Simply by limiting which calls can be made to Spellborn, Gameguard does more than "jack $%#$," and that's not all it does.

That is self-evident.  As you so firmly believe otherwise, you're delusional.  I won't waste my time with you.

So as not to be tempted, I've blocked/ignored you.   Sorry, I've just better things to do than butt heads on a forum with people who are so off the end of arguing their side that they're missing such fundamentally obvious points.  Also, I'm nipping any compulsive streak of my own to participate thusly.  I sorely regret all of my time I've wasted in the past in doing so, as I've never convinced anyone of anything on a forum, and I doubt I ever will.

I will, however, savor the irony of your naming yourself after a movie character who is all about asserting his authority upon others.

Block me but let nProtect do whatever they want with your system, brilliant.  As anyone who plays the games will tell you it doesn't stop the cheats, at best it delays them while they develop workarounds (simply Googling finds so many workarounds it is not even funny).  If GameGuard like programs worked then cheating wouldn't exists, just like if DRM and other invasive copy protection worked IP theft would not be an issue.  These issues persist because developers are all too willing to farm out the responsibility for cleaning up the mess of their poor code on users, and there are far too many stupid users (like we have heard from here) all to willing to go along.

I say if you are fool enough to let them hog tie you and hoist you over a pile of wood then I say you are not only asking to be roasted but deserving of such.  As Franklin said, those "who would trade his liberty for security deserves neither.  Perhaps Franklin's context was more serious but in a very real way perhaps not.  No company has the right to use your computer for their purpose without, at least, seeking direct consent from you.  The nefarious manner in which GameGuard installs and operates usurps the user and no matter what its purpose or intent that alone is reason to rail against it - the shady way it operates in pursuit of its purpose only gives more reason.

Originally posted by AgtSmith

Block me but let nProtect do whatever they want with your system, brilliant.  As anyone who plays the games will tell you it doesn't stop the cheats, at best it delays them while they develop workarounds (simply Googling finds so many workarounds it is not even funny).  If GameGuard like programs worked then cheating wouldn't exists, just like if DRM and other invasive copy protection worked IP theft would not be an issue.  These issues persist because developers are all too willing to farm out the responsibility for cleaning up the mess of their poor code on users, and there are far too many stupid users (like we have heard from here) all to willing to go along.

 

I say if you are fool enough to let them hog tie you and hoist you over a pile of wood then I say you are not only asking to be roasted but deserving of such.  As Franklin said, those "who would trade his liberty for security deserves neither.  Perhaps Franklin's context was more serious but in a very real way perhaps not.  No company has the right to use your computer for their purpose without, at least, seeking direct consent from you.  The nefarious manner in which GameGuard installs and operates usurps the user and no matter what its purpose or intent that alone is reason to rail against it - the shady way it operates in pursuit of its purpose only gives more reason.

wow..are you still here pretending you know what you are talking about?

Still....GG...not a real rootkit...just a false positive....and no threat to anyone....except Agent

I apologize, you did catch me in a mood after the last message which was, if anything, quite murderous.

Fundamental fact of the matter with me is this: I don't debate anything on forums.

Why?  Not out of ignorance.  Not because I have no desire to find the truth, far from it. 

On the contrary, I don't debate anything on the forums because, as an apparent human reflex, the participants of a debate invariably gravitate to the extreme outer reaches of one side or the other.

At the point where you've taken a side, the other side becomes your enemy, your goal being to disprove it.  An observation of any one matter where one side or the other must be disproved at all costs is one bereft of the truth.

There exists a philosophy of computer usage of purity.  Of keeping your computer as free of controlling programs as possible.  Of software companies trusting their users to do what's right because they have no right to inhibit how the users utilize their computers.

It's a philosophy that's disproved when a company invests it, only to be severely ripped off.  The problem is, like any philosophy of absolutism, of staying as far off the fence as possible, it couldn't be any further from the truth.  Life exists as it is: in the middle of all surrounding it.  Not as a debater wants it: on one side or another. 

As proud of a tradition as debate may be in the Western world, its truth-finding capacity is dreadfully limited. The more we spend energy against each other, the less we spend energy to research, understand, and forward the ways of truth.

In matters of GameGuard and Chronicles of Spellborn, the developers make themselves very clear in their terms of service agreement: This software includes both Gameguard and marketing software, and if you don't like it, don't use the product.  It probably wasn't even the developer's choice to include the software, it was Acclaim's, and they likely include the software because they signed a contract it will be on all their software.  You know not even the battlefront your battle exists.

They've made their decision.  If enough people don't like this, perhaps they'll revise their policy.  Otherwise, they'll see no need.  It's simple cause and effect.  This, too, should be self-evident.

Benjamin Franklin was an incredible individual, insofar as a great visionary who would fly a kite during a lighting storm to find his visions true is, but you do him no service in taking a quote of his that applied to conditions several hundred years ago and dragging it out of context for your own needs.

I've read through quite a bit of this thread, to which I wish I had the time back.

Look - I'm not going to go into a bunch of techno mumbo jumbo, suffice to say that I am technically very competent.

And this is simply not something most reasonable technical people are going to sweat.

In point of fact I wager that most techs have a similar setup to mine.   Windows XP on a seperate gaming box that gets wiped and reloaded periodically.   Online banking and most browsing, etc gets done on a decent laptop next to it - because laptops are pretty awesome nowadays.   Lots of us run Macs as the lappy for various reasons atop of all that.

So the idear of an anti-cheat piece of code, which has been used in the industry a long time, blah blah, no, repeat no reports of malicious use?

*shrug, very *shrug.

The folks who truly do get bent out of shape over it are still trying to eat up all the canned goods they stocked up for Y2k and realized the next day there wasn't a nuclear fallout to contend with - just lots and lots of beanie weenies.

Originally posted by geldonyetich

I apologize, you did catch me in a mood after the last message which was, if anything, quite murderous.

Fundamental fact of the matter with me is this: I don't debate anything on forums.

Why?  Not out of ignorance.  Not because I have no desire to find the truth, far from it. 

On the contrary, I don't debate anything on the forums because, as an apparent human reflex, the participants of a debate invariably gravitate to the extreme outer reaches of one side or the other.

At the point where you've taken a side, the other side becomes your enemy, your goal being to disprove it.  An observation of any one matter where one side or the other must be disproved at all costs is one bereft of the truth.

Fair enough, I think we all understand what you are describing.  I think I have been very fair in this discussion and even as people have flamed me for doing nothing but bringing to light something that users certainly should be aware of at the least.

Originally posted by geldonyetich

In matters of GameGuard and Chronicles of Spellborn, the developers make themselves very clear in their terms of service agreement: This software includes both Gameguard and marketing software, and if you don't like it, don't use the product.  It probably wasn't even the developer's choice to include the software, it was Acclaim's, and they likely include the software because they signed a contract it will be on all their software.  You know not even the battlefront your battle exists.

They've made their decision.  If enough people don't like this, perhaps they'll revise their policy.  Otherwise, they'll see no need.  It's simple cause and effect.  This, too, should be self-evident.

Benjamin Franklin was an incredible individual, insofar as a great visionary who would fly a kite during a lighting storm to find his visions true is, but you do him no service in taking a quote of his that applied to conditions several hundred years ago and dragging it out of context for your own needs.

Again, the TCoS EULA (I posted it quite some time ago) says nothing about GameGuard and even in deep lawyer-ease one would be very hard to see them saying anything at all about what Gameguard is and what it is capable of.

I spend much of my week dealing with people's computers so mucked up by poorly written, non malicious, well meaning software it is easily a bigger threat than viruses or spyware to most users.  Be it every two bit piece of stupid software having autorun features, sloppy code in terms of changing system settings, and other common practices the fact of the matter is that without getting a Ruby Ridge about things there is a serious problem today with software companies taking the opportunity that a user chooses to install one of their programs to get a foothold on that computer nad push down all sorts of stuff the user never asked for and likely never wanted. 

That being said, I think GameGuard goes way beyond what I describe above, beyond OEM or Freeware crapware that gets installed along side what the user actually wanted.  It is actively working to subvert the user on his own computer, and not just on cheats.  If you approach this subject honestly and look at the list of software it reports as a cheat (Steam, Daemon Tools, F-Secure, and on and on) it is exerting a level of control over the users computer than goes well beyond looking for know cheats and stopping them.

And again, it is about the way it does what it does.  Why does it not have a proper installer that advices the user of it being necessary and even provides an EULA so the user can see the scope of what it does and what it is offered to not do?  What about ensuring that when the game is not active that GameGuard is absolutely not active in any way?  How about a proper uninstaller so a user can remove it when they no longer need or want it?  You have to ask yourself why these basic things are not done if GameGuard, as we all presume, have no malicious intent?  If a company cannot even meet these basic standards in terms of respecting the user then how can you trust them with all the other stuff (hidden drivers, memory access, system/usage info phoned home).  It is a completely legitimate concern.  Consider this, why does GameGuard not simply scan your computer programs and close TCoS if it sees what it says is a cheat?  Why does it have cart blanch to close any programs the user has running with no notice and no user acknowledgment?  If it where just about stopping people from cheating a much more responsible thing to do would be to have the program cut off game access, in this case TCoS, if a forbidden program/cheat is found.  Instead, it hoses other software - it doesn't inform or ask the user it can will even go as far as to reboot the users computer.

Originally posted by geldonyetich

They've made their decision.  If enough people don't like this, perhaps they'll revise their policy.  Otherwise, they'll see no need.  It's simple cause and effect.  This, too, should be self-evident.

True - but the way it is hidden how many people really know what is going on with GameGuard - I bet few do and that is why I started the thread.

Originally posted by geldonyetich

Benjamin Franklin was an incredible individual, insofar as a great visionary who would fly a kite during a lighting storm to find his visions true is, but you do him no service in taking a quote of his that applied to conditions several hundred years ago and dragging it out of context for your own needs.

I won't argue this issue is on par with the issues of Franklin's day but I will contest your claim that it is that far out of context.  If you give up your freedoms, large or small, simply for security or convenience then you truly are inviting further infringement and less security and convenience in the end.  Our Founding Fathers would be appalled and the things we accept today from government and corporations, I have no doubt they would side with the previously cited Electronic Freedom Foundation on issues just like the one we are discussing here.

The simple fact of the matter is that the way this program works (the dangerous activity that is flagging so many security programs , the hidden drivers, the hooks on system and user processes, the stealth instal and no uninstall) all adds up to one thing - nProtect doesn't respect the user and certainly doesn't trust them (beyond the cheat detection purpose), so how can you trust nProtect/GameGuard?

Originally posted by ryoutou 

The folks who truly do get bent out of shape over it are still trying to eat up all the canned goods they stocked up for Y2k and realized the next day there wasn't a nuclear fallout to contend with - just lots and lots of beanie weenies.

Cute joke, I get it; but in all seriousness without all the people, me amoung them at the time, who had responsibility to do a crapload of work leading up to Y2K things might have gone apeshit.  It is a bit ridiculous to stand around talking about how somthing was a big thud when it was a big thud precisely because a lot of people worked very hard to correct things that where very wrong. 

Originally posted by AgtSmith 

Originally posted by ryoutou 

The folks who truly do get bent out of shape over it are still trying to eat up all the canned goods they stocked up for Y2k and realized the next day there wasn't a nuclear fallout to contend with - just lots and lots of beanie weenies.

Cute joke, I get it; but in all seriousness without all the people, me amoung them at the time, who had responsibility to do a crapload of work leading up to Y2K things might have gone apeshit.  It is a bit ridiculous to stand around talking about how somthing was a big thud when it was a big thud precisely because a lot of people worked very hard to correct things that where very wrong. 

Haha.  I did a fair ammount of billing for Y2K updates too.   Paid for a fair bit of my house.

But I don't go around agitating to my relatives to caulk their windows so that the Internet bogeyman doesn't get them.

Its like that gambling anecdote, but customized.   If you can't spot the wackadoo on the forum, you are almost assuredly the wackadoo :D

Originally posted by AgtSmith

Originally posted by Orphes

Great so now you are suggesting that TCoS is infected with a virus.

 

No, AVG, Kapersky, and a number of other prominent security software programs (links and pictures provided) are saying the the behavior I describe in this thread is dangerous, that is why it is triggering alerts.  I have been quite clear that my objection to GameGuard is the method it operates, installs, and refuses to uninstall and the potential for abuse that comes with that method.  As I said, A/V programs today look at behavior and if something behaves inappropriately it triggers and alert whether it is malicious or benign.  The actions GameGuard uses are the red flag, it really doesn't matter if it is malicious or not because it should not operate the way it clearly does operate.

 

Originally posted by Orphes

Is there any known situation where Gameguard have been exploited?

 

I have posted a number of links (NIST and SecurityFocus among them) to known exploits in GameGuard, heck someone even posted the code that can exploit GameGuard.  All posted multiple times in this thread:

NIST (US government vulnerability database)

Security Focus (very reputable computer security resource)

Juniper.net (another reputable resource for computer security information)

 

Ok, I proebly have a reading problem then, if there is no difference in have and can.

What is a false positive?

Back in beta, there were no rootkits.  It was Acclaim that added these lame requirements, as they always do on their games.  It is one of the reasons I refuse to play Acclaim games.  BTW, you can remove them after you uninstall, but you have to do it seperately.

Originally posted by Aganazer

Last time we had this discussion, we came to the conclusion that GG is about as harmful as Microsoft Word. As a full time programmer for over 10 years and a master's degree in CS, I can assure you that ANY program can trash your system if that was its intention. Its just a matter of whether or not the program was written with malicious intent. Unless anyone can prove that GG was written with the intent of harming your system, then I won't worry about it.
 

I've known the OP from other forums where he routinely misrepresents and complains about the silliest of things. I would take anything he says with a large grain of salt, very large. In fact, I would suspect that his intention was to start an inflamatory subject which would make him a troll as well.

"written with the intent of harming..." So, it takes malign intent, rather than just poor design/coding to harm a system? How long have you worked in the field?? GameGuard is just another so called "anti hack" app, that appeals to non tech suits, who see it as cheap one stop app for dealing with issues that should have been addressed in the first design phase.  Its a bone thrown to the anti cheat hysterics who other wise would be heard screaming all the way to LEO about "Haxorz!!"..<rolls eyes> I'd not object to such measures(in effective as they are) nearly as much, if they had any sense of professionalism and included a clean up system in the uninstall app.

Originally posted by vesavius

You know what, I had posted here a repsonse to agtsmith's slippery politician like mud slinging, but forget it.
 

This is turning into a typical mmorpg.com thread full of white noise, tainted opinion, and spin. In short, it's now pointless and useless.

The change in this board is noticable recently, which is a real shame beacuse this was one on the few places on this site you could read good natured clear clean posts.

I guess growing awareness of the game has it's price.

Its always been that way Vesa <shrug> The on line gaming population self selects(because of the nature of the on line experience) for those who tend to be thoughtless and/or abusive.  Just the nature of the beast.

Originally posted by Wraithone 

 

"written with the intent of harming..." So, it takes malign intent, rather than just poor design/coding to harm a system? How long have you worked in the field??

...

I'd not object to such measures(in effective as they are) nearly as much, if they had any sense of professionalism and included a clean up system in the uninstall app.

Well said.  The irrational trust of a program installed surreptitiously, that uses the same methods as rootkits/spyware to acheive its purpose, and that usurps user control without permission or even notice is really beyond me.  If nProtect/Acclaim have truly honorable intentions then why the stealth install, the lack of an uninstall, and why use methods that rightly define the program as a rootkit/spyware? 

Spyware (Pretty clear and common definition, notice intent has nothing to do with the definition):

"software that is installed in a computer without the user's knowledge and transmits information about the user's computer activities over the Internet"

Rootkit (Certainly harder to define as rootkit really refers to a methodology rather thana type of malware, this definition seems most fair to both sides of this case though):

A type of Trojan that keeps itself, other files, registry keys and network connections hidden from detection. It enables an attacker to have "root" access to the computer, which means it runs at the lowest level of the machine. A rootkit typically intercepts common API calls. For example, it can intercept requests to a file manager such as Explorer and cause it to keep certain files hidden from display, even reporting false file counts and sizes to the user. Rootkits came from the Unix world and started out as a set of altered utilities such as the ls command, which is used to list file names in the directory (folder).

Legitimate Rootkits?  Rootkits can also be used for what some vendors consider valid purposes.  For example, if digital rights management (DRM) software is installed and kept hidden, it can control the use of licensed, copyrighted material and also prevent the user from removing the hidden enforcement program. However, such usage is no more welcomed than a rootkit that does damage or allows spyware to thrive without detection.

If those methods are truly necessary than a responsible company worthy of the requisite trust for use would engage in full disclosure prior to install, provide a means to uninstall the program when the game is uninstalled, and make sure it is inactive when the game is not running.  Short of these things how can you reasonably trust the distributor of the software or the software itself?  The issue is not if GameGuard is some secret malware bent on world domination one user's computer at a time.  The issue is the method by which it is deployed and operates.  Intent does not negate method, not by a long shot.  Furthermore, such methodology is ripe for abuse and such abuse would be completely transparent to the user thus the inappropriateness of the methodology.

I haven't had GG or Acclaim's other software bundles on my computer in over a year, but as far as I remember CCleaner can still uninstall them and even disable them.  The game won't run while they are disabled, but I know I used to disable them before I got rid of all my Acclaim games.

Originally posted by ryoutou

I've read through quite a bit of this thread, to which I wish I had the time back.

Look - I'm not going to go into a bunch of techno mumbo jumbo, suffice to say that I am technically very competent.

And this is simply not something most reasonable technical people are going to sweat.

In point of fact I wager that most techs have a similar setup to mine.   Windows XP on a seperate gaming box that gets wiped and reloaded periodically.   Online banking and most browsing, etc gets done on a decent laptop next to it - because laptops are pretty awesome nowadays.   Lots of us run Macs as the lappy for various reasons atop of all that.

<snip>

Any chance you could try and explain to me what you mean with 'reasonable technical people'?

I am willing to take the bet you are proposing, but I need to know what 'techs' are first :) What are we betting btw?

You seem to imply you are running a Mac, for security reasons in the last line I quoted. Did I understand that correctly?

And, last question. You seem to imply people should have several computers to be safe (I could very well have misunderstood you). Do you think this is in any way fair to the ordinary user? Do you honestly think this is something most people can afford? Especially with more than 1 person in the household that is a gamer.

Originally posted by AgtSmith

That is the point - the GameGuard service hides itself from the user and operating system, that is why I call it a rootkit and why I am saying it is such a very bad thing.  This is why it doesn't work with Windows 7 because Win 7 does not allow hooks on system files (to a degree) as GameGuard does  such things (this guy is having this issue as are others).

Um, it does work in Windows 7. It just has difficulties updating. 

I run the game in Windows 7 every day, and I dont think its me imagining it every night, although I do have a good active imagination. 

And you know how the not patching properly problem for GG is fixed? Its rather simple actually... you copy the game installation folder over to a winxp or vista machine, run the game patcher and let it update and let GG update, and you copy ONLY the files in the same folder back over. No hooks, no registry files, nothing but the data files themselves. 

It may be a dubious anti cheating system, but I thought I would correct this bit of mis-information. 

Agent Smith-

Thanks for the heads up on this. I was considering trying TCoS but no chance now. It kinda sucks that you had to keep posting here with all these idiots who should be still playing their nintendo games instead of even touching a computer but just know that your message got out to me and my friends and co-workers.

I work in the NOC of an asian telco so I know what security warnings and exploits are for and why you NEVER open your computer up with this type of software. I only use my windows box for gaming on a separate subnet and Debian on my main machine and still I would not be stupid enough to install this garbage.

Maybe their devs will hear the complaints on their official forums and change it but likely akklaim is laying down that particular law (i am sure they have an enterprise licence for its usage so it makes it the "cheap" way to protect TCoS). Oh well. Been hearing the game is crap anyways.

*Salute*

First post? Sock puppet post? Otherwise great how FUD is doing its work.

Originally posted by ibndeath

Agent Smith-

 

Thanks for the heads up on this. I was considering trying TCoS but no chance now. It kinda sucks that you had to keep posting here with all these idiots who should be still playing their nintendo games instead of even touching a computer but just know that your message got out to me and my friends and co-workers.

I work in the NOC of an asian telco so I know what security warnings and exploits are for and why you NEVER open your computer up with this type of software. I only use my windows box for gaming on a separate subnet and Debian on my main machine and still I would not be stupid enough to install this garbage.

Maybe their devs will hear the complaints on their official forums and change it but likely akklaim is laying down that particular law (i am sure they have an enterprise licence for its usage so it makes it the "cheap" way to protect TCoS). Oh well. Been hearing the game is crap anyways.

 

*Salute*

*hugs* the alt account created to just agree.

Is a hug appropriate? Don't want to create any awkardness... I felt that some might need it.

Originally posted by ryoutou

I've read through quite a bit of this thread, to which I wish I had the time back.

Look - I'm not going to go into a bunch of techno mumbo jumbo, suffice to say that I am technically very competent.

And this is simply not something most reasonable technical people are going to sweat.

In point of fact I wager that most techs have a similar setup to mine.   Windows XP on a seperate gaming box that gets wiped and reloaded periodically.   Online banking and most browsing, etc gets done on a decent laptop next to it - because laptops are pretty awesome nowadays.   Lots of us run Macs as the lappy for various reasons atop of all that.

So the idear of an anti-cheat piece of code, which has been used in the industry a long time, blah blah, no, repeat no reports of malicious use?

*shrug, very *shrug.

The folks who truly do get bent out of shape over it are still trying to eat up all the canned goods they stocked up for Y2k and realized the next day there wasn't a nuclear fallout to contend with - just lots and lots of beanie weenies.

You see, this is the view I take as well... It is my view that agtsmith has entrenched himself so deeply into his point, and invested his own identity into it so heavily now, that can't and indeed won't back off, even though he has really only created a jumble of nonsense posts about a supposed maybe 'threat' that dosent exist. Who used the Signal to Noise phrase here before? Very true that- the signal to noise ratio here in Smith's posts on this thread is low. Very low. To me, his intention is clear.

He won't commit to a clear position, bombards the thread with a ton of quotes that he knows most users won't read in order to create a amtosphere of panic, and it even looks like some people here arnt above creating alt accounts to support their now entrenched stance when noone else comes forward to do so. He is just throwing out static in the hopes of scaring people and grabbing some supposed glory through 'winning' the internet.

This thread isnt about GG and SB, that point has been answered repeatedly, this thread is just about 1 man's ego and his need to control others and find human contact, any kind of human contact, through friction.

.

Agent, should I take the red pill or the blue one?