These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Team Security - Now with 100% more Anti-RMT

First post First post First post
Author
SXYGeeK
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#521 - 2012-04-06 16:59:09 UTC
Vulcan23 wrote:
A mere combination of words does not a meaningful answer make. Especially when those words are presented in a context that suggests that the problems at issue were not properly understood in the first place, rendering empty answers even emptier. It also doesn't help that the 'answer' is surrounded by contradictory statements that at one moment state that there is literally nothing to worry about and then at the next moment state that the needs of a 'niche' playstyle (a niche playstyle! in MY sandbox?) will not affect the way he proceeds. So, it is really not surprising that people continue to ask for clarification in response to such a complex of empty phrases, contradictory statements, and expressions of a lack of concern for the issues at hand (which in any case seem not to have been properly understood).



The concern that seems to be raised is..
We're worried that certain styles of game play that heavily involve meta gaming could be misconstrued as RMT activity and result in false positive bans. We wan't some explanation or assurance of how the security policies in place will avoid this.

To rephrase the answer (yet again) from Sreegs that has been repeated several times...
Ultimately, it is not possible to ensure that false positives from situations like this will not occur. This is due to much of the meta gaming revolving around these game play styles does not exist within the game mechanics and is therefor out of the control of CCP. It is also due to the fact that sharing details about how the policy might avoid these situations would compromise the process.
It has been stated that they do not believe they have caught any true false positives yet, but that there have been some bans reversed in certain situations where some other lesser infraction (illegal account transfer) may have cause a link to occur.
An assurance that situation X or profession Y will be protected cannot be given because in doing this "underwriting" they would be declaring a potential loophole or safe haven for RMT activity.
Because of the sensitive nature of the policy the only realistic assurance that can be give, has been given...
"If situations like these occur they will be dealt with on a case by case basis, considering the merits of the individual situation"


Mara Villoso
Long Jump.
#522 - 2012-04-06 17:23:49 UTC
Hmmm. Let's see. You're a little upset that you might get caught up in something as a result of your interactions with other players. You're concerned, because, hey, you trusted people and they might turn out to be bad. As a result, they may cause an incredible amount of damage to you, your corp, and your alliance; damage that you feel shouldn't be done because, hey, you trusted someone who turned out to be bad. Hmmm. Where have I heard this before? Where oh where? Oh yes, its an exact description of spies, corp thieves, traitors, and the like.

Welcome to eve mother****ers. Be careful who you trust.
Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#523 - 2012-04-06 18:36:36 UTC
Mara Villoso wrote:
Hmmm. Let's see. You're a little upset that you might get caught up in something as a result of your interactions with other players. You're concerned, because, hey, you trusted people and they might turn out to be bad. As a result, they may cause an incredible amount of damage to you, your corp, and your alliance; damage that you feel shouldn't be done because, hey, you trusted someone who turned out to be bad. Hmmm. Where have I heard this before? Where oh where? Oh yes, its an exact description of spies, corp thieves, traitors, and the like.

Welcome to eve mother****ers. Be careful who you trust.

This is exactly why botters and ISK sellers should be flagged in game. At the very least, CEO's need to know this stuff as it can cause a lot of damage to the corp/alliance and players who associate with them. It is a very fine line indeed...but my opinion is simple. You break the rules, you forfeit your rights. This thread is not for that discussion though.

Good job Sreegs. You are not my favorite Dev unfortunately. Punkturis rules you all! Lol

Just kidding! You guys are all awesome! Keep up the fantastic work!

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821

DeODokktor
Dark Templars
The Fonz Presidium
#524 - 2012-04-06 21:51:26 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:


If I asked you nicely once to stop lying and you didn't listen what am I to do?

Here's the difference. I have a question what is a butt? That's a question... I have a question 2000 pages of text ending in "so the market blah blah blah" is not a question. In short get out.



If you want me to "Get out" then you can opt to request for me to receive a ban for the forum for either a short or long vacation.
If you wish to be vindictive you could also request for me to receive a ban from the game itself.
My question (not in the post you quoted) was not 2,000 pages long, nor was it a lie, it was a question!

A lie would be something like.
"Devs instill everyone with confidence"
"Devs have never been caught cheating"
"Devs give useful answers to questions every time they are asked"

Also, I quit replying to you once you gave a semi-answer to the question.
If too much text makes things difficult for you to cope with then we can make flow charts with pictures for you next time.

-Deo
The D1ngo
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#525 - 2012-04-06 23:44:31 UTC
DeODokktor wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:


If I asked you nicely once to stop lying and you didn't listen what am I to do?

Here's the difference. I have a question what is a butt? That's a question... I have a question 2000 pages of text ending in "so the market blah blah blah" is not a question. In short get out.



If you want me to "Get out" then you can opt to request for me to receive a ban for the forum for either a short or long vacation.
If you wish to be vindictive you could also request for me to receive a ban from the game itself.
My question (not in the post you quoted) was not 2,000 pages long, nor was it a lie, it was a question!

A lie would be something like.
"Devs instill everyone with confidence"
"Devs have never been caught cheating"
"Devs give useful answers to questions every time they are asked"

Also, I quit replying to you once you gave a semi-answer to the question.
If too much text makes things difficult for you to cope with then we can make flow charts with pictures for you next time.

-Deo


!tuo teg
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#526 - 2012-04-07 07:00:50 UTC
Mara Villoso wrote:
Hmmm. Let's see. You're a little upset that you might get caught up in something as a result of your interactions with other players. You're concerned, because, hey, you trusted people and they might turn out to be bad. As a result, they may cause an incredible amount of damage to you, your corp, and your alliance; damage that you feel shouldn't be done because, hey, you trusted someone who turned out to be bad. Hmmm. Where have I heard this before? Where oh where? Oh yes, its an exact description of spies, corp thieves, traitors, and the like.

Welcome to eve mother****ers. Be careful who you trust.


Mittani's ban has proven that CCP can differentiate between being a douche in game and being out of game. Even with an ingame initiated EvEmail.
RMTers screwing out of game other players (because having the accounts confiscated is a RL consequence) is an out of game action, even if it's initiated in game.
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#527 - 2012-04-09 01:19:26 UTC
To CCP Sreegs and the security team:

Great work - and I reallly do hope that the CCP beancounters appreciate it (Hint: if not, write an interoffice memo - stating how much RL money you guys are saving the company - and make sure it gets cc'ed to all the right folks).

And, more kudos for your amazing patience in responding to some rather unbelievably whiny posts in this thread.

To the whiners:

RMT = real life theft.

Get it through your skulls - this isn't metagaming. It is a RL crime. Knowingly buying or assisting in the trafficking of stolen goods is also a RL crime - and you can be prosecuted (yeah, even in China). Claiming that you unknowingly bought or assisted in the trafficking of stolen goods still means that all such goods and profits from such goods may be seized without any reimbursement or consideration. So, in short, yes, you are always personally culpable to some degree, whether your involvement was accidental or premeditated - and irregardless of the degrees of separation between you and the original thief (ask the major museums about this).

Botting = cheating.

Read the EULA. Then, read it again. If you cheat, you will be banned - temporary or permanent - up to CCP. If you benefit, directly or indirectly, from cheating, then the in-game assets acquired via cheating may be seized, without reimbursement. So, if your entire alliance gets spanked 'cause its titans and POSes were improperly paid for via botting - blame the players who were knowingly involved in cheating, not CCP.

Loans = not part of the game.

And, as such, operate within a dangerous grey area - as do any other out-of-game agreement to exchange ISK or goods. If you inadvertedly do business with a suspected RMTer or botter, then you may end up getting picked up, too. Works the same way in RL (loan money to a suspected con man and see what happens to you when he gets picked up). It is not CCP's responsibility to support , monitor or police every out-of-game activity which players choose to engage in. They, however, do indeed have a right to step in when such activity, such as loans to RMTers, are involved in taking away RL money which rightfully belongs to CCP, as the owners of Eve Online (no, the game does not actually belong to the players).

False positives = might happen.

No net is perfect - even the flawless US justice system fails, on occasion, and, once in a while, the innocent get persecuted. But, speculating on the infinite number of "what might happen if..." scenarios is not how you run a security system, or a justice system, for that matter. You set up rules & regulations, criteria for detecting and penalizing violations, and proceed accordingly, adjusting parameters along the way, as real - not theoretical - situations occur.

For protesting false accusations, the US courts have an appeal system and CCP has a petition system. Also, not perfect. But, if a country with 330M citizens and god-knows-how-many lawyers can't come up with a perfect system, then why would you expect more from CCP?
Raven Ether
Doomheim
#528 - 2012-04-09 10:47:25 UTC
"retroactive to at LEAST February."

So will bans and hunting down include everything that has happened from february 2012 and on, or everything that happened before february 2012?
DeODokktor
Dark Templars
The Fonz Presidium
#529 - 2012-04-09 23:36:15 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:

RMT = real life theft.

Get it through your skulls - this isn't metagaming. It is a RL crime. Knowingly buying or assisting in the trafficking of stolen goods is also a RL crime - and you can be prosecuted (yeah, even in China). Claiming that you unknowingly bought or assisted in the trafficking of stolen goods still means that all such goods and profits from such goods may be seized without any reimbursement or consideration. So, in short, yes, you are always personally culpable to some degree, whether your involvement was accidental or premeditated - and irregardless of the degrees of separation between you and the original thief (ask the major museums about this).



RMT is not real life theft, nor is it "Illegal".
Legally Liable and Illegal are two completly differnt things.

If RMT was illegal then CCP wouldnt take part (In selling time codes for ISK).
If RMT was illegal then we would see sites selling gold/isk/virtual items shut down.
If RMT was overly harmful and ccp could track down the users then they could seek finacial damages. A few games in the past have been destroyed by botting but other than Blizzard I am not sure any other company has taken legal action.
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#530 - 2012-04-10 07:26:25 UTC
DeODokktor wrote:

RMT is not real life theft, nor is it "Illegal".
Legally Liable and Illegal are two completly differnt things.

With regards to Eve Online, yes, RMT is real life theft. The definitive issue is ownership - players do not actually "own" any of the assets in the game, incl. ships, ISK, modules, etc. All Eve Online game assets belong solely to CCP and therefore players have no legal right to profit from the selling of such items. Your subscription fee allows you to play the game, and that is all. Buying a GTC for real money from CCP and selling it as PLEX in game for ISK allows you to *use* such ISK in game - but, you still do not actually "own" ISK and are never given the right by CCP to sell it out-of-game.

DeODokktor wrote:
If RMT was illegal then CCP wouldnt take part (In selling time codes for ISK).

CCP is not doing anything illegal with regards to selling GTCs and allowing PLEX to be converted to ISK because they own the game. They can also license such rights to other vendors, if they so choose. You, as a player, and the RMTers do not have such rights.

DeODokktor wrote:
If RMT was illegal then we would see sites selling gold/isk/virtual items shut down.
If RMT was overly harmful and ccp could track down the users then they could seek finacial damages. A few games in the past have been destroyed by botting but other than Blizzard I am not sure any other company has taken legal action.

In the game industry, RMT is well-known to be harmful (as you noted, several games have been destroyed by botting), but legal action has proven difficult - yet not impossible - due to the intangible nature of virtual items and virtual economies, and the difficulty of establishing quantitative proof of specific financial damages. Most past cases have been settled out of court, and I doubt that much legal precedence has been set as how to deal with such cases.

But, this does not make RMT all nice and legal - it simply means that the courts do not yet know how to deal with the problem and have made no definitive rulings as of yet.
Nekopyat
Nee-Co
#531 - 2012-04-10 15:24:42 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:

No net is perfect - even the flawless US justice system fails, on occasion, and, once in a while, the innocent get persecuted. But, speculating on the infinite number of "what might happen if..." scenarios is not how you run a security system, or a justice system, for that matter. You set up rules & regulations, criteria for detecting and penalizing violations, and proceed accordingly, adjusting parameters along the way, as real - not theoretical - situations occur.

For protesting false accusations, the US courts have an appeal system and CCP has a petition system. Also, not perfect. But, if a country with 330M citizens and god-knows-how-many lawyers can't come up with a perfect system, then why would you expect more from CCP?


Ahm, that is exactly how you run a justice system. The debate and draft process of laws includes a significant amount of 'what if' speculation because they (when not grand standing) generally want to try to hash out these problems before a law goes into effect.

The perceived problem with CCP's system is the same one you get in real systems, or at least a variation of it. They have the 'prosecutor' problem.. rewards based off positive rates without a corresponding cost for failing to weed out the false positives. This was esp apparent during Unholy Rage where big sexy numbers were the single most important result. CCP is behaving like elected officials, which is not all bad, BUT live systems have a combination of elected/political officials and 'professionals' that have a reward system that is different. There are also possible penalties for malicious prosecution along with transparency where people are allowed to refute the evidence against them.

At least in the past, while there was a petition system, you were not allowed to see any of the evidence against you, and CCP had no political motive for re-enabling people, esp if doing so impacted one of the 'big sexy numbers' (so people who were multiboxing were just as good of targets, politically, as botters).

And true, this is a hard problem, one that no government has solved in human history. This does not mean we can not call CCP to task for issues regarding it since we should generally strive to do better, not say 'well, no one is perfect, so we should just be happy'.
Nervon
HaveItYourWay Corp
#532 - 2012-04-12 18:42:49 UTC
What to do with all that ISK???


Why not start a lottery

- EVE Mega Lotto

Buy numbers, weekly drawings and some lucky pilot can win ISK by the month or 1 payment...
Ancy Denaries
Frontier Venture
#533 - 2012-04-13 19:55:21 UTC
This thread contains some of the stupidest people I've seen in EVE. That's a record, guys. Well done. *golfclap* Sreegs won't give you a straight answer BECAUSE THERE IS NONE.

You loan money to a dude. Dude steals your money and never pays back. Tough luck.

You loan money to a dude. Dude has bought RL money, or sells your money for RL money. He gets banzored. You're out of your money. Same thing. Tough luck.

Now, you've "loaned" this guy money for years and he's sold it for real life cash and gets caught doing it. Guess what? Sreegs isn't stupid.

"Shoot at anything that moves. If it doesn't move, shoot it anyway, it might move later."

"Do not be too positive. The light at the end of the tunnel could be a train." - Franz Kafka

Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#534 - 2012-04-14 09:15:33 UTC
Nekopyat wrote:

Ahm, that is exactly how you run a justice system. The debate and draft process of laws includes a significant amount of 'what if' speculation because they (when not grand standing) generally want to try to hash out these problems before a law goes into effect.

No, you might reasonbly expect it to work this way (I did once), but it does not.

The justice system is based entirely on case studies, attempting to apply past judgments to new cases. This same method is applied to creating new laws - which is why people often compare the process to "closing the barn after the horse has bolted". New laws are rarely created from scratch, in anticipation of addressing a future problem; they are most usually created as the result of a trial, or series of trials, in which there were no applicable case studies, and the judge(s) was forced to create a new precedent. The laws thus created are usually very specific and do not include any "what if" speculation.

As for bills which are discussed in Congress, that has very little to do with the justice system. Most of that nonsense is purely political, and few passed bills actually contain any real substance, due to the need for extensive compromise to please the lobbyists. The "what if" speculations are simply used as a tool to manipulate public opinion, accordingly.

For example, take a look at gun control in the US. The only gun control laws have been enacted via the justice system, and each of these laws were only enacted after a serious crime was committed (usually involving multiple deaths) and went to trial. None of these laws included "what if" speculations, and thus are continuously redefined as new precedents are created in court trials. And, of course, the US Congress has been completely unable to enact any sort of gun control law, since the original Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment, due to the power of the lobbyists.

Completely off topic, ofc, but fun to discuss. My apologies to everyone on the forum. :)
YuuKnow
The Scope
#535 - 2012-04-18 19:55:38 UTC
Here's a question.

What keeps botters from starting a new account when there old account is banned? Is their credit card information tagged as a banded card? Is their ISP recognized and then the ISP banned?

If not its just one more reason that all botters should be perma-banded after the 2nd insult as they will likely just be back anyway...
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#536 - 2012-04-18 20:31:05 UTC
YuuKnow wrote:
Here's a question.

What keeps botters from starting a new account when there old account is banned? Is their credit card information tagged as a banded card? Is their ISP recognized and then the ISP banned?

If not its just one more reason that all botters should be perma-banded after the 2nd insult as they will likely just be back anyway...


They do not need a credit card, just the ISK to buy a PLEX from their Bot ring friends. Also ISPs can be spoofed. What stops them is:

The time it takes to skill up the new pilot. That's a cost to business.
The ISK removed when they get caught. That's another cost to business.

If CCP can make these two costs more than the profit, the botters will not bother to return.

Also, CCP does have ways of figuring out who owns new accounts. I just do not know how well they work.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Romar Agent
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#537 - 2012-05-07 17:07:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Romar Agent
Situation:

I'm in my own corporation.

A (RL-)friend is in his own corporation.

I want to invest 2,000,000,000 ISK into his business.

It can be proven that these ISK are legit, either earned by me ingame or gained trough selling PLEX bought from CCP.

How do I transfer the money w/o being flagged by Team Security?

Transfer money?
Contract money?
Make a trial account, buy and redeem PLEX with that character, sell PLEX, join the corporation, transfer the money to the corp wallet, delete the character (really?)?

What about an option to buy shares?


Please forgive me if this question has been asked before - I didn't want to delve into 27 pages. Be angry, but please provide me with a link, thank you.