These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Hide your ISK, Team Security is out of control. (Allegedly)

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#301 - 2013-02-12 16:56:39 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Just for the record, dear CCP Sreegs, I like what you have done and that you take your time to come onto the forum and talk to us. It is very kind of you and one does not get to see this often. So thank you for doing this! Cool


Agreed. Sreegs posting is always good posting.
Orlacc
#302 - 2013-02-12 16:58:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Orlacc
Guy got caught botting. ILLEGAL Isk was removed. End of story. I don't care how "thoughtful and caring" the dbag was.


Plus, after years of coddling and special treatment Eve-Uni needs to stfu.

"Measure Twice, Cut Once."
Finalgear
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#303 - 2013-02-12 17:01:11 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:


While I'm not trying to slide things under a rug, yes basing an allegation against my team on a single act of misconduct 7 years ago is pretty insane.



I believe if CCP had a perfect track record, most pilots would not be here asking for proof of the botting allegations.
(As the methods I've read about being used by John were not in fact 'botting' by definition, but were using quick copy and pasting at its best.)

Transparency is paramount, the now removed ISK means nothing in light of possible recurring corruption, and selective oversight after the matter is brought in to question.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#304 - 2013-02-12 17:02:46 UTC
Finalgear wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:


While I'm not trying to slide things under a rug, yes basing an allegation against my team on a single act of misconduct 7 years ago is pretty insane.



I believe if CCP had a perfect track record, most pilots would not be here asking for proof of the botting allegations.
(As the methods I've read about being used by John were not in fact 'botting' by definition, but were using quick copy and pasting at its best.)

Transparency is paramount, the now removed ISK means nothing in light of possible recurring corruption, and selective oversight after the matter is brought in to question.


Yes lets tell the botting community how CCP are catching them out...
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#305 - 2013-02-12 17:05:54 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Yes lets tell the botting community how CCP are catching them out...


What could possibly go wrong?

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#306 - 2013-02-12 17:07:11 UTC
David Zahavi wrote:
words
[/quote]

I'm not responding to copy pastes from another forum posted only there for the sole purpose of ensuring that I can't respond to them. I thought this couldn't get any more infantile but woo boy howdy was I wrong.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
Finde learth
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#307 - 2013-02-12 17:07:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Finde learth
Why don't the 14 days ban happen with removal of ISK at the same time ?
CCP Sreegs
CCP Retirement Home
#308 - 2013-02-12 17:08:34 UTC
Finde learth wrote:
Why don't the 14 days ban appear with removal of ISK ?


They do. It didn't apply in this case. This was explained in my first post.

"Sreegs has juuust edged out Soundwave as my favourite dev." - Meita Way 2012
Mathrin
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#309 - 2013-02-12 17:09:36 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Finalgear wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:


While I'm not trying to slide things under a rug, yes basing an allegation against my team on a single act of misconduct 7 years ago is pretty insane.



I believe if CCP had a perfect track record, most pilots would not be here asking for proof of the botting allegations.
(As the methods I've read about being used by John were not in fact 'botting' by definition, but were using quick copy and pasting at its best.)

Transparency is paramount, the now removed ISK means nothing in light of possible recurring corruption, and selective oversight after the matter is brought in to question.


Yes lets tell the botting community how CCP are catching them out...


Yes and while we are at it lets assume 'John' was completely honest and forth right in telling us exactly how he did things. Simple fact is the aren't going to tell us if what John states is true because they will not give out that info. As it should be.
Dante Uisen
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#310 - 2013-02-12 17:09:44 UTC
Finde learth wrote:
Why don't the 14 days ban appear with removal of ISK ?


I think that was what he got, he decided to delete the character himself. He was allowed to keep the isk by mistake, which was why they were later removed, after being transferred to to eve-uni.
Dan Leviathan
Legion of Lemmings
War Rats
#311 - 2013-02-12 17:09:57 UTC
I feel like I just read 16 pages of the same ****. Why keep regurgitating the same crap? CCP banned him (fairly or not) and the isk is gone. If you want API support for market why not make a new post?
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#312 - 2013-02-12 17:11:25 UTC

So, what I'm getting from this is :

Sreegs considers cache scraping "illegal" but it really isn't, according to the EULA because nothing is modified.

So, carry on because he would have to ban everyone who uses EVEMon, everyone who uses EVE-Central, etc.

Which is pretty absurd.

Tells me all I really need to know about CCP Security.

Where I am.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#313 - 2013-02-12 17:12:24 UTC
Callie Cross wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Callie Cross wrote:
It seems to me like CCP Sreegs has provided in this thread most of the information that Kelduum asked for in the first place, and that if this information had been exchanged in the first place, none of this would have been brought up in the forums.


They don't need to provide info to the masses. He was botting and got the isk taking away, thats as much info as we need.



A private convo between CCP and Kelduum (who was involved directly) isn't the masses. This issue has now been brought to the masses because this very basic and simple information wasn't conveyed in the first place. It's unnecessary, pure and simple.

Despite what he apparently thinks, Kelduum is indeed "one of the masses" and is not entitled to full disclosure of information on sensitive security matters.
Blink
This is actually the root of the problem.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Dan Leviathan
Legion of Lemmings
War Rats
#314 - 2013-02-12 17:13:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Dan Leviathan
Bloodpetal wrote:

So, what I'm getting from this is :

Sreegs considers cache scraping "illegal" but it really isn't, according to the EULA because nothing is modified.

So, carry on because he would have to ban everyone who uses EVEMon, everyone who uses EVE-Central, etc.

Which is pretty absurd.

Tells me all I really need to know about CCP Security.


Actually never said "John" was modifying said he was accelerating. The EULA is vague purposefully. If you think he was banned "just for the hell of it" then you must be insane. [EDIT] or a botter
Finde learth
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#315 - 2013-02-12 17:15:15 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Finde learth wrote:
Why don't the 14 days ban appear with removal of ISK ?


They do. It didn't apply in this case. This was explained in my first post.


CCP Sreegs wrote:
our logs show that it was discussed and approved prior to either them receiving the isk or petitioning.


i don't understand what "it" means.
Tisisan
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#316 - 2013-02-12 17:15:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Tisisan
baltec1 wrote:
Tisisan wrote:
What scares me here is that it really looks like a player can 1) question a the legality of an action publicly, 2) get an official ccp response saying its ok, 3) do said action, and 4) get banhammered by CCP Screegs who doesn't give a **** what the rest of the company thinks, then laughed at and mocked when you question it.

That's a pretty crappy way to do business.


No, its a case of the dirty isk went away and people want it back so will try every way possible to get it back even if it means publicly trying to attack CCP into a corner.


I don't care about eve-uni, in fact i find it funny that they've been screwed in all of this. But you need to stop licking long enough to actually read what Screegs is saying, then you might be a little concerned too.

CCP Sreegs wrote:
Nemo deBlanc wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:


I'm not sure how asking for where we've made a statement I disagree with (and I'm the only one that matters in this instance) is "cluelessness" but suffice it to say that I would highly recommend you not engage in such activity. You can choose to ignore that and make a self righteous post defending yourself after we take action if you like.


Speaking of self righteous...

Are we to interpret this as official policy change on the issue of cache scraping? 9 months ago, you were fine with it, have things changed since then? If so, I guess enjoy gloating over wrongly banned market accounts.


I've never agreed with it. My stance of "Don't modify the client" hasn't changed since day one. That GMs for some reason have a different interpretation than I do is irrelevant.


That seems to pretty clearly say "I don't care what you've been told by another official representative of this game, I'll ban you if I damn well feel like it." I don't care what the policy is, but it damn well needs to be consistent. I dont much care if this means more communication between departments, or removing GMs ability to answer questions regarding potential EULA violations (since apparently their opinions are irrelevant), or a much closer involvement from the security team with places like Market Discussions, or something else. But players NEED to be able to ask if something is allowable, and trust that answer.
Mathrin
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#317 - 2013-02-12 17:16:27 UTC
Bloodpetal wrote:

So, what I'm getting from this is :

Sreegs considers cache scraping "illegal" but it really isn't, according to the EULA because nothing is modified.

So, carry on because he would have to ban everyone who uses EVEMon, everyone who uses EVE-Central, etc.

Which is pretty absurd.

Tells me all I really need to know about CCP Security.



What I got was CCP bans botter. Friends of botter become upset they lose botting isk and verbally attack the security team. The team leader is upset his team is being attacked. End of thread. Keep it up ccp
Markku Laaksonen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#318 - 2013-02-12 17:17:05 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Dante Uisen wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:
Dante Uisen wrote:
Vera Algaert wrote:
I'm very sure that you can't modify 30 orders within a minute - whether with macros or by hand.


You can use the in-game browser to display market data, which makes it a trivial task to write software that detects when you need to update you orders. All you need to do is use javascript to cycle trough the item you want to sell, this updates the local cache which you can parse to get the items sell prices. From there on all you need to do is verify the weather or not you have the lowest price.

You can list the correct price need to undercut by .1 isk, or maybe even manipulate the copy/paste buffer directly to contain the correct value. In the end all you need to do is find the correct order, edit and paste the value. It probably takes more then 2 sec for reach order, but you can do a lot of orders each minute.

This is a public know and legal way of managing market orders.



I would not recommend anyone do this and I'd ask that you not tell our players what you consider to be legal. The EULA does a decent enough job of that and is contrary to your statement.


This has been discussed before on the official forums, where dev/gm posts said this method was not against the rules as the player edits the market order.


I'd stick to the actual legal agreement you agreed to rather than outdated GM replies. It's a suggestion.


EULAs are not legally binding documents in America.

DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/

EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy
Callie Cross
Tax Code
#319 - 2013-02-12 17:17:10 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Callie Cross wrote:

A private convo between CCP and Kelduum (who was involved directly) isn't the masses. This issue has now been brought to the masses because this very basic and simple information wasn't conveyed in the first place. It's unnecessary, pure and simple.

Despite what he apparently thinks, Kelduum is indeed "one of the masses" and is not entitled to full disclosure of information on sensitive security matters.
Blink
This is actually the root of the problem.



You are forgetting the tiny "300 billion ISK" transaction that landed Kelduum's lap. That kind of made him part of the "matter".

Hammer Borne
Doomheim
#320 - 2013-02-12 17:17:35 UTC
On the next one, please swing the banhammer hard enough that I can feel the shockwave in this corner of nullsec. I will tingle with joy!