Posted - 2011.03.28 00:03:00 - [1952]

 

Originally by: Nadarius Chrome

---

Let's see how many of the "devil's advocate" wannabe posters have disappeared.

---

Don't know if you include me in that label, but I haven't disappeared by any means.

I'm just waiting for the cognitive dissonance to start with those that just automatically accept that anyone banned is therefore guilty, as if these claimed changes and these claimed bans actually reduce the problem.

Taking the '1000' accounts banned figure at its face, unless that number was at least 60% nullsec macro ratters, then all CCP has done is hurt highsec miners who might amass 15 million per hour, as opposed to 8-10 million per hour, which will not affect the game in any meaningful way. Yes, yes, we all need to wait and see, or as an ex-wife used to say, 'hide and watch', but anyone who thinks that macro miners are the root of the problem are sorely mistaken.

Posted - 2011.03.28 03:16:00 - [1954]

 

Originally by: Minarete

---

I am going to be very very interested to see how this all pans out against the economy etc.

I am one of the maniac fools that mines too much, and I cant see other "Miners" picking up the slack of mineral stock pile depletion even if the price doubles or triples, it is just too *F*ing boring, and I do it while I am working at home.

My main purpose for mining, is to supply for my own T2 Production, which does not require a whole lot of T1 minerals. I do not sell that much, and actually buy more than I mine myself.

I do mine about 4-6 times more Ice than my own PoS requires, and sell the excess, only again, because it is easy, but also boring as *F*, the price of that doubling, would not in anyway make me rich.

---

EVE's economy is built on the assumption that botting would be permitted (as it has implicitly been in the past). I think because of that fact, EVE's economy is going to need some serious reconstruction. Regardless, botting and using botting as a crutch for the economy, when it is explicitly against the EULA, is absolutely unacceptable.

I would rather see a lottery where players are randomly given resources than see the continued implicit approval/crutch of botting. At least that would even the playing field for those who adhere to the EULA. That's a horrible idea, I know, but it illustrates how much I would like to see bots disappear from EVE.

To reduce shock, iteratively:
1) Burn away a significant portion of bots.
2) Damage control on EVE economy.

Posted - 2011.03.28 12:04:00 - [1956]

 

Posted - 2011.03.28 12:32:00 - [1958]

 

Amusing quote from the bot site Kappas quoted from above...

Quote:

---

I hate to say it, but we could be in trouble here... just lost 5 of my 14 accounts today alone. and ITS A SUNDAY! good thing they only gave me a 3 day ban.

Edit: well, now I know they are watching me, just lost another a few seconds after i did the original post. I think pretending to pvp in them will get the rest of the bots safe... bot with -1.9 sec status... lol..

---

Posted - 2011.03.28 12:38:00 - [1960]

 

So you can pretty much bot all you want since you only get a few days ban max the first time anyway? Followed by a 30 days ban of what i assuem is only the account you bot on?

Posted - 2011.03.28 13:53:00 - [1962]

 

Edited by: Othran on 28/03/2011 13:53:37

Originally by: Hairy Beta

---

Edited by: Hairy Beta on 28/03/2011 12:55:56

roidreaver seems to be okay.

http://www.publicdemands.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?6928-So..-how-many-of-you-have-been-banned-in-this-mini-wave

---

Lovely its a .co.uk and its being used for commercial purposes so we can get the whois populated correctly - and if its false registrant info we can get the domain removed from the registrant too. Nice and easy too, not like .com domains where the vast majority have incorrect registrant info and nobody will do anything about it.

You'd imagine CCP might have a clue about things like this.......

Edit - Nominet case number assigned and in progress.

Posted - 2011.03.28 14:46:00 - [1964]

 

Edited by: Puchat Aivoras on 28/03/2011 14:50:03

Originally by: Othran

---

Edited by: Othran on 28/03/2011 13:53:37

Originally by: Hairy Beta

---

Edited by: Hairy Beta on 28/03/2011 12:55:56

roidreaver seems to be okay.

http://www.publicdemands.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?6928-So..-how-many-of-you-have-been-banned-in-this-mini-wave

---

Lovely its a .co.uk and its being used for commercial purposes so we can get the whois populated correctly - and if its false registrant info we can get the domain removed from the registrant too. Nice and easy too, not like .com domains where the vast majority have incorrect registrant info and nobody will do anything about it.

You'd imagine CCP might have a clue about things like this.......

Edit - Nominet case number assigned and in progress.

---

And that accomplishes what? you know his/her name and company? If this person is THAT deep into botting not only is their real name not on a single one of their accounts, but they are probably running them all through a VPN service to give them multiple IPS so ccp wont be able to do jack with the info.

What we need to do is make a statement that they are not welcome in our game.
this one here is one of the bot authors
http://www.publicdemands.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?6923-PLEX-for-Japan
It is the same one that bragged he had 12 bots going 23/7 and didn't get touched with the ban wave. he claims his program does 120mil a day per bot on their forums.
By his post that means he donated 43,200,000,000 in isk or about 115 plex at 375 mil each. Now something like that has to be easy to track that isk should be removed from the donation pool, back tracked to him and all his accounts banned!

This would say that we are in no way OK with bot isk, no matter what it is used for. It would also remove most if not all of the programers accounts forcing him to start from scratch or at best delay his code release till the ban was over and force him to acquire all new accounts.

Posted - 2011.03.28 14:59:00 - [1966]

 

Edited by: Othran on 28/03/2011 15:01:43
It accomplishes something in that you find out who the owner of the .uk domain is - or who he purports to be.

.uk domain names have fairly strict rules - part of which is that if you run a commercial site you must provide accurate contact info, this overlaps into Distance Selling Regulations (UK consumer law) as well.

In the case of that particular domain, well its got a nameserver in RIPE IP space ostensibly allocated to a US LLC company that doesn't seem to exist. Same nameserver for a mining bot which has two .com addresses. Not even going to bother looking at the whois for the .coms as it'll be garbage and it'll be a USA registrar.

So in this instance (if I'm right) we can get the .co.uk pulled either because the registrant info is wrong or the registrant does not do any business within the UK (which he doesn't). Now at that point we can get RIPE involved via Nominet and get the IP allocation pulled.

All of that can be done EASILY. Its not the usual whack-a-mole crap you have with .com and US registrars who don't even attempt to validate registrant info.

Anyway if it annoys the domain holder then I like it.

Its not rocket science.

Edit - oh and a .co.uk domain attracts significantly less in the way of merchant fee "premiums" than a .com so you push costs up. If not you **** the bot vendor off and that's good....

Posted - 2011.03.28 15:42:00 - [1968]

 

Originally by: dexington

---

Originally by: Othran

---

In the case of that particular domain, well its got a nameserver in RIPE IP space ostensibly allocated to a US LLC company that doesn't seem to exist. Same nameserver for a mining bot which has two .com addresses.

---

ns1.publicdemands.co.uk (178.79.137.18) is the same ip running the forum, the server is probably hosted by linode.com, who the ip also is assigned to. The servers running the forum, are located somewhere in england most likely close to london where linode.com also have facilities and hardware.

Can't really see what the problem should be, looks perfectly legit to me.

---

It would to you. Now **** off.

Posted - 2011.03.28 16:01:00 - [1970]

 

Edited by: Othran on 28/03/2011 16:04:10

Originally by: Slate Shoa

---

I haven't had time to watch the whole thing, but I think this is the presentation:

EVE Fanfest 2011 Security Presentation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4gZm-85JOs

Keep this link on each new page in this forum if this is the promised youtube video...

---

That's the one although it seems to have had a bit cut off at the start.

Edit - from 13:40 or so to 22:00 is the whole crux of things. That's the man who has the know-how. Sreegs knows what he's doing but Claudio is the key.

Posted - 2011.03.28 16:23:00 - [1972]

 

Edited by: Othran on 28/03/2011 16:32:29
Edited by: Othran on 28/03/2011 16:25:13
Uhuh. You know who has the IP space? Like hell you do. You looked at the obvious and failed.

The reason is YOU HAVE NO CLUE. However here's a hint : wtf has the /28?

Again, **** off and stop trolling.

Like I said a Nominet case is open and they have agreed with what I've said. Registrar and registrant are informed that whois IS being populated. As usual its 123-reg so Nominet are well used to this.

Posted - 2011.03.28 16:41:00 - [1974]

 

U 2 need to chill the **** out

what is this accomplishing? even if you both track down the street address and owner names of those companys, what can you do about it?

this is CCP's war, let them fight it.

Posted - 2011.03.28 16:49:00 - [1976]

 

So far we have ..

Violation 1 - Unknown ban
Violation 2 - 30 day ban
Violation 3 - perma-ban.

And this from the bot forum today...

Quote:

---

they're bot detection cannot be that advanced, case in point, they ban 3 of my miners, they do not ban 4 of my miners, one of which runs on the same computer and has the same ip as the 3 that were banned. They are all in the same corp, a corp of only miners. sounds soooooo advanced [14 day ban btw]

---

Looks like violation 1 has a figure attached to it now.

Posted - 2011.03.28 16:56:00 - [1978]

 

Originally by: NinjaSpud

---

U 2 need to chill the **** out

what is this accomplishing? even if you both track down the street address and owner names of those companys, what can you do about it?

this is CCP's war, let them fight it.

---

You are spot on. Sorry.

Its just hard to let it go when a .uk domain is involved. Simple reason is that its nice and easy to get the .uk domain removed from scammers/etc. Its not like that in most other countries and people NEED to know that if its a .uk domain and trades (ie takes money/goods) then all of the consumer law applies - including full disclosure of name/address/telephone for the registrant. Also if you are a trader on one .uk domain then unless its a .me.uk (personal domain) then ALL of your .uk domains are commercial.

Low hanging fruit.....

Posted - 2011.03.28 17:24:00 - [1980]

 

Originally by: Othran

---

Originally by: NinjaSpud

---

U 2 need to chill the **** out

what is this accomplishing? even if you both track down the street address and owner names of those companys, what can you do about it?

this is CCP's war, let them fight it.

---

You are spot on. Sorry.

Its just hard to let it go when a .uk domain is involved. Simple reason is that its nice and easy to get the .uk domain removed from scammers/etc. Its not like that in most other countries and people NEED to know that if its a .uk domain and trades (ie takes money/goods) then all of the consumer law applies - including full disclosure of name/address/telephone for the registrant. Also if you are a trader on one .uk domain then unless its a .me.uk (personal domain) then ALL of your .uk domains are commercial.

Low hanging fruit.....

---

That's all well and nice, but what would be the legal basis for getting all that information? They are not doing anything illegal. And even if you were to argue that they are, the affected company is not in the UK, but another country. And if you were to get the UK to try to do *anything* against this site what would be the argument?

"Excuse me, your honor, but these horrible people are affecting my Internet Spaceships Game by not playing fair"
- "your what?"
- "you see, your honor, there's this game called eve online. It's about internet spaceships..."
- "Spaceships? what?"
- "Yes, it's a sci-fi game you see.."
- "SAI-FAI?"
- "Science fiction"
- "Ah, something like...Arthur C. Clarke?"
- "Who? what? no no no, it's a game"
- "Arthur C. Clarke makes games?"
- "No, no, it's an internet game... an MMORPG"
- thinking "what in bloddy hell..." says: "look i don't know what on earth you're talking about but I don't see a crime commited here within the UK"
- "But your honor..."
- "And it's spelled honour you bloody yank, now get out of here"

TL;DR: Nobody will go after the site. Waste of time. You need to go after the botters since they're the ones that are reachable by the TOS and EULA. Period.