means."? They cannot let thousands of cheaters go unpunished just because some clueless people blow this out of proportion. There are literally thousands of areas where complains about privacy would be justified. This case isnt.

 

The end justifies the means is often, perhaps normally, used in a negative sense, describing abusive behavior, often in the same vein as the saying about the path to hell being paved in good intentions.

[Malediktus.9250]

> @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > > > @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> > > > Also, even having a salt does not necessarily protect you, if the formula (for example md5) is known and the salt is unique per client, anet still need to keep track of which client is using which salt in order to generate a set of hashes for the unauthorized programs per client.

> > >

> > > So what? Nobody said its easy to legally keep hackers away from your software. Anet went with the most lazy approach, and the one doing most damage to innocent bystanders.

> > >

> >

> > But no damage has been done at all. I wish people with zero knowledge about this would stop talking.

> >

> > Also did you ever heared of "The end justifies the means."? They cannot let thousands of cheaters go unpunished just because some clueless people blow this out of proportion. There are literally thousands of areas where complains about privacy would be justified. This case isnt.

>

> The end justifies the means is often, perhaps normally, used in a negative sense, describing abusive behavior, often in the same vein as the saying about the path to hell being paved in good intentions.

Just like laws often have good intentions but are made by clueless old politicians who understands nothing about the world (especially the modern, digital world). Sometimes it is just best to ignore the laws and just avoid getting caught. Or bribe some people.

[Ashen.2907]

> @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > @"Malediktus.9250" said:

> > > > @"Yasi.9065" said:

> > > > > @"Deihnyx.6318" said:

> > > > > Also, even having a salt does not necessarily protect you, if the formula (for example md5) is known and the salt is unique per client, anet still need to keep track of which client is using which salt in order to generate a set of hashes for the unauthorized programs per client.

> > > >

> > > > So what? Nobody said its easy to legally keep hackers away from your software. Anet went with the most lazy approach, and the one doing most damage to innocent bystanders.

> > > >

> > >

> > > But no damage has been done at all. I wish people with zero knowledge about this would stop talking.

> > >

> > > Also did you ever heared of "The end justifies the means."? They cannot let thousands of cheaters go unpunished just because some clueless people blow this out of proportion. There are literally thousands of areas where complains about privacy would be justified. This case isnt.

> >

> > The end justifies the means is often, perhaps normally, used in a negative sense, describing abusive behavior, often in the same vein as the saying about the path to hell being paved in good intentions.

> Just like laws often have good intentions but are made by clueless old politicians who understands nothing about the world (especially the modern, digital world).

 

Absolutely.

 

Company policies are written by desk jockies back east at corporate who havent dealt with the field directly in decades.