open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Raging On
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 : last (11)

Author Topic

Kalle Demos
Amarr
Helix Protocol
Posted - 2010.12.15 12:51:00 - [211]
 

Heh and here I thought I was the only one that wasnt impressed with the blog.

Here is a small conversation Timmy and Billy have

Quote:
Billy: I am so useless and cant make ISK but I want to get stuff somewhat for free without doing work

Timmy: Thats ok Billy, there is many ways you can undock in failfits without having to work for it

Billy: Oh how?

Timmy: Well Billy it will involve you breaking the EULA, are you prepared todo that?

Billy: Yeah sure, I take it you want me to buy ISK using RL cash then?

Timmy: No Billy that would be stupid, ISK is expensive to buy and you will get banned, you dont want to get banned do you?

Billy: But I will be breaking the EULA, so I will get banned

Timmy: You dont get banned for botting

Billy: Botting?

Timmy: Yes botting, a crappy software with so many requirements to the UI that does all your mining or ratting for you?

Billy: Why wont I get banned from using bots?

Timmy: CCP find it hard to deal with botters, so they are going to focus on RMT, little do they know RMT has dropped in the past year because it is cheaper and safer to buy and use a bot.

Billy: Cool! So I wont have to play really and in a week I can finally get my failfit supercarrier

Timmy: That is correct


betty drunkenlord
Posted - 2010.12.15 12:58:00 - [212]
 

First CCP thank you for a response. It was a good start to introduce strategic plan on fighting bots and rmt. By word 'strategic' I mean describing an action plan with activities on all fields that will stop spoiling the greatest game for many of us.

1. Change game mechanics/client-server communication/client internal behaviour to make difficult for botting programs to read and exploit the game. Just sum up all ideas from this and earlier threads, note cons and pros for each of them, then gather top coders/testers/GMs etc., choose top 10 ideas then start implementation.
2. Design and impose a clear communication campaign that bot is as bad as rmt since it hurts ccp, player experience, it is the denial of the very uniqueness of this game -> you need to work hard for long time to achieve results in this game (htfu/harsh envrionment pararells etc). For example some window in the start screen reminding that using macros or selling ingame isk for RL cash is bannable and criminal offence. For once stop with ambiguousness concerning bots that profits ccp. It's the other way round!
3. Get to know your players better, introduce at least periodical (every 2 month) surveys asking about different elements of the game, then create task force to report you findings of those. Right now you never now whether those 1000 players that quit last month just stopped playing because of RL issues or because they were really disgusted with bots or game mechanics. The faster you introduce such survey the more growth you generate more growth for your company since you will now 95% players that don't have that much time to communicate with you via forums/csm/alliance leaders etc.

Simple as that. With all the consultation apply qui bono rule (who benefits from current state of affairs -> botters, rmters and RENTERS that is big alliances). These will be the people who openly or secretly oppose any change making botting and rmting more difficult.

Let's remember:
Bots crowds out most active players, they crowd out many highsec corporations from 0.0, they crowd out people from one of big professions in game i.e. mining making the game for all of those guys much less interesting.

SyntaxPD
Posted - 2010.12.15 13:03:00 - [213]
 

by fact. EVE economy can eat all botter together also.

If they bot isk - minerals will rise in price and more ppl or bots will go for mining and manufactuing, shifting prices down

If they bot for minerals - they will fall in price and more ppl will go for isk, increasing incomes and buyers strengh and increasing prices for minerals.

so bots or not bot will not have heavy impact on highsec player, but will strongly affect 0.0 map.

betty drunkenlord
Posted - 2010.12.15 13:10:00 - [214]
 

Originally by: SyntaxPD
by fact. EVE economy can eat all botter together also.

If they bot isk - minerals will rise in price and more ppl or bots will go for mining and manufactuing, shifting prices down

If they bot for minerals - they will fall in price and more ppl will go for isk, increasing incomes and buyers strengh and increasing prices for minerals.

so bots or not bot will not have heavy impact on highsec player, but will strongly affect 0.0 map.


lol, bots have a GREAT impact on all players who buy plex since they collectively increase demand for plex (+ some of them via rmt decrease supply of plex) -> bots crowds out player's accounts who are fed with plex. They have also great impact on high sec starter profession which is miner (less profit for players who want to be a miner).

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2010.12.15 13:17:00 - [215]
 

Originally by: Apollo Gabriel
The Pink Bunny Test is the last, best hope for banning macros, here is how it works:

1) Allow GMs to turn off mining modules (and only mining modules)
2) Allow GMs to minimize all active windows.
3) Allow GMs to spawn a Pink Bunny over the module buttons.
4) Allow GMs to open a chat box irrespective of client restrictions directly above the modules
5) If the player reactivates their modules then bot, otherwise enjoy the funny conversation which will follow.


6. Bot program, seeing something on the screen it cannot handle, brings the offending screen to the front and sounds an alarm so the bot manager can deal with it.

This would stop simple "timed" macros, the more basic bots, and the bots run afk (but even those could just simulate a DC, leaving suspicion, but no proof). But the actively managed bot farms (30+ per person, person always there to handle issues) will keep right on grinding.

Now if we could have a webcam looking at the keyboard....

gfldex
Posted - 2010.12.15 13:27:00 - [216]
 

Originally by: Vincent Athena
Now if we could have a webcam looking at the keyboard....


As it seams there are 2 bots out there right now. Not hard to sneak a little extra into a patch that has a look at the process list and forwards a tiny little wee bit of information to the server. Heck, even Blizzard is getting that done. CCP could have done that years ago. They don't care and/or fear they would have to ban halve of their ingame buddies. You can handle only so many MSN messaged per day, you know.

Cyaxares II
Posted - 2010.12.15 13:38:00 - [217]
 

Originally by: gfldex
As it seams there are 2 bots out there right now.

no idea what game you are talking about but it doesn't seem to be EVE.

Mar'Ketalt
Posted - 2010.12.15 14:16:00 - [218]
 

wow the dev basically pulled a DEA on us:

"The drug war is only going on because you stupid people keep buying! Stop doing drugs!"

Why not something a little more complex, about how you're examining the actual ways that RMT moves in EvE, through the 0.0 alliances at what not? At the moment, many people are convinced CCP is basically in bed with RMT, since it sells subscriptions.

Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
Xenon-Empire
Posted - 2010.12.15 14:31:00 - [219]
 

Edited by: Garia666 on 15/12/2010 15:00:42
Why dont you guys team up with an 3th party security tool.
scanning for known programs with certain specific data. LIKE the BOT TOOLS

like example Battleye ANTI-CHEAT

http://www.battleye.com/


Or build in your own secret scanning tool..

Raid'En
Posted - 2010.12.15 15:01:00 - [220]
 

Edited by: Raid''En on 15/12/2010 15:01:03
must agree that there's nothing we didn't know on this "blog" :/
there's not even a single number o_O

Jowen Datloran
Caldari
Science and Trade Institute
Posted - 2010.12.15 15:13:00 - [221]
 

Edited by: Jowen Datloran on 15/12/2010 15:19:46
So CCP is countering the constant evlving botting industry by doing the same as last year... Not surprisingly have you lost the fight a long time ago.

Luckely, no matter how much people bot or buy titans out of their salary it will have no effect on the parts of the game I enjoy. Staying the heck away from no sec power struggles (aka. "pay to win") was indeed a wise choice.

FYI: "Hardcore gamer" means borderline or full blown cheater in this day and age.

Razz XXX
Minmatar
Vashta Nerada Corp
Posted - 2010.12.15 15:47:00 - [222]
 

Originally by: Jowen Datloran
Edited by: Jowen Datloran on 15/12/2010 15:19:46

FYI: "Hardcore gamer" means borderline or full blown cheater in this day and age.


Nice Quote!!

Kile Kitmoore
Posted - 2010.12.15 17:56:00 - [223]
 

Wow, I really don't envy CCP's position in this whole RMT/Botter battle. If you start slamming the ban hammer to hard you catch a number of legitimate players/corps. On the other hand if you take a lighter approach to RMT/Botting it starts to spread like a virus, as players feel they have to join them to beat them. One thing is very clear, you have a difficult job ahead. This blog unfortunately is lacking both passion and substance for winning this little war. My biggest fear however is that some at CCP are well aware of large RMT/Botter activities but because these are attached to someone who may be well known or liked they ignore the player/corps. practices. CCP should not rule out that people in it's own organization could be involved. God I hope I am wrong on those last two statements.

Proposals:
1. Who's in charge? Seriously, is there someone in CCP's organization that is responsible for combating this menace? If not, why not? If this person does not exist maybe they should and depending on how serious you take this matter will determine their qualifications. Personally, I would find someone who has the technical know-how to reverse engineer these little apps floating around and can create client/server side tools for detection. This person would also need to be able to analyze logs and track those RMT transactions back to their source. In the end, you have someone or a team you can actually hold accountable when the RMT/Botter disease starts to spread. I would also not rule out hiring someone who actually develops these tools, can't beat them get them to join you in your fight. Find your CCPCSI and give him/her the tools and authority.

2. Examine the way these activities are reported by the player base to your organization. If someone reports a bot through the petition system what happens, where does it end up and with who? Using the petition system may not be the best method for players to communicate these activities. If a new process for reporting needs to be created just take into account that some fools will abuse it. This system should have a way which people who do help report these activities are informed of both the status and outcome. Consider awarding helpful players.

3. Communication to the player base. Clearly layout what will happen to players for using botting tools or buying ISK's through non-approved sources. Clearly layout what happens to a corp. or an alliance who's leadership is aware of such activities. Communicate how the player's can help CCP police these activities, heck offer rewards. The method you use to communicate this information is just as important, forum posts and dev blogs will not reach the masses. Use e-mail in-game and out of game in combination with dev blogs. This communication should be ongoing and not when the masses huddle together with their pitchforks and torches.

4. Create a system that allows a player/corp. to appeal if they are unfortunately caught in a tidal wave of bans.

Good luck in your fight, I look forward to reading CSM's discussions with you concerning this matter.

Altaica Amur
Pan Galactic Gargle Blasters
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2010.12.15 19:17:00 - [224]
 

Quote:
Manfred Sideous's post


1. Maybe, certainly doing something to change local so that it dosen't play into the hands of botters would be nice but at the same time I think better tools would have to be developed to counter logoffski and afk cloaking tactics from making you unable to use your own space.

2. I agree, moon mins getting into PI would be good to make it a more valuable activity but some changes would need to be made to the mechanics to reduce the prevalence of botting that's been reported.

3. I'm not sure force-moving it is the way to go but introducing a soft barrier to highsec production would be nice, simply have a % based fee that's based on the security of a system to allow POS production to become competitive, if not entirely replace, station production.

4. I'm not sure about this, it's very difficult since it would mean a massive cut to highsec income where there are still a lot of real players playing the game. That said I think it would be worth making some change to the code that would prevent most/all botting programs from operating just to get a sense of where the numbers of real players and bots are.

5. Interesting idea and certainly some sort of CCP endorsed way of moving big assets like this around would be good, though at the same time it prevents the sometimes-humerus scamming/trickery that might otherwise occur with someone who can't ban either party.
Quote:
Jaqel Broadside's drivel


1&2 Yeah I get this and there's a degree of truth to it but at the same time I prefer the current sov system to bashing towers forever, and no I don't bot, botting in my end of Provi would be bad in so many ways.
3. This has always been true and even outside of Sov we see an obvious trend towards blobbing up and numbers when fighting others I'm not sure what you expect them to do and no this isn't in any way part of a pattern that connects to botting RMT, fleet bots would be lol tho.
4. It's definitely grindy and lacks in value to make it all that worthy for human player's time.
5-7. True enough and I'd like to see some progress here
8. This is the closest you get to an actual solution other then saying 'lol everything's bad' and I agree that belt rats need more variety and having a random chance of 10+ BS spawning when you kill a belt rat would help improve the income for players while increasing the risk to bots who may not react appropriately to a changing tactical situation.
9-17. Totally going off the rails, you're confusing player competition with botting and creating a false association between lower security space and botting. Nullsec that's well controlled by the sov holding alliance is good for botting lowsec is laughably bad and much of more contested 0.0 is also quite bad. T2 BPOs make enough isk to be worth doing the human input required to take advantage of them anyways, if any part of this was to be botted it would be the materials collection. Your argument about Caldari is also laughably bad though, other then the Raven and the drake there aren't a ton of caldari ships used a lot in PvP, it's ECM was one of the few Caldari ships welcome in a roaming gang until the recent rise of the drake.

Quote:
Shurikane's post
"Keyword: obvious. Instant red flag. "He gets all the kills as a sniper, he's obviously hacking!..."
"Imagine porting that over to EVE. I hop in my trusty Raven, wander my alliance's space, get a nice quiet system and go to town ratting while a corpmate trails behind in an industrial"


Right there you stopped behaving like a bot and any effort to build a circumstantial case for your behavior being botting should stop there. Even if you're doing a full day marathon of ratting as you mentioned later bio breaks should prop up in the logs as breaks unexplained by the presence of a hostile, furthermore I think the proportion of innocent players who Marathon a few days in a row is low enough to be worth the risk.

Deandra Walran
Posted - 2010.12.15 22:57:00 - [225]
 

Maybe its time for CCP to actually get into the bot market themselves? It appears that they only care about the RMT side of things. So, why doesn't CCP create their own "authorised" bot (that mines, rats and missions) and charge an additional fee per month for its use (or double PLEX/month)?

With this, CCP has a financial intrest in quashing all other bots. CCP seems to only act if they are the ones losing out on the money.

SyntaxPD
Posted - 2010.12.15 23:18:00 - [226]
 

Originally by: betty drunkenlord

lol, bots have a GREAT impact on all players who buy plex since they collectively increase demand for plex (+ some of them via rmt decrease supply of plex) -> bots crowds out player's accounts who are fed with plex. They have also great impact on high sec starter profession which is miner (less profit for players who want to be a miner).


Think about it just same to international currency trading and global market.

On the one hand we have EVE-inside economy, which will not hurt from bots (but 0.0 power balance hurts). And on the other hand we have PLEX, wild to EVE commodity, that comes from nothing and have significant value. Bots will trully affect plex only if amount of plexes per month would remain stable.

EVE-inside economy is all about isk-minerals, this relations between goods and currency will always be at roughly same level or fluctuate slightly, coz ppl would go more profitable way, balancing both sides.

Lets imagine how it could be, but first, think about it like about minerals-plex and isk-plex. And here we have some different scenarios:
1st: amount of plex remains stable, supply heavily restricted, prices for plex will go up,both in isk and minerals. In other words, PLEX seller could buy more ravens for single plex, this will attract more suppliers (and more isk buyers by RMT).
2nd: for some reasons, there is too much isk in eve, and what happen ? Mineral prices will go up and lift prices for other staff, what is very bad for new players, but it's only for first look. In this term players choose the way to get more isk and if the NPC cannot provide needed amounts they will go for other players. Mining is a market approved way of getting isk from players and not from endless can - NPCs. And what we see - balancing again.

But thee are still 2 things which will hurt from botters really, not to mention your own ego (my roommate has titan and he's doing nothing, i play 20\7 and have not!!!ragerage).

The first is CCP, as potential plex supplyers go for RMT and do not buy plex. But this will not really affect eve itself, for eve economy - doesnt matter if you buy plex or if you buy isk - you anyway get it from another player.
The second is 0.0 powerblocks for the reasons i mentioned higher - naighbours have and we have not - the power of alliances.


Xel Ra
Posted - 2010.12.15 23:24:00 - [227]
 

Originally by: 4Chan TubeChild
This is such a stupid ass blog. I can't even believe I still play this game.


So go play something else.

Cornwalace
Posted - 2010.12.15 23:50:00 - [228]
 

IMO, the only solution is to keep everything that costs the amount of ISK that it takes for RMT's, would be to change things at an ongoing pace/faster. Whether it's moving Jita around (forcing people not to trade @ Jita for a time), Random NPC's putting hits out on pilots that are botting, or even the simple act of creating a rule that really makes it difficult (because, lets be real, it's impossible to stamp out completely) for bots to thrive.

The theme behind it is just that the ability to make isk needs to be adjusted in an ongoing fashion, as to limit the amount of botting that does take place. Whether it's changing a character's ability altogether, or just being insanely proactive to accounts that have an unusally high flag's by players for being a bot or what-not.

One idea I have for changing a character's ability altogether is an Amarr character agreeing to more rules/taxes, or a Minmatar character agreeing to random NPC hit squads or by the Amarr empire, especially if they make way more isk than usual.

Another idea is having an actual concord fleet literally go after those people/associations/corporations directly, no matter where they're at. I'm sure it's not beyond ccp to find out what w-space or wheverever they're at and just have at it.

Jaqel Broadside
Posted - 2010.12.16 00:08:00 - [229]
 

Edited by: Jaqel Broadside on 16/12/2010 00:09:03
Originally by: Altaica Amur


Quote:
Jaqel Broadside's drivel Razz


9-17. Totally going off the rails, you're confusing player competition with botting and creating a false association between lower security space and botting. Nullsec that's well controlled by the sov holding alliance is good for botting lowsec is laughably bad and much of more contested 0.0 is also quite bad. T2 BPOs make enough isk to be worth doing the human input required to take advantage of them anyways, if any part of this was to be botted it would be the materials collection. Your argument about Caldari is also laughably bad though, other then the Raven and the drake there aren't a ton of caldari ships used a lot in PvP, it's ECM was one of the few Caldari ships welcome in a roaming gang until the recent rise of the drake.




I think you miss the point of 9-17, I had to cut things short, my appologies, where I speak of low sec missions I mean a high sec missioner now faces low sec missions on a day to day basis - most people will not do them for various reasons. This leads to some lack of progression if you need faction standing or corp standing. But even with several accounts you can find yourself with nothing much to do for days if you are unlucky.

Sure it may force you to look for alternatives in the game but ultimately it reduces your income, people with less income will look for sources of ISK for the new shiny they want and that promotes buying ISK, that was my point. That's why I deeply suspect people advocating knocking high sec income - especially when the stated reason of inflating mineral prices has failed epically.


As regards a solution and not a whine.

One immediate observation, nano ships required pilot skill - please bring in more pilot skill required for everything.

CCP has some real problems. They code in Python yet the tools being used to bot are most likely coming from Microsoft - which can be programmed in Visual Basic, C#, j#, C++ and some new meta languages like F# - and in fact they all compile to one machine independant code base.

I don't code in Python but I imagine it doesn't support the Microsfot tools directly. Python will ALWAYS be several steps behind simply because of the huge platform Microsoft caters for.

Some suggestions perhaps are better not posted on a public forum - but I also wouldn't dream of trying to teach grandma how to suck eggs,, grandma knows very well what a mouth with no teeth can do.

But THE biggest suggestion I can make is get in touch with Microsoft as I am pretty sure other software vendors have faced the same problem and, seeing as the tools are coming from Microsoft's own code libraries I'm pretty sure they will help CCP out.

PS. I do hope CCP read this stuff and conclude that they also have a cultural problem in developing gank/repetative game mechanics rather than strategy mechanics, however they do also have some very good policies like options,,, keep providing people with options, that is infact the way to go and I love it ugh

Santa Cluasewitz
Posted - 2010.12.16 07:12:00 - [230]
 

Vague useless crap. CCP trying to shut up the 50 thousand people who read the RMT uncovered articles.

This "devblog" can be summed up with "catching botters is hard m'kay!"

It's not like they sit in the same systems every day logging on after downtime ratting the same belts for 23.5 hrs a day. On wait most of them do. Just write a script to see who made a billion isk ratting the last week and look at their activity.

mechtech
SRS Industries
SRS.
Posted - 2010.12.16 07:29:00 - [231]
 

Bots =/= RMT. This is where CCP is not seeing correctly.

They are both a problem, but most of us are more concerned about people who use bots for personal (or corp/alliance) gain vs 1T isk sitting in holding accounts.

We need a targetted effort against botting. Who cares if it's for RMT, for personal gain, or just because someone likes cheating, bots need to be targeted and eliminated to the best of CCPs ability.

Also, many botters get 3 day bans, this is not enough. Take isk away, even take SP away, temp bans are not enough for the first offence.

Most bots use client injection. This is a client security hole and needs to be fixed. This would be the first step towards fighting bots, not just RMT.

Cyaxares II
Posted - 2010.12.16 09:03:00 - [232]
 

Edited by: Cyaxares II on 16/12/2010 09:22:15
Originally by: Jaqel Broadside
CCP has some real problems. They code in Python yet the tools being used to bot are most likely coming from Microsoft - which can be programmed in Visual Basic, C#, j#, C++ and some new meta languages like F# - and in fact they all compile to one machine independant code base.

I don't code in Python but I imagine it doesn't support the Microsfot tools directly. Python will ALWAYS be several steps behind simply because of the huge platform Microsoft caters for.

Some suggestions perhaps are better not posted on a public forum - but I also wouldn't dream of trying to teach grandma how to suck eggs,, grandma knows very well what a mouth with no teeth can do.

But THE biggest suggestion I can make is get in touch with Microsoft as I am pretty sure other software vendors have faced the same problem and, seeing as the tools are coming from Microsoft's own code libraries I'm pretty sure they will help CCP out.

argh.... you're totally wrong (well you might be right about you're grandma but that's sth I can't really comment on).

Choice of programming language does not matter at all.

The stupid "macro/OCR" approach to bots is always technically possible (if you allow multitasking even without multitasking you could load your macro as e.g. a keyboard driver which ignores the actually attached keyboards and just sends the predefined sequence of keys - the OS has no way to know that the driver does not do the "proper" job).
Even if MS would not give me the APIs to send keystrokes or mousecommands to other applications people would find ways around this in no time (use the internal APIs the OS uses to achieve the same result, use fake keyboard/mouse drivers, ...). And MS would probably break countless legitimate applications while achieving nothing.

Hooking into other applications is something that is handled by the operating system and is possible in every desktop OS if you have admin privileges (because it is a functionality that is necessary for debugging tools).

Now, Python can make it easier to hook into the client without going low-level but as the popular toolkit for botting authors advertises support for Age of Conan, EVE Online, EverQuest, EverQuest II, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, World of Warcraft, ... (i.e. doesn't require Python and just uses plain Windows APIs) I doubt many people make use of this "weakness".

People like to write code in C# or VB because it is easy (compared to C/C++) and because Visual Studio (Express) is such a nice (free as in beer) IDE.

But if you are going to write a bot "from scratch" you'll end up calling the Win32 API (for which every major programming language provides wrappers) all the time and won't make much use of the .NET libraries.

Language does not matter. Neither on the client's nor on the bot's end.

Jaqel Broadside
Posted - 2010.12.16 11:05:00 - [233]
 

Originally by: Cyaxares II
Stuff


The Macro process you describe should be easy to spot.

It's just a matter of knowing if the call was made internally by the client or not, then it is game over for all botting activity.

Max Cetera
Capital Researchs Inc.
Posted - 2010.12.16 12:33:00 - [234]
 

How to catch botters 101:

1. Release some small "client fix" patches that won't touch anything important and keep injection-bot without any update needed.
2. After a few normal patches, release the "Bot Trap" one as client fix #3
3. In that patch, duplicate all calls used by "mainstream" injection-bots :
- Client is changed to use all the new ones
- Old ones still produce the same effect on the game, except they send a warning about it to the server

Wait 1-2 weeks, temp ban everyone who ran a bot, but perma ban the bot farms running 23 hours a day.

Jaqel Broadside
Posted - 2010.12.16 12:37:00 - [235]
 

Originally by: Max Cetera
How to catch botters 101:

1. Release some small "client fix" patches that won't touch anything important and keep injection-bot without any update needed.
2. After a few normal patches, release the "Bot Trap" one as client fix #3
3. In that patch, duplicate all calls used by "mainstream" injection-bots :
- Client is changed to use all the new ones
- Old ones still produce the same effect on the game, except they send a warning about it to the server

Wait 1-2 weeks, temp ban everyone who ran a bot, but perma ban the bot farms running 23 hours a day.



If there are any "Temp" bans then I want my money back for the last x years thank you for not having a game worth paying for.

Cyaxares II
Posted - 2010.12.16 15:57:00 - [236]
 

Edited by: Cyaxares II on 16/12/2010 16:08:03
Originally by: Jaqel Broadside
Originally by: Cyaxares II
Stuff


The Macro process you describe should be easy to spot.

It's just a matter of knowing if the call was made internally by the client or not, then it is game over for all botting activity.

I think I am out of this discussion.

I freely admit that my knowledge of computer security is a bit sketchy (but then I am an economics grad student) - however, from my POV the only way you could enforce your idea of "how things should be" would be in hardware.

Your ideas require the operating system to lock down the computer nearly completely and require hardware to secure the operating system (hello Blue Pill).

Of course that's the exact opposite of the purpose of a personal computer.

So if you think "lockdown" is the solution to bots (or any sort of malware) I invite you to stop using PCs and switch to console games (and witness how even the most complicated "protection" schemes do eventually fall to the ingenuity of hackers, i.e. the "homebrew" community).

edit: if you would think your ideas through ("if I do x an intelligent bot author would do y, so I would have to do z to prevent that, ...") you would re-discover Trusted Computing after very few steps. By that point you would hopefully realize that even if you think Trusted Computing is a good idea it is a completely unrealistic goal given the culture that has developed around general-purpose "personal" computers.

gfldex
Posted - 2010.12.16 16:33:00 - [237]
 

Originally by: Cyaxares II
I freely admit that my knowledge of computer security is a bit sketchy (but then I am an economics grad student) - however, from my POV the only way you could enforce your idea of "how things should be" would be in hardware.


Not even there. Any virtual machine can simulate any hardware. You can make assumptions about speed and rule a few bits out that way, but over the interweb that's a bit tricky to do so.

The effect of punkbuster and friends is not caused by them being able to detect stuff. (PB works for 2 days for popular cheats, then those cheats are updated) The effect comes from the heads of folk that think PB _might_ catch them. You create an environment where only those who want to leave the game anyway would use it. (And a few idiots. Brains are funny things.)

As a result you wont scare RMTs off with that. But I would be very surprised to see somebody risk his accounts to maintain sov with botted ISK. It's a bit counter productive the fight over space, just to lose it because you could not convice your alliance members to pay for it.

Andrea Griffin
Posted - 2010.12.16 17:15:00 - [238]
 

For those who are promoting tools such as PunkBuster as anti-cheat measures, remember that even those tools can be fooled and it isn't particularly difficult to do so. Even Valve's VAC system can be bypassed.

VAC does a pretty good job, but it never catches the recent tricks and is always a few steps behind the cheaters. It does make things trickier, but not impossible. Given that there are communities out there that share information on bypassing these systems, it wouldn't take long for the Eve bot creators to be active again.

Perhaps this is the reason why CCP hasn't already implemented these measures. It would be a large cost for them for a minimal return on the investment, then you have ongoing maintenance costs as well.

Dawn Harbinger
Posted - 2010.12.16 17:26:00 - [239]
 

I understand the difficulty in addressing such a convoluted problem, but I would like to see this become a top priority for CCP and the CSM.

After all, what's the point in playing when a bunch of cheaters and crooks are running the show?

Arithron
Gallente
Gallente Trade Alliance
Posted - 2010.12.16 17:43:00 - [240]
 

It was a pleasent change to see (for the first time- never read it confirmed by CCP before) that Market bots are acknowledged. These buggers are the ones that really hurt the game and stop any sort of 'open-sandbox free economy'. Some of the earlier bots were easy to spot )and indeed fool quickly into making their owners large losses. However, they have got better and now are harder to detect. However, they must be accessing live API (?) or something also, as they are actived across multiple commodities at any one time. Why have live API...delayed is surely safer and as usable...???

The real problem with RMT'ers is that CCP are relatively powerless to stop them OUTSIDE of the game. I have reported one active on Ebay, who I estimate has made in excess of 20,000 from selling isk the 'safe way'. It would be easy to stop this fella....contacting him covertly via MSN posing as a customer, enact a transaction and await the character trading within game. Once this info is known, other accounts etc linked can be banned.

Why just a 3 day ban or warning? Perma-bans surely much more effective :)

Forgive the ramblings...

Arithron


Pages: first : previous : ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 : last (11)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only