Slashdot Mirror
BBC Tells World About The Warden
Anonymous Cowpat writes "The BBC is running a story about the Blizzard title World of Warcraft. Specifically an article about, 'The Warden', Blizzard's highly-invasive anti-cheating software, which some, including The EFF have labelled as spyware. Most of the people around here have probably heard of it by now, but it's interesting to see the story in the mainstream press and (at time of writing) on the front page of the BBC's technology news section, no less." From the article: "The watchdog program, called The Warden by Blizzard, has been known about among players for some time. It makes sure that players are not using cheat software which can, for example, automatically play the game and build up a character's qualities. However, knowledge of it crossed to the mainstream thanks to software engineer Greg Hoglund who disassembled the code of The Warden and watched it in action to get a better idea of what it did."
Something tells me that disdain for providing your credit card info earlier than you'd like isn't what's preventing you from playing WoW, and neither is The Warden.
ACs are modded -6. I don't read you, I don't mod you, I don't see you. Don't like it? Don't be a coward.
As other poster said, if you don't like it don't play the game. As well does it compare hashes client side? As long as its sending no information to blizzards server than "He's cheating!!" I really don't see why anyone cares what it sniffs.
of more than one multiplayer online game, I have to say, cheaters playing the same game as you suck. Have you ever played CS with cheaters? Really doesn't make it fun at all. Although I'm not 100% thrilled at HOW they're preventing cheaters, so far, they have proven to be not-that-evil(TM). For now, maybe because I like WoW so much, I will give them the benefit of the doubt.
AirSpeak - http://itunes.com/apps/AirSpeak
So, you would say it is ok for the Police to come search you house to make sure you have no drugs, stolen goods, kidnapped 3yr olds
The difference is that you have the right to private property, WoW has the right to deny you access to THEIR private property based on their own criteria. If this you feel this criteria is too invasive then, by all means, do not use their software/services.
This is like drug testing, you have the right to choose not to work for an employeer that does drug testing, you do not have the right to change their policy on drug testing.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
FTA: "[The EFF] added that the Blizzard could get away with using The Warden because information about it was buried in licence agreements that few people read."
Didn't read the license agreement? Sorry, but that's not Blizzard's problem. It would be nice if Blizzard had made it more obvious that they would be doing this.
But you know what? Tough titties, you agreed to it.
That said, it's good that people are drawing attention to this -- maybe next time around, Blizzard will be faced with losing revenue should they try to implement the same kind of solution.
What MMORPGs need to do is implement better server-side analysis to identify cheaters. Difficult? Yes. Expensive? Yes. But probably less difficult and less expensive that losing craploads of clients, and hiring craploads of lawyers. Then they won't need to have the invasion clause in the license for their games.
Spread the word, and maybe we won't have to deal with this next time.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Screw the quotes about what information it goes through. The bottom line is the cheat flags that it looks for and sends back. Here's the million dollar question for almost every application that gets flagged as having 'spyware'**
Do you want to play a fair game and a have a good time, or will tin foil hats get the best of you because you feel like you have big secrets to hide from the world?
** Yes, I realize that a number of those claims can be well founed, but a lot of it is just paranoia.
Perfecting Discordia
www.stevenvansickle.com
People agree to this when they sign up for the service. This is the only method to stop cheating, and thats to be invasive.
The current top anti cheat for medal of honor allied assault is a third party program that makes the warden look like a freaking panzy on what it does.
It checks memory to verify there are no spyware signatures, verifies all files before they run, locks the files, runs its own explorer shell so that a person cant alt tab and run things. The game can only be executed within the context of the anti cheat software, the hardware is checked to make a key that can be bannable even if the person re-installs or reformats.
It locks the memory of itself, and the MOHAA software.
Even at that point it isnt good enough, it also launches two other executables with similar protections built in that check each other to make sure that none of the executables is being shut down or altered by an outside program.
People have to agree with this, because nothing else works, if you slip in one area, they write a cheat to exploit it. You slip in another area you get a cheat in another area. If you dont validate all files, even files with odd extensions, they write a kernal thingy that goes around it.
Cheaters have too many dedicated fucktards trying to ruin the games for everyone else.
When you sign up for World OF WarCraft, or use another type of anti cheat, you are saying that you agree to this kind of thing because you want to participate.
In sports, umpires can watch the players and make sure that they arent cheating, in on-line games the umpires have to get right on the computer. AS LONG as those people only use information required to successfully stop a cheater (IE they arent going in and finding out what programs you have installed in your registry and uploading your outlook e-mail book etc...) then what is their to complain about?
All of the stuff where it scans the URL of web sites, and views peoples MSn etc.. thats all tertiary to what its doing. It is scanning those because it is showing up as open windows processes, there is nothing for the anti cheat program to use to determine that the open windows ARENT cheats, until it checks there names to see if it matches the signature.
I dont think people realize just how clever cheaters can be. One of the cheats turned in for MOHAA involved using a bug with MSN and video drivers for ATI. If a notification was up, you could see through the walls!
Then people wonder at the lengths anti cheat software is beggining to take.
If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion
Hoglund noted that the text strings in title bars could easily contain credit card details or social security numbers.
Since when would a site submit a URL in the title? I assume this is for sites which don't have a <TITLE> tag, and just display the URL as the title. Even in that case, any website that submits a document with such information in the GET string is asking for trouble. It would allow it, among other things, to be viewed in the document history etc.
We need to stop jumping every perceived violation. There seems to be a witch-hunt on for privacy/security violators, and often the assumptions of what 'could' create a security risk falls into the realm of pretty silly...
Whatever happened to the good ol' days of Diablo 1 online when I had to use a hack for the sole purpose of disabling everyone else's hacks around me?
Perfecting Discordia
www.stevenvansickle.com
A cheater-robot gets caught because it plays a game better than any human could... right? So then, the real challenge for a human player is to be mistaken for a machine... a kind-of reverse Turing test...
Seeing bad movies only encourages them. Watch responsibly
Warden was stealth/sleazed in under the radar
Under whose radar? Blizzard announced that they were going to be doing this near the beginning of this year, and they've been reasonably upfront about it. There have been multiple forum postings as well.
IF they want to prevent cheating, watch for behaviour patterns
They do that as well. But, funny thing, guess which is more effective?
And, frankly, the amount of whining and tin foil hat complaining going on over this is just ridiculous. They do not expose any private data at any point in time. The sniffing occurs only while you are playing the game, it does not negatively impact any other programs, all "gathered" data is hashed and compared purely on the client side, and only if the hashed data matches a list of "known bad" hashes is an indicator (again, only an indicator -- not the raw, unhashed data) sent back to Blizzard.
If you want to complain, then complain about the possibility of false positives. Hash functions, by their very nature, do not ensure uniqueness. Multiple values will hash to the same value. I haven't seen a technical discussion of the hashing function, so it may be exceptionally rare, but it's still possible.
And no, I don't play WoW or any other Blizzard game at this time. And I'm not a fanboy. I'm just tired of people blowing this out of proportion -- it just dilutes the response against real privacy/security threats.
and there is nothing morally wrong with using them
You agree not to cheat. Then you cheat anyway. What's not immoral about that?
This is what PHP programmers have known for a LONG time.
Just as you can hack some javascript to prevent validation, what makes them think we can't run some remote control software whose client happens to run on... *GASP* your own machine!
But what are they gonna do next? Introduce captchas into the game every 5 minutes?
No, sir. The answer is changing THE GAME RULES (the equivalent of validating user input in the server, not the client) so that quick advancement is not done. i.e. restrict repetitive training to N hours, and such.
Trying to control the client is nonsense.
Mr Hoglund noted that the text strings in title bars could easily contain credit card details or social security numbers. ... even though he knows that - in the astonishingly massive world of Windows commercial software, shareware and freeware - there's not a single program out there that does this.
Mr. Hoglund is an idiot.
I have a hard and fast rule -- if I'm not actually paying you any money, I'm not providing you with sufficient information to subsequently bill me.
I absolutely will not provide CC information to use a 'free' trial. I also typically refuse to allow people to take moneys out of my accounts in the future without my interaction. You may send me an invoice. You may not just decide to take what you need.
But, I'm probably being unrealistic. Nobody would ever misuse that, right?
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Ok, this is just specious:
Should I be expected to forfeit my original $50 and a years worth of subscription fees because they changed the terms?
What - did you suddenly lose the years worth of gameplay you already experianced? Do you call up HBO when they cancel a show you liked and demand a refund from the moment you subscribed with them?
I mean, you can stop playing the game! And stop paying for it.
I would hope people understand that subscription based games are going to be like any subscription service rather than like the old single player CD based games which were like books (sort of).
Of course, this among other issues is exactly why I have yet to buy or play a MMORPG.
Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3