Slashdot Mirror


Activision Blizzard Secretly Watermarking World of Warcraft Users

New submitter kgkoutzis writes "A few days ago I noticed some weird artifacts covering the screenshots I captured using the WoW game client application. I sharpened the images and found a repeating pattern secretly embedded inside. I posted this information on the OwnedCore forum and after an amazing three-day cooperation marathon, we managed to prove that all our WoW screenshots, since at least 2008, contain a custom watermark. This watermark includes our user IDs, the time the screenshot was captured and the IP address of the server we were on at the time. It can be used to track down activities which are against Blizzard's Terms of Service, like hacking the game or running a private server. The users were never notified by the ToS that this watermarking was going on so, for four years now, we have all been publicly sharing our account and realm information for hackers to decode and exploit. You can find more information on how to access the watermark in the aforementioned forum post which is still quite active."

272 comments

  1. Other games? by SJHillman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is this known to be the case for any other games? IE: Diablo III?

    1. Re:Other games? by Zocalo · · Score: 5, Funny

      I know surfing the web using Internet Explorer can be a bit of an adventure, but even so, I think that's probably the first time I've seen it referred to as a "game".

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:Other games? by Teancum · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Internet Explorer is indeed a game. It is just a game played at a higher level and you are unwittingly a participant in that game acting as a pawn. That you may or may not actually be using that software is itself a part of the game.

    3. Re:Other games? by tepples · · Score: 3, Funny

      So I take it the only way to win IE is not to play. In that case, how does one start with a store-bought PC and download something better such as Firefox, Chrome, or a whole different operating system, without playing?

    4. Re:Other games? by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 0

      Are you kidding IE's a roller-coaster Ride :)

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    5. Re:Other games? by the+simurgh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      i wonder how long till a lawsuit is filled because activision basically gave hackers all the info they needed to hack accounts and never told account holders not to post screengrabs because it contained account info.

    6. Re:Other games? by moronoxyd · · Score: 0

      FTP. USB flash drive, CD ROM, DVD, external hard drive.
      Get the idea?

    7. Re:Other games? by Barefoot+Monkey · · Score: 0

      Oh, IE certainly is a game. A strange game. The only winning move is not to play.

    8. Re:Other games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You keep posting this link to every news article on slashdot, you'd think eventually you'd realise that you look like a total dufus.

    9. Re:Other games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows has a built-in telnet client, and an FTP client as part of IIS.
      You can connect to a server and download the Firefox installer that way without touching IE.

      I have a shared folder on my network of many common installers for programs everyone in the household uses should they need to reinstall something. Firefox, 7-Zip, and OpenOffice are amongst them (obviously this wont help you, but you could do something similar on your own network, or on a router that supports USB devices for network storage.

    10. Re:Other games? by sarysa · · Score: 1

      That's the problem with soccer. You constantly wait for it, but it never comes...

      --
      Charisma is the measure of someone's ability to lie with a straight face.
    11. Re:Other games? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 0

      So I take it the only way to win IE is not to play. In that case, how does one start with a store-bought PC and download something better such as Firefox,

      sudo apt-get install firefox

      Chrome,

      sudo apt-get install chromium-browser

      or a whole different operating system, without playing?

      wget http://mirror.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/ubuntu-releases/lucid/ubuntu-10.04.1-desktop-i386.iso

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    12. Re:Other games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      how does one start with a store-bought PC and download something better such as Firefox, Chrome, or a whole different operating system, without playing?

      wget.

      Leave your geek badge at the door.

    13. Re:Other games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      It contains the account name (which cannot be used to login anyways since you have to use a battle.net ID to login now), and the IP of the server you're playing on (which is public anyways), and the timestamp. Not sure if I know what info you're talking about that "basically gave hackers all the info they needed to hack accounts."

    14. Re:Other games? by ildon · · Score: 1

      The account name posted is not what you use to login. If you created an account after the Battle.net 2.0 account merger, you have no way of even knowing what your own "account name" is.

    15. Re:Other games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can go into the "WoW/WTF/Account" directory to find it. Your account name will be the name of a subdirectory.

    16. Re:Other games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's just referring to Diablo III's endgame: Using Internet Explorer (or another browser of your choice) to go to www.paypal.com and check to see if any of your auctions have sold.

    17. Re:Other games? by fisted · · Score: 0

      what's wrong with wget?

    18. Re:Other games? by ildon · · Score: 1

      Ah, that makes sense.

    19. Re:Other games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IE is a tool for downloading browsers. Once you've done that, you can remove it from the desktop.

    20. Re:Other games? by tepples · · Score: 1

      store-bought PC

      sudo apt-get install firefox

      'sudo' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
      operable program or batch file.

      wget http://mirror.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/ubuntu-releases/lucid/ubuntu-10.04.1-desktop-i386.iso

      'wget' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
      operable program or batch file.

      Any store-bought PC not made by Apple will include Windows as its only installed operating system, and I'm not aware of a command-line HTTP downloader client shipped with home versions of Windows.

    21. Re:Other games? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Yea, I forgot to mention - you need a Linux live CD to do this, and it assumes that you're replacing Windows/dual booting.

      Actually, now that I think about it, with a live CD and flash drive, you can very easily get firefox without ever touching IE; just boot into the live CD system and use its web browser (likely firefox) to hit Mozilla's website and download the firefox install executable, transfer it to the flash drive, then reboot into Windows and install your new software.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    22. Re:Other games? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Also, this.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    23. Re:Other games? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Which means that unless one already has a Linux live CD, one would have to download Firefox using the command-line FTP method you mentioned and order a Linux live CD that way, or possibly download a disc image from ftp.ubuntu.com and burn it. But I guess if IE is demoted to "Firefox Downloader", the game is an arguable win.

    24. Re:Other games? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      I personally recommend everyone keep a live CD around for, if nothing else, troubleshooting issues in Windows (i.e., wireless works w/ the live CD but not the Windows install). Heck, I'm pretty sure I've got a Knoppix 4 CD around here somewhere, that thing belongs in a museum...

      The FTP method is probably the most effective way to download FF without ever having to open IE, unless you're just adamantly opposed to the Windows command line (wouldn't blame ya); in that case, you can actually copy/paste the ftp server address into the Location bar at the top of any Windows Explorer menu, and it will open a connection to the server in that window.

      I just prefer command line stuff, makes me feel all hackery :D

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    25. Re:Other games? by CanHasDIY · · Score: 1

      Live CD and live USB - 'cuz sometimes, having an available CD/DVD burner is handy in a live distro.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  2. *Insert X-Files theme song* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    *Tu du tu du du duuuuuuu*
    *neh neh nah nah* [echo]
    -----*neh neh nah nah*

  3. Cows!! by onyxruby · · Score: 1

    There was an infamous cows shot from a hell level of diablo2 from years ago that my character surrounded by hundreds of cows. Wonder if that if that was watermarked?

    1. Re:Cows!! by zieroh · · Score: 1

      Thanks for your input xxxxxx@xxxxxx.xxx

      That's seriously fucked up.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
  4. Brain encoding. by Valor958 · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's not actually a watermark on the picture. It's a watermark encoded in your brain from playing too much WoW.

  5. Ouch by ledow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ouch. That's gotta hurt. I think there's a case for even places like the EU commission there, if people are unknowingly distributing other's data.

    That said, I don't really care because I've never touched WoW. But, yeah, I can see the problem. 4 years of IP -> client records, plus things like date-time stamps. If nothing else, that's a whole host of web-crawling to link people to IP's, accounts.

    You kind of expect it in pre-release reviews or betas or something but in the full client and in every screenshot? Bit nasty.

    More interesting - what other games do that?

    1. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      More then you think. It was a feature in spore. It let you drag the image to the game and the game would pick up the animal in the image. It was an awesome feature.

    2. Re:Ouch by xSquaredAdmin · · Score: 2

      According to the summary it links user IDs to the IP of the server they were on, not the client's IP.

      --
      Crushing dreams at the speed of sarcasm
    3. Re:Ouch by Wovel · · Score: 1

      It's the server IP...

    4. Re:Ouch by cpu6502 · · Score: 2

      This story is hardly news. "A megacorp acts like an asshat and reveals personal data online via photo watermarking." I've come to expect ALL megacorps act like asshats nowadays. It's a challenge to find one that doesn't.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    5. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My understanding is that Spore encoded the creature's data into the PNG metadata, which can be of arbitrary size. I believe Adobe Fireworks does the same thing, encoding all its internal data into a PNG file whose image is just a thumbnail of your work. Wouldn't work well in JPEG.

    6. Re:Ouch by theArtificial · · Score: 1

      Ouch. That's gotta hurt. I think there's a case for even places like the EU commission there, if people are unknowingly distributing other's data.

      I can imagine it now, having to get model releases signed for any screenshots which have other characters present. If you look closely at the terms Blizzard specifically tells you that everything is their property (this is apparent if you ever try to sell 'your' account) from the contents of your characters inventory, to the character itself.

      That said, I don't really care because I've never touched WoW. But, yeah, I can see the problem. 4 years of IP -> client records, plus things like date-time stamps. If nothing else, that's a whole host of web-crawling to link people to IP's, accounts.

      The embedded IP address is the IP address of the server the game client is connected to. I imagine this to be a concern if you're operating an unofficial server.

      You kind of expect it in pre-release reviews or betas or something but in the full client and in every screenshot? Bit nasty.

      Initial evidence shows that this only affects JPEG screenshots below quality 10 settings, if you use a 3rd party program such as Fraps to create screenshots you apparently avoid this issue entirely.

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    7. Re:Ouch by theArtificial · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A megacorp acts like an asshat and reveals personal data online via photo watermarking

      Personal information?

      Information which can be used to distinguish or trace an individual's identity, such as their name, social security number, biometric records, etc. alone, or when combined with other personal or identifying information which is linked or linkable to a specific individual, such as date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name, etc.

      The embedded IP address is the IP address of the server you're connected to. IP addresses are not personal information. The account name is not personal. If I follow this logic your email address is personal information, and so is your license plate? From their terms of service:

      For some activities, we may ask you to create a username and password and/or to provide other, non-personal information such as your age, date of birth, gender, and/or game and platform preferences; and, combine such information with your personal information.

      I've come to expect ALL megacorps act like asshats nowadays. It's a challenge to find one that doesn't.

      What do you expect, they're made up of people. I can see this really impacting someone who signed an NDA not to disclose things which they willingly agreed to in the first place. I'm sure you've never played Wow for any period of time because if you had, you'd realize when updates happen to their Terms, they present them to you and require you scroll through them and agree to them before you'll be able to access the game. I don't have some hardon for Blizzard but none of what they're collecting is personal.

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    8. Re:Ouch by noh8rz10 · · Score: 2

      This story is hardly news. "A megacorp acts like an asshat and reveals personal data online via photo watermarking."

      Well, that's the news, isn't it? I'm familiar with asshat corporations, but not familiar with nefarious jpg watermarking.

    9. Re:Ouch by grim4593 · · Score: 1

      Similarly, NI LabVIEW has the ability to embed program code in PNG screenshots. http://www.ni.com/white-paper/9330/en

    10. Re:Ouch by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      If nothing else, that's a whole host of web-crawling to link people to IP's, accounts.

      IPs have accounts????

    11. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. The data encoded in the watermark, if it is even real, is completely worthless to anyone except blizzard, it couldn't be used to log in to your account, access your credit card info, get your email address, or anything even remotely malicious.

    12. Re:Ouch by mibus · · Score: 1

      The embedded IP address is the IP address of the server you're connected to. IP addresses are not personal information. The account name is not personal. If I follow this logic your email address is personal information, and so is your license plate?

      Yes, I consider those things my personal details, along with my street address, phone number, bank account number, etc. etc.

    13. Re:Ouch by theArtificial · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, I consider those things my personal details, along with my street address, phone number, bank account number, etc. etc.

      Something interesting about public information and personal information is it varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Email addresses are used by both individuals and businesses. In the case of politicians or when requesting public records, in many situations emails are public knowledge. Not to mention many email providers provide indexes listing their members which are opt in. Your address is public knowledge as well as personally identifiable and is even listed on the side of your house and often times painted on the curb out front, and probably listed in a phone book. Look out Google Streetview! Your phone number is public knowledge and personally identifiable. It's also spread around when/if you: sign up for any discount memberships through a supermarket, opened a new business, registered a domain name (without the 'privacy guard').

      TL;DR:
      Besides the financial information, it's a legal question and depends where you reside.

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    14. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My understanding is that Spore encoded the creature's data into the PNG metadata, which can be of arbitrary size. I believe Adobe Fireworks does the same thing, encoding all its internal data into a PNG file whose image is just a thumbnail of your work. Wouldn't work well in JPEG.

      Champions Online does this with saved costumes, which are stored in a jpeg. The image data shows a preview of the costume, with the data used to create it stored near the beginning of the file. It's human readable (and editable) and accounts for about 10-15% of the file. Useful to know if you want to sort or rename them, since it stores the name inside the file, and you can't always edit the names in-game.

      Works fine as long as you don't try to edit the image in an external program - editors strip and destroy the costume data.

    15. Re:Ouch by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      Spore did it with alpha channel steganography (alternating between 0xFF and 0xFE alpha).

    16. Re:Ouch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Name, DOB, gender, and so forth are most certainly personal information and frequently have legal status as such. Your local hospital can't give out a listing of DOBs, genders, and so forth even with the names stripped out because it would violate HIPPA.

    17. Re:Ouch by theArtificial · · Score: 1

      Blizzard is not a healthcare provider to their customers (they're arguably detrimental to physical activity wouldn't you say?) and is not subject to HIPPA guidelines for any of their gaming services.

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
  6. Reminds me of the Printer affair by Penurious+Penguin · · Score: 4, Informative

    HP (and others) used to, or maybe still do, use watermarking in printers to hide data revealing time, printer type, etc.
    http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-5811739-7.html
    https://www.eff.org/issues/printers
    ~ Meta data is watching

    --
    Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
    1. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by firex726 · · Score: 1

      All printer manufactures do this.
      It's done at the request of the government, for officially anti-counterfeiting purposes.

    2. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

      'request' ?

      yeah, they use pastel colored letterhead and say 'pretty please' when they ask you.

      sheesh!

      FORCED by the gov is more like it.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by Penurious+Penguin · · Score: 2

      I didn't know all printer manufacturers did; I'll be looking into it further, despite not having a printer for 5 years. The "officially anti-counterfeiting" bit is pretty dubious (as an excuse, not your statement) though. I actually thought their excuse would be The Children. Either way, while I dislike criminal activity, I do like due anonymity.

      --
      Forward! -- Emperor Norton, 2012
    4. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      If memory serves, it isn't actually a factor of printer manufacturer(and/or re-badger); but of the OEM behind the color laser print engine. Apparently there are relatively few of those, and some, thanks to a little leaning from Uncle Sam the details of which have never come to light, include the watermarking 'feature' in all their print engines. Since printer manufacturers can, and sometimes do, switch parts suppliers between models, a given manufacturer might have both bugged and clean hardware on offer at a given time.

    5. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      https://www.eff.org/pages/list-printers-which-do-or-do-not-display-tracking-dots
      http://miami.typepad.com/springyleaks/2012/05/foia-release-names-spy-printers.html

    6. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is pretty common. Once printers got decent color quality the government said "Hey, people are using your printers for counterfeiting. Do something to mitigate this or we'll try to legislate something and it'll probably suck for everyone involved." This is SOP in a lot of areas.

    7. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Some software(Photoshop being the big name; but not exclusive to them) also includes this 'feature'. If you manipulate an image of a major world currency in excessive detail, a neat little binary module included with photoshop will snag you and direct you to this rather bland organization.

    8. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by fast+turtle · · Score: 2

      Sorry but it only applies to color printers per International agreements to prevent/track counterfit money

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    9. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      The tracking dots are for output devices and apply to all output, counterfeit or not.

      On the input side, there's a pattern of 5 dots on practically all currency that programs like Photoshop and scanners recognize to degrade scanned images of currency. It looks like a distorted X with a dot at the ends and in the middle..

    10. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by theArtificial · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a job for a SLR camera with some good lighting and the GIMP. Here is an example of a camera used to do this in WW2

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    11. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      I believe legally they are obligated to in certain regions due to printers being used to try and print money.

    12. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      IIRC it only affects high resolution colour printers and the dataglyph is printed in yellow ink/toner.

      Despite your skepticism, it was intended as an anti-counterfeiting measure, initiated by the Secret Service not the FBI.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    13. Re:Reminds me of the Printer affair by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's called EURion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EURion_constellation

  7. Why? by BlackPignouf · · Score: 0

    Why would you upload and share your WoW screenshots anyway?

    1. Re:Why? by iamagloworm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      One may also ask 'Why would you play WoW?' but the answer is not a pleasant thing to say.

    2. Re:Why? by ciderbrew · · Score: 1

      Same reason they want to add your Facebook, twitter, game stats & time played/pissed away on line. A really shit reason.

    3. Re:Why? by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      Guild Websites, How To guides etc

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    4. Re:Why? by RogueyWon · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm assuming you're just being sarky, but the question sort-of merits a proper answer in case anybody is actually interested. There are a few reasons:

      1) Proof of a particular achievement. Guild websites etc frequently post screenshots of kills of new bosses (or of Arena victories if they're PvP focussed) to demonstrate the level they're playing at as an aid to recruitment. You see less of this these days, since the game added an actual achievement system, along the lines of that seen on Xbox Live or Steam.

      2) Guides and walkthroughs for particular parts of the game (generally boss fights). There's a trend these days towards using youtube videos as a substitute for more traditional text-and-pictures guides. Now, youtube videos can have their place in describing MMO encounters (though I hate, loathe and despise them as a susbstitute for walkthroughs for offline games), but text-and-pictures is still much more convenient for a quick-reference guide and people are still making them.

      3) Requests for technical help. Something along the lines of "hey, guys, I installed addon x, but it doesn't seem to be working properly - here's a screenshot".

      4) Random silliness - either "look, I managed to get my character somewhere that's supposed to be inaccessible" (which you see less of these days) or "look, we used 500 dead gnomes to spell out "bumpoo" in giant letters across the Barrens".

    5. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do people take photographs of silly signposts etc and show their friends?

    6. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Troll?

      I uploaded mine because my 29 rogue got the highest damage I had ever seen at that level in warsong gulch.

      I've done it to prove to new groups that my warrior could tank and DPS, and was capable of switching in three seconds.

      I've done it to show a character in a guild profile...

      In post-guild first-ever-raid pictures...

      I mean, do you really have to ask this? Yes, there are OCD people that just grind, but for a lot of people, it's a social experience.

      I refuse WoW these days, but I do miss some of my friends from it. Some of my best and longest friendships have been from MUDs played nearly 20 years ago...

    7. Re:Why? by Empiric · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "This watermark includes our user IDs, the time the screenshot was captured and the IP address of the server we were on at the time."

      And, without a password to go with that user ID, none of these are what one should reasonably consider "personal" or "sensitive" in the first place.

      IMHO, in terms of privacy concerns, this is a non-story. Simply presenting it to Slashdot as a neat graphical hack would make more tinfoil-free sense.

      --
      ~ Whence do you come, slayer of men, or where are you going, conqueror of space?
    8. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In addition to needing a password to access the account, I think pretty much everyone these days has an authenticator tied to their account, which provides another level of security.

    9. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WoW's UserID is your battle.net login ID. It is not the same as your character name and is never shared or known to others.

    10. Re:Why? by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      I believe Blizzard now requires user IDs to be a valid email address.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    11. Re:Why? by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected. It's not the email address; it's the old user name that A) was supposed to be secret, and B) can't be changed.

      I very much would not want it associated with my character's name, as it could tie together different online identities that I have, as a privacy concern, a desire to keep separate.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    12. Re:Why? by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      You forgot and c) can no longer be used to log in anyway.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    13. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it's still the best MMO out there and there are no other good games to play.

    14. Re:Why? by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      Doesn't matter. My account is disabled and I don't care if someone tries to log in. I care that my old user name, which I have entrusted with Blizzard to be tied to my real name and my character name, not be released to the public in a way that ties it to either my real name and/or my character name.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  8. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by GuldKalle · · Score: 0

    Also, whoever decided that screenshots should be saved as jpeg by default (assuming it is default) should be fired.

    --
    What?
  9. Re:Just JPG artifacts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Watermarks do not work that way!!! Good night!"

  10. sketchy but legit by v1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Their TOS describes how and what info is SENT to them by the client. This is information on your own computer. They don't have to tell you all the places they store your information. Think copy protection. There's a good deal of sneaky things they're doing on your computer to make sure you're running a legit license. They don't have to tell you about any of that. If you take a file that their client makes, and upload it somewhere, it may contain identifying information in it. This just happens to be a screenshot / image, that you wouldn't normally expect metadata to be in.

    It's not too different than say, your digital camera embedding metadata. And it does. A lot. Usually common things like date/time, fstop, exposure, etc, but also can include model of camera, CAMERA SERIAL NUMBER, gps location, firmware version, total number of shots taken, etc etc.

    So you can take off the tinfoil hat. It's too late. They're already in your head.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:sketchy but legit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "This just happens to be a screenshot / image, that you wouldn't normally expect metadata to be in."

      The data is part of the JPG image itself, it is not metadata. Metadata can easily be removed from a file, the data Blizzard has placed into a JPG would require removal with Gimp or Photoshop.

      This is really sloppy on Blizzard's part and they deserve the firestorm headed their way.

    2. Re:sketchy but legit by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The difference with digital camera watermarking is that EXIF is a (not always obvious depending on the UI, and sometimes less standard that it ought to be) standardized metadata storage system. The internet is rife with amusing mistakes made by people who don't know about exif and upload anyway; but that's a UI/user problem. The fields are well known, easily viewed and edited with commonly available software, and not designed to be covert or strip-resistant in any way. Some imaging devices are, quite arguably, excessively chatty by default, and that is a legitimate concern given user ignorance; but there isn't anything sneaky about the technology.

      Watermarks, at least in this incarnation, are designed to be covert, strip-resistant, and are not intended for the creator of the image to be aware of.

      This is a 'prisons and fortresses share certain architectural similarties; but do not share purposes' situation...

    3. Re:sketchy but legit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, this watermark contains metadata. It's just not stored in the 'normal' format used for image metadata.

      Metadata is data about data. The data in question is the screen shot. The meta data is the user id, etc. which is stored as a watermark in the image.

    4. Re:sketchy but legit by v1 · · Score: 1

      Whether or not they're steno'ing the data only affects what you KNOW is in the file. They're still allowed to PLACE anything in the file, and they're neither required to tell you what data, nor even be obvious about it being in there in the first place.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    5. Re:sketchy but legit by caluml · · Score: 1

      It's steganography, not stenography. Stenography is what people in court-houses do.

    6. Re:sketchy but legit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, what an idiot. No one here is conflating this with any "tinfoil hat" conspiracies but you. What is being discussed is the sneaky methodology and the potential invasion of privacy. Are you so desperate to feel superior that you must run in, create a ridiculous straw man, then save us from it while blaming it on us? Seriously, you are no smarter or aware than anyone else here, grow up.

    7. Re:sketchy but legit by Missing.Matter · · Score: 1

      So if you find a secret message in a court transcription, we have a case of a steganographer stenographer?

    8. Re:sketchy but legit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And, were it an European environmental case, could you have a stenographer steganographize a stegosaurus in Steglitz?

    9. Re:sketchy but legit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think copy protection.

      Copy protection is there to treat you, the customer, as a criminal. It is completely inappropriate.

      It's not too different than say, your digital camera embedding metadata. And it does. A lot. Usually common things like date/time, fstop, exposure, etc, but also can include model of camera, CAMERA SERIAL NUMBER, gps location, firmware version, total number of shots taken, etc etc.

      Digital camera metadata isn't there for the purpose of screwing you.

    10. Re:sketchy but legit by theArtificial · · Score: 1

      The data is part of the JPG image itself, it is not metadata. Metadata can easily be removed from a file, the data Blizzard has placed into a JPG would require removal with Gimp or Photoshop.

      Or using a program like Fraps which apparently side steps this whole fiasco.

      This is really sloppy on Blizzard's part and they deserve the firestorm headed their way.

      Relating to what? This realistically (potentially) affects people who may sign NDAs or play on pirate servers. None of the information disclosed is private information. Any personally identifiable information they have was given to them by the player in the first place.

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    11. Re:sketchy but legit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What nonsense.  They don't have to tell you what they're doing?

      They are running an online service!  They should be *giving* away the client!

      Also, the CAMERA SERIAL NUMBER doesn't identify you as a PERSON, since there is no ACCOUNT associated with it.

    12. Re:sketchy but legit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not too different than say, your digital camera embedding metadata. And it does. A lot. Usually common things like date/time, fstop, exposure, etc, but also can include model of camera, CAMERA SERIAL NUMBER, GPS LOCATION, firmware version, total number of shots taken, etc etc.

      FTFW.

      GPS Location can and often is worse than exposing serial numbers of cameras, especially if you pay for everything in cash like I do.

      If in doubt, just run your pictures through a EXIF remover.

    13. Re:sketchy but legit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GPS Location can and often is worse than exposing serial numbers of cameras, especially if you pay for everything in cash like I do.

      That was meant to read

      GPS Location can and often is worse than exposing serial numbers of cameras, unless you pay for everything in cash like I do.

      YMMV

  11. Re:That's no watermark... by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 3, Funny

    No it's a sail boat!

    --

    Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

  12. So what? by aekafan · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    This is what I think Blizz/Activision will say if you complain. What are you gonna do, go play another game? Even though they are losing subscribers, they have enough that they really don't care. I don't play WoW, nor do I even like it, but I have some relatives who are so addicted to it that Blizzard executives could break into their house and rape their children, and they would give it a pass. This is meaningless on that scale.

    1. Re:So what? by Robert+Zenz · · Score: 1

      Exactly. As every user has read the TOS which they agreed to (*snickers*), they should know that they can't hold Blizzard reliable anyway...additionally, the "Acknowledgments" section sounds a like an interesting butt rape to me...well, not much worse then many other licenses, though.

    2. Re:So what? by theArtificial · · Score: 1

      As every user has read the TOS which they agreed to (*snickers*)

      What kind of person doesn't read what they're agreeing to in the first place? It explains why we have a mortgage crisis, "Oh a Mortgage document, TL;DR" /sarcasm

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    3. Re:So what? by srmalloy · · Score: 1

      "...can't hold Blizzard reliable..."

      Somehow, I think that's even more appropriate a comment than the "...can't hold Blizzard liable..." that I think you intended to write.

      I suspect, though, that Blizzard will make a response to this news... and the response will consist solely of pushing the data through an encryption function before it is used to watermark the screenshot so that it's no longer plaintext.

    4. Re:So what? by Robert+Zenz · · Score: 1

      Yeah...I know...I suck at english (or typing...depends)...I realized my typo an hour later, does that count?

  13. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by gl4ss · · Score: 3, Insightful

    it's a pretty far done troll if so, if you read further to the thread(there was some disassembly from mac client).

    (it would be entirely feasible that they remove the watermark at full quality.. because it would be obvious then).

    this is blizzard we're talking about after all. (I don't think jpg artifacts would position themselves like that, not on any of my pron pics anyways)

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  14. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you read the thread, other people have actually decoded those "compression artifacts", and even wrote a tool to do it so, no, those aren't just artifacts.

  15. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by firex726 · · Score: 1

    How do you account for the pattern then?

  16. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Has anyone actually done some work on the quality 10 screenshots to ensure that the pattern isn't actually still in the structure of the file?

    It was my understanding that digimarc's tech was supposed to make their watermarks essentially invisible to the human eye, and perhaps it is a biproduct of lossy compression that's actually showing the pattern on lower qualities.

    Has someone taken the eye-dropper tool to a large section of a quality 10 screenshot to verify that there aren't pixels that have a different color by even one bit?

  17. Substantiated Fact by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 5, Informative

    This post has a script to save the watermark only

    Next time, actually read the thread before posting.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    1. Re:Substantiated Fact by aitikin · · Score: 0

      Read the thread? This is Slashdot, I'm surprised he read the summery!

      --
      "Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
    2. Re:Substantiated Fact by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm sorry but that's totally false. The moon isn't made of cheese.

    3. Re:Substantiated Fact by Copperhamster · · Score: 1

      Ahh Fraps, the best investment I ever made so many years ago when games often didn't do these 'screenshot' things.

    4. Re:Substantiated Fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or the silly thing that the first thing I saw when I got to site the article is on was a WOW bot site banner ad. oh wonders and joy.

    5. Re:Substantiated Fact by crazyjj · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hell, sometimes I don't even read the comments before replying.

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    6. Re:Substantiated Fact by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 2

      I don't even read my own comments, just hit the keyboard randomly. Sometimes I get lucky, sometimes not so much.

    7. Re:Substantiated Fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry but that's totally false. The moon isn't made of cheese.

      Only a weak crane would not fly.

    8. Re:Substantiated Fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wholeheartedly agree, Obama is a complete idiot.

    9. Re:Substantiated Fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct. Cheese is made of moon.

  18. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by kgkoutzis · · Score: 5, Informative

    From reading the thread, the artifacts do not appear when JPEG quality is set to 10 (i.e. maximum) or if a non-lossy algorithm is used (like TIFF or PNG). If this was meant to be a watermark, the programmer who wrote the algorithm should be fired.

    These are most likely JPEG compression artefacts.

    They did this on purpose, in order to avoid having their watermark identified when viewing the images in really high quality. An Assembly expert wrote some code that allows you to add this watermark on purpose in the high quality images: http://www.ownedcore.com/forums/world-of-warcraft/world-of-warcraft-general/375573-looking-inside-your-screenshots-4.html#post2491687 We also decoded the content of the watermark and it indeed contains the account information, as mentioned. It is NOT artifacts. Please read the full forum post before posting dis-informative comments. Thank you.

  19. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by MatthiasF · · Score: 0

    Or the embedded information can only be seen from sharpening when there is JPEG compression.

    The watermark is probably in the uncompressed files too, you just can't easily pull them out with sharpening because the file is uncompressed.

  20. Absurd by medv4380 · · Score: 1

    JPEG compression artifacts? That's absurd! How would a random compression artifact contain the UserID, Time, and IP address? I'd be more likely to believe that was an actual picture of Jesus in my Sandwich. The reason the lossy compression just reveals the pattern.

    1. Re:Absurd by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Funny

      Blizzard actually poisons the kernel entropy pool so cleverly that 'random' behaviors by the computer end up leaking identifiable information. Very sneaky of them...

  21. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Originally the game only saved screenshots as TGA, but at some point JPEG was made the default setting and you had to edit a config file to change it back. It might be a setting in the UI now, I don't know.

  22. Re:Just JPG artifacts by Metabolife · · Score: 1

    Yes, strategically place JPG artifacts caused by known compression techniques to create a readable barcode.

  23. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm not surprised the commenter above didn't read the posts following the first post of the source.

    What's important are these posts:

    1.) Disassembly from the Mac OS X client, which shows watermark functions triggered in the screenshot routine.
    http://www.ownedcore.com/forums/world-of-warcraft/world-of-warcraft-general/375573-looking-inside-your-screenshots-2.html#post2489452

    2.) Using a memory modifier, the client is edited to only save the watermark (discarding the actual screenshot) even in JPEG 10 and Lossless formats. Completely disproves compression artefacts theory.
    http://www.ownedcore.com/forums/world-of-warcraft/world-of-warcraft-general/375573-looking-inside-your-screenshots-4.html#post2491687

    3.) Further disassembly shows the following are included in the watermark: Account Name, Realm Info (Serialized, unknown content), Realm IP, Timestamp
    http://www.ownedcore.com/forums/world-of-warcraft/world-of-warcraft-general/375573-looking-inside-your-screenshots-5.html#post2492494

    You really should read some of the posts in between as well, linking Digimarc to Blizzard Activision, patents filed by Digimarc describing precisely this watermarking technique (and possible predecessors), and how the payload (88 bytes) is repeated multiple times exactly to 5808 bytes in order to survive anticipated resizing and further compression.

    Whilst I'm sure they may have good intents (for support maybe? giving benefit of the doubt here), it's these kinds of tricks being pulled by digital companies whilst keeping consumers in the dark that really turns me off.

  24. Backmasked Message? by trevc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you look at the JPEGs in a mirror you can see a hidden message "Hello, hunters. Congratulations. You've just discovered the secret message. Please send your answer to Old Pink, care of the funny farm, Chalfont."

  25. Money Talks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At some point we are going to start showing a little respect for ourselves as consumers, and stop supporting companies like this, right?

    These companies know they can do pretty much whatever they want, because we're all just a bunch of consumer whores anymore.
    Money talks. Stop buying their crap.

    1. Re:Money Talks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      At some point we are going to start showing a little respect for ourselves as consumers, and stop supporting companies like this, right?

      Wrong, unfortunately.

      That will never happen. Shit, I thought it might when companies started controlling what you're allowed to run on your own device and prohibiting things that were "inconvenient" to their business model, but no... people line up to buy that shit. I thought it might happen when companies installed rootkits on people's computers, but no, people continued to buy things from the same company.

      There IS no level of abuse that people won't accept if the toy is shiny enough.

  26. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    They claim it's been successfully decoded, but that code rule and examples are not provided. As they give the steps to generate such a picture, it would be otherwise easy enough to verify.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  27. Good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would have encoded that info into the game a long time ago. I was looking at the bot situation in wows early days and thought to myself that there should be some details encoded into the screen that would allow Blizzard to track back to the account.

    It would not take much at all. There were several areas of the screen that would lend its self to encoding information. I am sure you could do it with just a few bytes of information. Enough bytes to indicate account ID index (3 bytes) and a small date (2 bytes). You could encode this in as little as 2 pixels on the screen (but it would stand out). Something like this could be encoded into border patterns on the edge of controls and would be almost invisible.

    I know you can customize the heck out of the display, but this would catch a lot people.

  28. Questionable by ptresadern · · Score: 1

    Okay, so there's some pattern that shows up against a completely untextured view of the world. How would they recover such a faint watermark from an ordinary view of the world, complete with complex textures in the background? For that sort of thing, you need a copy of the image without the watermark so that you can take the difference between the two, and that doesn't seem to be the case here. And if you wanted to covertly record someone's data, why go to this effort when you could just send it to your server without telling them?

    1. Re:Questionable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you wanted to covertly record someone's data, why go to this effort when you could just send it to your server without telling them?

      Blizzard/Activision/whoever is really, really picky about people running private WoW servers. The point is, they might well not control the server to which the client is connecting. But, if a player is posting screenshots to brag about the l33t cust0m 53rv3r he's connected to, the client might watermark enough data for Blizzard's aching-for-action legal team to make a case against the person running the server. If they could get any worthwhile data out of people this way, they've been getting away with it using the very client they're using, right under their noses, for four years now without anyone noticing. Sneaky.

    2. Re:Questionable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, so there's some pattern that shows up against a completely untextured view of the world. How would they recover such a faint watermark from an ordinary view of the world, complete with complex textures in the background? For that sort of thing, you need a copy of the image without the watermark so that you can take the difference between the two, and that doesn't seem to be the case here.

      Yes, if this were 1900 and nobody had invented signal processing, you'd indeed have to do that. Since then, we've learned quite a bit, and extracting a repeated pattern from an unknown but uncorrelated background noise isn't a problem.

      And if you wanted to covertly record someone's data, why go to this effort when you could just send it to your server without telling them?

      Really? Can't think of anything? Like people playing with no network connection to blizzard to foil just such mechanism, and posting screenshots online?

    3. Re:Questionable by Trails · · Score: 1
    4. Re:Questionable by Macthorpe · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm pretty sure all you'd need is a couple of screenshots with the watermark in. If you know the location of the watermark, you can start building the information out of just one, and two or three would give you enough.

      And if someone posts a screenshot of them playing on a private server, or of them botting on a real server on a different website where their account name doesn't match, how on earth would you link that to an active player without something in the image?

      --
      "It does not do to leave a live dragon out of your calculations, if you live near him." - Tolkien
    5. Re:Questionable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly Blizzard knows exactly where in the image to look for the data, even if it isn't visible to the human eye on anything but an untextured background with a lossy compression. (It's likely still there in the non-compressed formats, just not visible. This is a known issue with watermarks.) So they'd just run the picture through their decode function and get cleartext out, no problem there.

      As for why? Because not everyone uses the official blizzard servers, and because say people using bots and screenshotting for botting tutorials might use the official servers but at the time Blizzard wouldn't know they were doing anything bad... but when they find their screenshots it would be trivial to track them down.

    6. Re:Questionable by omnichad · · Score: 1

      The watermark is embedded in the image multiple times. As complex a scene as it is, you can compare the multiple copies and look for the variations between them in common. If you already know where the "pixels" of the encoding is at and the differential that is used, it would be relatively easy to extract. On the other hand, Digimarc has a patent on it so it's relatively complex anyway.

      Remember, you don't have to use an image manipulation tool to read the watermark. If the RGB values are all shifted by 1 to make the encoding, it's really faint, but on the numbers side, it's still a higher/lower value. It's also why the grid uses > 1 pixel squares.

  29. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by fche · · Score: 0

    Linky please?

  30. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why? What would be the point of lossless screenshots from a game? Do you really think everyone needs pixel-perfect screenshots from a game? Or do you work for a storage company and you want people to fill their hard drives faster?

  31. Re:Ask Slashdot by hawguy · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sigh. This kind of story makes me miss ignorant Ask Slashdot questions. I wonder if the OP would mind if I told him how to select the best network cable for use at home.

    I'd like to know - the cheap cables I keep buying on eBay often fail after a few plug/unplug cycles, and the $20 Systimax patch cables seem like overkill.

  32. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least read the summary.

  33. Why not just email Mike Morhaime by orodos · · Score: 2

    and ask him wtf is going on? MMorhaime@blizzard.com

  34. Another reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to play GW2.

    1. Re:Another reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I second this suggestion. At least they haven't proven that they hate their customers yet (as far as I know).

      Plus, a bunch of dudes from Blizzard from back in the day are the ones that created ANet, the way I hear. I'm thinking people that had a hand in the original SC, Diablo2, Warcraft3 most likely would have gotten "laid off" from Activision by this point anyways - obviously they care WAY too much about the customer, just by making good games...

      Since Blizzard has been taken by Activision, I've been waiting for things like this to happen. Guess we shouldn't be surprised.

    2. Re:Another reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, but GW2's publisher apparantly does.

  35. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by cluedweasel · · Score: 2

    From the frequent "how to I open a screenshot" posts that used to appear in the WoW TS forum, I suspect it was changed to lower support calls.

  36. Screw Actizard, contact privacy@blizzard.com by dasacc22 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Got fed up with all the BS and emailed privacy@blizzard.com to have my account and all my games perma-deleted from their system. Took an untold number of weeks for them to finally follow through on it but I'm now no longer a zard-tard.

    Doesn't look like many slashdotters here care, but if you actually do then claim your info back and stop affiliating with this once decent company.

    1. Re:Screw Actizard, contact privacy@blizzard.com by Khyber · · Score: 1

      I got you beat. I never touched WoW at all. I did EverQuest for about two months and got bored of it. Too easy.

      No challenge (and I mean a real challenge, not once you can solve with an army of friends and brute force) means no go for me.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    2. Re:Screw Actizard, contact privacy@blizzard.com by dasacc22 · · Score: 1

      actually I've never played WoW, just way too goofy for me. I emailed blizzard to have my account deleted during a diablo III fiasco. They nerfed increased-attack-speed gear, which needed to happen, but I was unaware of this until a couple days before hand and spent all my earned gold left over making it to inferno on IAS stuff.

      All that aside, the reason I asked them to delete my account and access to games (starcraft 2, diablo 3) is b/c of how they handled people on their "community" forums. I only use the word community in the sense that it's in the title on the page somewhere. Post after post after post discussing the IAS nerf was deleted, even sane and civil posts where the OP could easily reconcile the difference through discussion.

      That's not a community. That's damage control. I could overlook the crap handling of the nerf but shutting up the player base? not so much.

    3. Re:Screw Actizard, contact privacy@blizzard.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, that's showing that you don't know the difference between EQ and WoW.

      WoW actually does have challenges besides the tank-and-spank fights that lead to zergs.

      There are many fights in WOW, if you don't understand the mechanics of them you will NEVER beat.

      That said, there are problems with that too, it can have a scripted feel to it, if you want to phrase it that way, though others would say it's more like a dance step and how is that offensive?

      I suspect they don't realize there ARE limits to what computers can do at this time, and while it might be nice if you could solve a boss encounter by setting fire to the drapes, if somebody doesn't program that in, it won't happen.

    4. Re:Screw Actizard, contact privacy@blizzard.com by TriezGamer · · Score: 1

      The biggest problem with the IAS nerf (which, as you said, needed to happen) was the failure to compensate with a subsequent buff to on-hit effects. Especially Life on Hit. Like you, I was built for IAS and had spent tons of gold on IAS equipment, and when the nerf hit, the attack speed wasn't what killed me -- it was the approximately 40% reduction in Life over time from my old attack speed that did me in.

  37. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Wait, they added un unencrypted watermark? Why on earth would you NOT encrypt a watermark of this kind?

  38. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by JustOK · · Score: 4, Funny

    Why? What did it say?

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  39. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by degeneratemonkey · · Score: 1

    More people should read my post's parent.

  40. None of this information would be a problem by CubicleZombie · · Score: 0

    As long as it doesn't have the address of your parents basement, I see nothing to worry about.

    --
    :wq
  41. Makes Sense... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If someone ever actually manages to find Mankrik's wife, they need to know who and when so they can send the prize.

  42. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Mortimer82 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The thread indicates it may have appeared during WotLK alpha builds and only contains:
    - Account name that was used pre-BNET or otherwise a post-BNET numeric account name. (email address is NOT included)
    - IP address of the realm you are connected to, NOT the client IP. (However, this could be used to identify pirate servers).
    - The time the screenshot was taken

    I suspect it was most likely used to catch people leaking imagery of alpha builds which were not allowed to be made public. WotLK was the last WoW expansion Blizzard tried to keep secret for the alpha, but everyone was leaking it despite very clear NDAs having to be agreed to by all who participated. With their next expansion, they didn't bother with an NDA outside of a very small group of initial internal testers.

    I wouldn't call this any kind of breach of privacy as none of the information is personal. An account name can only be matched to a real name by Blizzard and only if you play on their servers.

    Of course privacy zealots will say otherwise, but each to their own.

  43. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    What a retard you are. Just read the first few sentences, then click on the link.
    Or do you actually need someone to come and fucking click on the link for you?

  44. one word for you NINITE by RobertLTux · · Score: 0

    http://ninite.com/.net-7zip-air-chrome-firefox-flash-flashie-foxit-java-opera-pdfcreator-reader-safari-shockwave-silverlight/

    that covers just about everything you would need download (on another computer) shove it onto a flash drive and then run on your new computer (must have network connection)

    --
    Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    1. Re:one word for you NINITE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      silverlight? why would *anyone* install silverlight and 3 different browsers? silverlight is 100% unused on the web aside from netflix, which hopefully will stop that shit soon enough.

    2. Re:one word for you NINITE by Cederic · · Score: 0

      silverlight is 100% unused on the web aside from netflix

      ..and LoveFilm and Sky Go, to name two of the three commercial video services I use.

  45. True - First Hand experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Posting anon for obvious reasons.

    I recently sold my Blizzard account.

    I sold it in a famous Brazilian auction site (Mercado Livre). I didn't include and personal info (obviously) in the ad, and my login ID/password and e-mail are vastly different from those registered with Blizzard.

    Somehow, BEFORE THE AUCTION ENDED, thus before the buyer tried to log-in from his IP, I received an e-mail from Blizzard along the lines of "we already noticed you're trying to sell your account"

    Well, fuck you, Blizzard. You were too late!! The sale went without a hitch and the buyer never reported any issues (he even added the Android authenticator).

    Screw their overprotective ToS. I no longer care for their DRM-laden games, so I passed it along. No, I didn't make tons of money, but at least I made someone happy and screwed Blizzard some.

  46. Seems well within their rights by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    The only people who'd need to worry are those exploiting the game who've distorted their toon names thinking that's all they need to do hide their identities.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    1. Re:Seems well within their rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree completely. That's why I think it's ridiculous that people make a big deal out of things like traffic checkpoints, random searches and non-invasive scanning. It seems well within the rights of law enforcement since, as you indicated, the only people who'd need to worry are those committing unapproved behavior thinking they can hide it. I understand that the situations are not exactly the same since one situation only involves a game world and a greedy corporation, and the other involves the much more important real-life factors of assisting the government and law enforcement identify real-world criminals.

  47. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would you read an article about graphics cards where the author was looking at compression artifacts instead of the true anti-aliasing effect?

  48. Re:That's no watermark... by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Online Games, it is the game makers best interests to be hard against cheater. Because if left uncontrolled they will ruin the game for everyone.
    So if you are going to be taking screen shots of your cheating. Might as well get tracked down and banned because of it.

    I remember back in them olden days of Lan Parties. A professor in my college actually hosted a WarCraft II Lan Party. So we were on two teams, One side had the professors 8th grade kid. He found a cheat that worked online. Once we found out both sides of the players (including his own team) in general told him that he cant play anymore. We wanted to play using our own skills if we won we won, if we loss we loss no big deal, not cheat, just to win.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  49. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

    Dude have you ever tried to support clueless users? I would remind everyone this is WoW, a game that has everyone from Mr T to soccer moms playing the thing.

    In hindsight was it a good idea to put this data in there without it being encrypted? Probably not but oh Lord I can see why they did it! Personally i wish I had an easy way to have the relevant data on the system just handed to me in a screenshot by the user pushing a single button than playing twenty questions like "What OS are you running?" what's an OS? "What version of Windows is on the machine?" Windows "Windows what?" Huh?

    Now picture that conversation going on for a half an hour or more and you can see why tech support would want a way to have the facts just handed to them, because I can imagine with the volume of support calls with issues like "My Warcraft looks funny!" cutting through the bullshit would seriously cut down on support time.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  50. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by omnichad · · Score: 1

    To prevent additional artifacts when you resize and save the image to JPG again. If you're doing anything to the image before publishing it, you don't want anything wrong at all with it.

  51. No Confirmation, No Story by FyberOptic · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    All of the claims made are extremely dubious. You have an incredibly small group of random people making these so-called discoveries. The very fact that you can't find the watermark in non-lossy JPGs is in and of itself a considerable dispute of the claim. The algorithms used in various JPG encoders can result in various natural patterns, because there really is no such thing as true random.

    And the OP's post is very misleading. It's implies that they've decoded the watermark. I've been following the thread since before it ever ended up on Slashdot, and all they have is what they interpreted to be binary data, and then converted that into hex values. Their "confirmation" of the data being encoded player info is based on a single person's supposed reverse engineering of the WoW binary, which has resulted in an incredibly detailed code listing which you normally only come close to if there are debugging symbols present, which I severely doubt Blizzard would be foolish enough to do, as it would aid in private server creation.

    I don't have WoW installed anymore to dig around in the binaries myself, but I did have my brother send me a screenshot. These artifact patterns can be revealed in various ways, from sharpening to gamma and levels adjustments. But when gathered from a non-solid color screenshot, they're nearly impossible to distinguish from the rest of the image, making their usefulness as a way of tracking anyone far less viable.

    Until we have more than 3-4 people on some forum, where, conveniently, someone released a tool to disable this (which couldn't possibly be designed to steal your WoW account info!), then I call bullshit on the entire thing.

    1. Re:No Confirmation, No Story by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Until we have more than 3-4 people on some forum, where, conveniently, someone released a tool to disable this (which couldn't possibly be designed to steal your WoW account info!), then I call bullshit on the entire thing.

      They released tools to get it alone out of the image and decypher it, so what the fuck else do you want?

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    2. Re:No Confirmation, No Story by FyberOptic · · Score: 0

      Wow look how fast they hid my informative response as flamebait. Perhaps they want to keep this charade up a bit longer.

    3. Re:No Confirmation, No Story by FyberOptic · · Score: 1

      No, someone released a tool to "disable" the watermarking, within a very short time of all of this starting.

      To anyone who is neither naive or stupid, the entire situation stinks of a scam.

  52. Bootstrap by tepples · · Score: 0

    FTP

    But how would people discover the hostname of the FTP server with Firefox? The old Firefox ads never gave the hostname of an FTP server, just the hostname of a web site that could be visited with an existing web browser (in this case IE). One could Google get firefox without IE to find this guide, but that too would require using IE.

    USB flash drive [...] external hard drive.

    Which requires bootstrapping. It's like finding someone to make a Free McBoot card for your PS2. What's the best practice for finding someone else who can provide this?

    CD ROM, DVD

    If you mean pressed discs, the official Mozilla store is by invitation only; I just checked today. If you mean recordable media, these have the same bootstrapping problem as above.

    Posted without bonus.

    1. Re:Bootstrap by FictionPimp · · Score: 0

      I worked at many ISP's in the 90's. There were many cases of people calling us because they didn't have a web browser or our setup CD. We had no problems giving them the info to connect to our FTP site and download a browser.

    2. Re:Bootstrap by tepples · · Score: 1

      But by the end of the 1990s, Windows 98 had become the standard operating system for personal computers not manufactured by Apple. I imagine that since the release of Windows 98, most major home broadband ISPs have changed their standard practices to assume the presence of IE as a system requirement unless the computer is manufactured by Apple, in which case Safari is assumed.

      Is the game still a loss if IE is demoted to "Firefox and Windows Update Downloader"?

    3. Re:Bootstrap by snowraver1 · · Score: 0

      ftp.mozilla.org. Easy. Guessed it first try (although I almost typed mozilla.com).

      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    4. Re:Bootstrap by TheRealGrogan · · Score: 2, Informative

      ftp.mozilla.org uses "round robbin" style mirroring. You connect to that host, and it automatically directs you to an ftp server.

      That's how I do it, anyway:

      230 Login successful.
      Remote system type is UNIX.
      Using binary mode to transfer files.
      ftp> cd /pub/firefox/releases/15.0.1/win32/en-US
      250 Directory successfully changed.
      ftp> ls
      200 PORT command successful. Consider using PASV.
      150 Here comes the directory listing.
      -rw-r--r-- 1 ftp ftp 17790056 Sep 05 18:41 Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe
      -rw-r--r-- 1 ftp ftp 189 Sep 05 18:41 Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe.asc
      226 Directory send OK.
      ftp> get "Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe"
      local: Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe remote: Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe
      200 PORT command successful. Consider using PASV.
      150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for Firefox Setup 15.0.1.exe (17790056 bytes).
      226 Transfer complete.
      17790056 bytes received in 4.45 secs (3.9e+03 Kbytes/sec)
      ftp> bye
      221 Goodbye.

    5. Re:Bootstrap by fisted · · Score: 1, Funny

      son,

      u r the h4x

    6. Re:Bootstrap by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1, Interesting

      FTP which on windows workstations is handled, by default, by IE and to get a ftp client like filezilla you will probably use a browser, - chicken vs egg

      or you could pop out the old linux disk and have any non IE/safari browser you want with a simple apt-get install, or simply while live booted grab the windows version of Firefox, Chrome, Konquerer, Opera, Seamonkey, elinks, whatever copy it you your windows partition reboot into windows install the new browser set all web related stuff to be handled by the new browser and kiss IE goodbye.*

      *until the next windows update when it resets the default program for hyperlinks to IE again.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    7. Re:Bootstrap by damien_kane · · Score: 2, Informative

      FTP which on windows workstations is handled, by default, by IE and to get a ftp client like filezilla you will probably use a browser, - chicken vs egg

      [Start] => Run => cmd.exe
      >ftp ftp.mozilla.org

      A native CLI FTP app has been included in Windows since (iirc) Win95.

    8. Re:Bootstrap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find your display of false appreciation using mangled syntax elements disturbing.

      Operating FTP was as common as typing.

    9. Re:Bootstrap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows still comes with a terminal ftp client called ftp.

    10. Re:Bootstrap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a command-line ftp client in windows, simply type ftp in the command window, at least until winows XP, not sure at tried with more recent versions.

    11. Re:Bootstrap by mister_playboy · · Score: 0

      Is the game still a loss if IE is demoted to "Firefox and Windows Update Downloader"?

      Just FYI, Windows Update is used separately from IE in Vista and newer OSes.

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
  53. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Entropius · · Score: 1

    Because depending on how the screenshot looks, png may actually compress better?

  54. I've never seen camera serial # in EXIF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What kind of camera puts it there???? Let me know so I won't buy that brand.

    1. Re:I've never seen camera serial # in EXIF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CANON does. I know since I have one, and I've always had to run the images through "jhead -purejpg" before archiving because of it.

    2. Re:I've never seen camera serial # in EXIF by QuebecNerd · · Score: 1

      Most decent DSLR do that. My Nikon D800 does it. My Nikons D700, D300, D300S and D7000 did it before and my friend's Canon 5DMKIII and 5DMKII do it too. I see it just by looking at my library in Lightroom.

      I have a smaller Fuji X10 and a Nikon P7000 abd they do not insert their serial number in the EXIF data.

  55. the claims are correct if you bother to fact check by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Instead of pumping out FUD because you feel like it.

    Some versions of the osx wow mop beta client have all the function names in it, it was widely distributed in what was pretty much an open beta. (active account = you got in) This is a well known fact to those that pay attention to such things.

    As for the rest, they have pretty much finished working out the encoding algorithm.

    (lol @ the captcha I got: "binaries")

  56. ISP joining instructions include a CD. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And on that CD you can place *programs*. Programs that you can *install*. Programs like *browsers*. They will also tell you the IP address to set your DHCP service to in the joining pack, along with your email address and various other things that, until you get a valid account, you cannot get through opening up IE even if installed.

  57. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Some years ago I developed my own steganography techniques and those pictures reminded me of that.
    You only need such patterns to encode information in lossy formats due to the compression artifacts. If you use a lossless picture, where every bit of every pixel is perfectly preserved, there are much more efficient ways to hide any information in the picture.
    Most likely the TIFF, PNG and other lossless formats contain the same information or even more, just encoded in a different way.
    So, if you want to avoid leaking your account details, save screenshots in a lossless format and then convert it to a lossy format.

  58. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Intropy · · Score: 1

    I once saw someone post a "link" to a screenshot on the forums that was something like "c:\documents and settings\username\desktop\World of Warcraft\screenshots\WowScrnShot_2353.tga." He didn't understand why nobody else could see it.

  59. But why do they want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really. IF they can't be considered personal or sensitive, then they can't be used to track down the PERSON who breaks something in the TOS. And what, exactly, is it in the TOS that they might be breaking that warrants this anyway?

    1. Re:But why do they want it? by theArtificial · · Score: 1
      What is personally identifiable information in the US?

      Information which can be used to distinguish or trace an individual's identity, such as their name, social security number, biometric records, etc. alone, or when combined with other personal or identifying information which is linked or linkable to a specific individual, such as date and place of birth, mother’s maiden name, etc.

      An account name or server IP address does not meet these requirements. The only way for it to be linked up with an individual is with the help of Blizzard. From their privacy page:

      For some activities, we may ask you to create a username and password and/or to provide other, non-personal information such as your age, date of birth, gender, and/or game and platform preferences; and, combine such information with your personal information.

      And what, exactly, is it in the TOS that they might be breaking that warrants this anyway?

      Since the account name feature hasn't been used since the launch of the Real ID service (enabling you to communicate with your friends across all* of the Battle.net games instead of having to add them per character per game). Older titles such as Diablo 3 wouldn't feature this for example. This would apply to Wrath (2008/9ish) NDAs and perhaps situations involving pirate servers.

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    2. Re:But why do they want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, like I said, it can't be used to identify THE PERSON who is breeching the ToS.

      Because, like you said:

      "Information which can be used to distinguish or trace an individual's identity, such as their name, social security number, biometric records, etc. alone, or when combined with other personal or identifying information which is linked or linkable to a specific individual"

      If it isn't personally identifying, they can't tie the image to you.

      So why is it there?

    3. Re:But why do they want it? by theArtificial · · Score: 1

      So, like I said, it can't be used to identify THE PERSON who is breeching the ToS.

      Well that's arguable. If you're doing something you're not supposed to be doing (say breaking an NDA) why would you take pictures and distribute them? Unless their machine was compromised (then there are bigger issues at stake) or someone else has access to the machine and the contents within.

      If it isn't personally identifying, they can't tie the image to you.

      It contains information (an account name and a server IP address etc.). When paired with information only Blizzard has, they're able to identify the account. None of the information included in the screenshots is personally identifiable information. It is not a name, date and place of birth, mother's maiden name, social security number, or biometric record. I learned a lot about what personal information and cardholder data is when implementing a payment system. There are very clear definitions of what is and isn't personal information. I don't profess to be an expert, all of what I've stated is available online.

      So why is it there?

      Seems like a great method to identify NDA breakers and identify pirate servers among other things. Perhaps instead of speculating we'll have an official response?

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
    4. Re:But why do they want it? by theArtificial · · Score: 1
      Hate to reply to myself:

      It contains information (an account name and a server IP address etc.). When paired with information only Blizzard has, they're able to identify the account.

      This should read: It contains information (an account name and a server IP address etc.). When paired with information only Blizzard has, they're able to identify the account holder (the one who is responsible and agreed to certain things etc.)

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
  60. It's confirmed by equex · · Score: 1

    Uh just read that thread guys, it's confirmed. Already with POC in several languages.

    --
    Can I light a sig ?
  61. it's called warden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you have no idea what you are talking about. the fact that this pile of shit became a front page topic makes me sick. do some research before you get on your soap box about the privacy of games you don't even play. automated anti-hacking. end of story

  62. Privacy by fa2k · · Score: 1

    Cool discovery.

    This is a minor privacy leak, when someone creates a program to decode the watermarks. It will also be worthless for authenticating screenshots, because when someone can read the watermarks, it doesn't take much to fake one. Blizzard should have encrypted the info with a public key to solve these problems.

    As it stands, it may be useful for others than Blizzard, to identify the origin of a screenshot (in a non-adversarial situation)

    1. Re:Privacy by fa2k · · Score: 1

      Correcting myself,

      Blizzard should have encrypted the info with a public key to solve these problems.

      PKI encryption wouldn't solve the authenticity problem. They would have to pull out the big DRM guns and include some secret (time dependent) string that their servers know, and an authentic WoW client has access to, but which the faker tools couldn't get.

    2. Re:Privacy by fa2k · · Score: 1

      Oh, + some hash of the picture data to check that it's the correct picture.

  63. One reason why not: fanbois. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really. Tell a Steamer that you WILL NOT use Steam for a game and you'll get a hundred nastygrams telling you variously that you're a tinfoil, idiot, wrong headed, trolling, only saying that because you've never used it or, rather smugly "well, you'll miss out on the game".

    It's the same deal with Diablo III.

    Say you won't use it and you're ridiculed for paranoia. Told that it is THEIR RIGHT as the publisher to buttfuck you. When the TOS changes, you'll get "well, I don't like it, but I agreed to an EULA that says they can change at any time". When you get illegal clauses, told "you're wrong, you're a pirate!". Or told that the buttfucking is necessary to stop cheaters or pirates or protect the developers.

    You WILL NOT be allowed to not buy it, and DEFINITELY shouted down if you try to tell anyone else about the downsides of an "agreement".

    1. Re:One reason why not: fanbois. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You WILL NOT be allowed to not buy it

      I didn't know fanbois had control of the financial industry necessary to force you to purchase such things. I do think it is the software company's right to put in crazy protection schemes, in addition to think it is a consumer's right to decide to just not buy it if it will cause and practical or ideological problems for them. Anything more seems like over-thinking what is otherwise a simple decision to buy a game or not.

  64. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by ruiner13 · · Score: 2

    I wouldn't call this any kind of breach of privacy as none of the information is personal. An account name can only be matched to a real name by Blizzard and only if you play on their servers.

    Or you have a dump the hackers made of their client list, which contained screen names as well as other info. They could then use this hacked info to get to any of the other data, especially by someone who posted a screen capture online. Using the leaked DB could tie that screen capture to MUCH more data.

    --

    today is spelling optional day.

  65. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by KingMotley · · Score: 1

    Rarely, unless it's an extremely small screenshot like 16 pixels by 16 pixels, but it'd be hard to play WoW on that.

  66. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by BenJury · · Score: 2

    It would be possible to use that information to get the first part of what is needed to actually log into an account. You've got the player name and realm, with that alone its easier to compromise an account. Although it is of course easier just to take the whole user list from Blizzard....

    --
    Blatant Advert: Android Apps!
  67. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by KingMotley · · Score: 1

    Yes, because the majority of users who take screenshots are reviewing graphic cards.

  68. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

    Also, whoever decided that screenshots should be saved as jpeg by default (assuming it is default) should be fired.

    From a cannon.

    Into the sun.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  69. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Before publishing it? I guess this raises the question: what is the purpose of games having a snapstop feature? Is it to primarily aid people writing critical articles about games or hardware, or is it so that you'll have a memento of that time you killed the boss monster?

    If it's the former, then of course you're right.

    If it's the latter, then snapping as jpg isn't any dumber than all the consumer cameras which do that. If you think jpg is bad for that too (and that's not a totally unreasonable position, I'll admit, but I do disagree with it) then you might as well say lossy compression has no place at all, since you never know for sure, when you're generating a final product or generating an intermediate file that someone still needs to work on.

  70. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by GuldKalle · · Score: 1

    Because compression artifacts look terrible on most CGI

    --
    What?
  71. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    privacy zealot... such a funny phrase.

    the thing is....If you allow your privacy to erode from every angle, don't come crying when you find you have none. When every transaction, grade, infraction, coffee stop, and random comment you have ever made has been bought, associated, linked, sorted, indexed, and don't forget monetized (to be able to be looked up--for a modest fee), at that point you may reconsider.

    Storage is cheap, Analytics is becoming more mainstream, and automated linking is just t the next step.

    Good luck to you, I'm sorry we cannot hire you due to this phrase you stated in MegaGame202 18 years back.... it was outright offensive, and spoke poorly of our megacorp. we only hire people enthusiastic about our company, vision, and products! Now please move along.

  72. Surprise-surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surprise-surprise on who is 'exposing' this originally. The "community" of cheaters at ownedcore.

  73. Interesting, but... by ildon · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is pretty interesting, but I think the OP is trying to spread FUD about what the implications of this data are. There is no personally identifying information contained in this watermark. It contains the server IP, server time, and account name. That's it. Now there's a lot of confusion about what "account name" means, so let me explain it for those who don't know.

    About the same time that this watermark apparently showed up (2008, the 3.0 patch associated with the WotLK expansion), Blizzard converted the WoW login system so that it was integrated with their new Battle.net 2.0 login system. At this time, it became necessary to login to WoW using your account's email address instead of your traditional account name. That traditional account name is what's being encoded into the watermark, not your email address login. If you created an account after the Battle.net 2.0 merger, then your "account name" is a unique string that isn't even display to its owner. Anywhere in the account management webpage or login screen that this string would appear, it instead displays "WoW1", "WoW2", etc. (if you have more than one account).
    So there's basically no way to associate this "account name" with your login information, real identity, etc. If you play on a private server, that account name is going to be based on the private server's login system, not Blizzard's login system.

    It's pretty obvious what the real purpose of these watermarks were: to identify users who violated the NDA of their closed betas and ban them from the beta, identify users attempting to sell their account, and possibly to identify the IP address of private servers to assist in attempting to shut them down.

    Further, the probability that these info could be used to help harvest accounts for gold selling or to phish for accounts seems ridiculous. It'd be highly inefficient to spend so much time on a single user when for far less effort you could just spam a million harvested email addresses.

    1. Re:Interesting, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your description of accounts contrasts sharply with my memory. I remember the account name being essentially a secret question, one of the things you are never supposed to share with anyone. This was up until I stopped playing WoW, January of this year. And for pre battle.net 2.0 accounts, it certainly is identifying information. Worse, if you were to unwittingly share this information, by say uploading a screenshot and linking to it from the WoW forums, a potential attacker suddenly has a lot more information about your account.

      Bottom line, it's a sketchy, shady thing to do and makes me even more glad I kicked the habit and haven't given them any more business. Blizzard has been getting less and less customer friendly ever since the Actvision acquisition and this is one more thing in their downward spiral.

    2. Re:Interesting, but... by ildon · · Score: 1

      Why would it be secret information? What could it possibly be used for? Just because you mistakenly thought it was some kind of secret information doesn't mean it actually was.

  74. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Mortimer82 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Their compromised database is indeed a very serious privacy issue. From a security point of view, fortunately they used a good enough password hashing technique that it is largely impractical to extract passwords from the dump.

    From my experience, with almost all people who have their accounts compromised, it was due to phishing or malware. Consequently, account names in screenshots will probably not make any difference to how many people have account security issues.

  75. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by ildon · · Score: 1

    They were originally TGA, and you can still create TGA screenshots. They changed them to JPG by default for user convenience. Most WoW users are not computer savvy enough to convert their own screenshots.

  76. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by cusco · · Score: 2

    Oof. You have no idea how many times I've seen people blame Exchange/Outlook because a link like that in an email didn't work. "It's all Microsoft's fault!" Well, I guess in a way it is, since MS enabled even idiots to use a computer.

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  77. Re:the claims are correct if you bother to fact ch by FyberOptic · · Score: 2

    First of all, using a beta client as a basis, which is much more likely to watermark screenshots to begin with to make sure someone isn't passing around info they shouldn't be, is not an indication that the final client does or is doing anything. And I can't reiterate enough the uselessness of a watermark which is nearly impossible to use except in certain circumstances.

    Second, I simply stated the facts. It's a group of 3-4 people who are "discovering" and dispersing all of this information. There is no correlation of this from anyone else of any reputable background. If you knew the definition of FUD, you would quickly realize that it's a group of unknown people shouting out something to fear based on unsubstantiated claims. Whoever posted this topic on Slashdot is completely irresponsible, and if it all turns out to be false, puts themselves at legal liability if Blizzard decided to make a stink about defamation.

    So far, you effectively have a lot of coincidence and suspicions. Don't try to discredit me simply because I point out that fact. If you want to prove me wrong, then prove me wrong, and I will happily admit to being so. Otherwise, it all just appears like people want to hide and discredit my comment to keep the story alive for that much longer.

  78. Self Respect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So lets stop giving these scummy companies our money.
    How many times are you gonna let the same people screw you over?
    Lets start showing a little self respect, huh?

  79. I am sure.... by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    I am sure that WoW's EULA covers this watermark, as it does the installation of The Warden service which actually tells Blizzard all the apps running on your computer at the time that you play their game. This is extremely intrusive, much more than this watermark.... I therefor suspect the wording used to perpetuate this EULA to encompass the warden would also apply to the watermarks.

    Long Live WoW!

  80. Wow thats cool! Watermarked people! by MindPrison · · Score: 1

    "Activision Blizzard Secretly Watermarking World of Warcraft Users"

    Cool man!

    That explains why I've seen all these people on the streets with that appears to be a photoshopped watermark on them.

    --
    What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  81. Re:That's no watermark... by englishknnigits · · Score: 3, Funny

    A schooner IS a sail boat stupid head!

  82. Re:the claims are correct if you bother to fact ch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Well, as a former WoW player, I decided to do due diligence and check my old screen shots. Any screenshots taken after WotLK due indeed have these watermarks. No they aren't jpeg compresion.

    I am not affiliated with the researchers in any way.

    It is easy to verify that screenshots have some kind of watermark by simply using a sharpen filter.

  83. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by randomencounter · · Score: 1

    Hmm, my browser failed to render your sarcasm tags.

    --
    Forget diamonds, copyright is forever.
  84. Re:the claims are correct if you bother to fact ch by FyberOptic · · Score: 1

    You have no indication that it's not jpg compression. Take any image, from anywhere on the internet, and sharpen it in this manner. Different images will give you different intricate patterns, depending on the encoder used.

    You have no idea if this strange visual effect is really just a compression artifact resulting from light variations due to shaders which WoW employs, causing very subtle differences in the colors in certain equally spaced locations. As long as it visually looks fine, it wouldn't matter if their lighting techniques were a bit of a hack job underneath. Hell, look at the one image they linked on the forum, where a guy with a much larger screen resolution had a different pattern entirely.

    Given that the most vocal detractor of my comment is also an Anonymous Coward, likely in order to retain moderating points, we'll just have to take your word that you're not him or part of the group.

  85. Is User ID secret? by Control-Z · · Score: 1

    IP address of the server, that seems harmless. Time, harmless.

    Is the User ID secret or something that other players could see anyway?

  86. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You really should read some of the posts in between as well, linking Digimarc to Blizzard Activision, patents filed by Digimarc describing precisely this watermarking technique (and possible predecessors), and how the payload (88 bytes) is repeated multiple times exactly to 5808 bytes in order to survive anticipated resizing and further compression.

    This does not look like a Digimarc watermark. The linking seems to be "Activision is doing this, Digimarc has patents, ZOMG."

  87. Watermark? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People still play WoW? How much free time does the poster have?

  88. Re:the claims are correct if you bother to fact ch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't try to discredit me simply because I point out that fact

    No, you gave your OPINION, not fact. Don't get the two confused.

    Also, go back and RTFM, then go back and read it again until some FACTS sink in.
    Such as your claim of "First of all, using a beta client as a basis, which is much more likely to watermark screenshots to begin with to make sure someone isn't passing around info they shouldn't be, is not an indication that the final client does or is doing anything"

    If you'd read the forum properly you'd see that people on there are giving screenshots of NON-BETA clients that still have the watermark.

    Don't try to discredit me simply because it proves you're a pedophile.

  89. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by makomk · · Score: 1

    (it would be entirely feasible that they remove the watermark at full quality.. because it would be obvious then).

    Not just entirely feasible - someone later in the thread claims to have found the code that disables the watermark on full-quality images and figured out how to patch it out, so that the watermark is present even in uncompressed TGA screenshots.

  90. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

    Blizzard has to deal with cheaters on a scale never before encountered by any game company. Even at the CS cheating peak when it rolled out PunkBuster, Valve never had to deal with as many cheaters in one game. Because of the economic incentives, gold farmers and others have tried with varying degrees of success to get past the protections in the game. Blizzard has made it reasonably clear that it takes certain actions to find cheaters, some of which are fairly rootkit-like in their implementation and ability, and that it does not disclose all of these methods to the end-user.

    Personally, I don't see a problem with this. I find the rootkit behavior a much bigger issue, but I'm willing to live with that in part because I know so many people at Blizzard (and I'm not just talking about a few customer service or QA people) and I trust that they're not going to do evil things with that ability. If they're willing to have that level of inspection on their computers, I don't see why there's so much fuss over the watermarking.

    --
    You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
  91. Screenshots or it did not happen? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So all those times when we said we have screenshots of what happened and the GM staff says that screenshots are not valid?

    Stay classy ActivisionBlizzard !

  92. Re:the claims are correct if you bother to fact ch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can positively confirm this. It isn't in my earliest screenshots but it's definitely in my more recent ones. It's exactly the pattern they're talking about, and I've been able to successfully decode one using the same technique they have. It seems to be a DigiMarc watermark indeed: payload 88 bytes, including my numeric WoW account number (ending in #1), day, month, year, hour and minute (not seconds) and IPv4 of the realm. It's followed by a CRC-32, and repeated. On a 1920x1200 screenshot it starts at 176 pixels from the vertical, and it seems like the top and bottom "bands" are wide, and the middle one is "narrow" (the reverse of the pattern they observed, presumably in 1920x1080 screenshots?). It wasn't in 4.0.6. It is in current, live, released builds of WoW.

    Just get a WoW screenshot, unsharp mask it with max strength with a radius of 1.0 pixels, and you'll probably be able to see it. I thought the JPEG compression was a bit poor quality compared to if I went out in TGA and packed it myself an intentional watermark wasn't what I expected - but there it is.

    Disassembly of the WoW client shows the function specified in the thread at the offset they specify too, and it does indeed contain a call to a recognised DigiMarc watermarking function. I presume decoding uses autocorrelation of some form, given how regular it is.

    I'm not sure it is necessarily a privacy issue: it doesn't contain any of your personal information directly--unless, of course, there is a way to look up account numbers. I'm not sure there is, although I've definitely seen them before somewhere I don't precisely recall.

    To reiterate: I can confirm. The live client does this, on the default settings. Just try it and see.

  93. This is dubious at best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Supposedly, if you /console SET screenshotQuality "9"
    the "watermarking" goes away. Which, frankly, makes me extremely suspicious.

    Either (1) that's a bug, (2) Blizzard took a decision to watermark some screen shots and not others, or (3) this is (as several people have suggested in the linked thread) a jpeg compression artifact, and not a watermark at all.

    I notice that, so far, the information on how to read the supposed watermark (which would allow us all to independently confirm that a watermark is indeed what we're seeing) doesn't appear to have been published. Until it is, my money is firmly on (3) - a compression artifact.

    1. Re:This is dubious at best by griego · · Score: 1

      No, you have to be at 10, the highest quality to avoid watermarking. Setting quality to 9 (and presumably lower, but that's not indicated in the post) enables watermarking. What's important is what the default is, which I haven't seen mentioned anywhere.

  94. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by suso · · Score: 1

    That's not actually true. jpg images can contain steganographic data in them just fine. For instance, there is a steganographic message in this image using steghide:

    http://www.climagic.org/images/mystery-developer1.jpg

    It could be that steganography didn't survive post processing. I just tested the image above by posting it to Facebook and the stego data didn't make the transfer. Maybe Blizzard developed a more hardy watermarking technique.

  95. Umm yes this is a big privacy issue ... by jest3r · · Score: 1

    Blizzard can easily monitor a users activeity outside of their network by "scraping screenshots". You don't think there's a privacy issue with that?

    Especially since they've kept it under wraps for years and failed to mention it in the privacy policy?!

    Hey by the way every time you post a screen we will track you. And be warned that anyone else who views your screenshot could potentially figure out what your User ID is. And if you upload the screenshot to a forum there is a chance that the forum software might have a vulnerability that allows virtually anyone to connect your WOW UserID to your Email Address on the forum and your IP address at which point they could figure out where you live, who your ISP is and pretty much everything else ...

  96. So when google spiders stuff on the internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So when google spiders stuff on the internet with the "default allow" of the internet requirement, this is real bad to copyright content owners. But when it comes to copyright content owners, default allow of their customers production is just fine and dandy...

    1. Re:So when google spiders stuff on the internet by theArtificial · · Score: 1
      This has nothing to do with copyright OR personal information (none was disclosed).

      So when google spiders stuff on the internet with the "default allow" of the internet requirement, this is real bad to copyright content owners.

      A web server responds to requests. The act of putting files in a shared directory on a web server is authorization. Barring any exploits if I ask for information and "you" provide it, how is than anything but stupidity and/or incompetence if you're upset that I have access to it? This doesn't address if the publisher (the entity who put the files online) is authorized to release the information, medical records or something for example.

      TL;DR
      Don't put files in a shared directory you don't want shared.

      --
      Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
  97. Re:the claims are correct if you bother to fact ch by FyberOptic · · Score: 1

    >pedophile

    Okay, troll confirmed, moving on to factually accurate articles.

  98. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by GuldKalle · · Score: 1

    How about png? All modern OSes has png support, right?

    --
    What?
  99. Re:That's no watermark... by Dogtanian · · Score: 2

    So if you are going to be taking screen shots of your cheating. Might as well get tracked down and banned because of it.

    And if you *haven't* actually been cheating, but you've posted pictures of your WoW game for whatever reason over the years anyway, it's okay that identifying information was embedded without your knowledge (possibly to be used against you years later in circumstances like, oh... *this case*) even if you had good reason to want to remain anonymous?

    Actually, I don't care whether the person *was* cheating, it doesn't excuse this sort of thing. If Activision had wanted to do this, they should have been open about it happening, if not the precise mechanics of how it was implemented.

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  100. Oh dear, retard responds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They WILL NOT let you not buy it. They will hound you, insist you're wrong, insist that you MUST buy it, that it is your DUTY to buy it.

    But you, being one of the retards going like a fapper over companies buggering everyone sideways, are being a twat.

    1. Re:Oh dear, retard responds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He isn't, and you don't believe he is.

      You, on the other hand, are throwing a screaming temper tantrum because he rightfully called you out on your hyperbolic bullshit.

      The so-called "fanbois" WILL "let you not buy it". They don't have a choice.

      Also, nobody has ever used "fanboi" to mean anything but "someone who likes that thing that I don't". All claims to the contrary are lies.

      You will now prove me right.

  101. Re:That's no watermark... by jellomizer · · Score: 2

    You confuse explaining a rational for doing sometime, with an endorsement for the practice.

    The gaming company know that cheaters are a problem, then they need to figure out where to draw the line.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  102. Question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who gives a fuck? It's not like you wow addicts are going to stop throwing money at them anytime soon...

    Their client their software they can do whatever they want. They have all the rights you have none.

    Now get back to spending money and grinding you lusers.

  103. Complete bollocks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reducing the JPEG compression to minimum or switching to TGA makes the supposed "watermark" go away, when in reality (if it was indeed a watermark), it would make it easier to decode. These are clearly compression artifacts. Unsurprisingly, they haven't actually been able to read any data from this "pattern", or shown that the same user always gets the same pattern. They're just applying some random filters to an image and then speculating that the compression pattern means something about the user account.

  104. Re:That's no watermark... by cgt · · Score: 1

    I clicked the damn sailboat.

  105. Re:That's no watermark... by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

    You confuse explaining a rational for doing sometime, with an endorsement for the practice.

    My apologies- I thought your comment came across a bit like you (personally) were trying to excuse the company with that rationale, rather than merely explaining their position. I'm happy to accept that this was a misinterpretation.

    The gaming company know that cheaters are a problem, then they need to figure out where to draw the line.

    Systematically compromising *everyone's* anonymity without telling them so is (IMHO) quite clearly over that line.

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  106. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Algae_94 · · Score: 1

    Of course you don't see the fuss about watermarking. You just said you're fine with Blizzard installing a root kit on your machine! Waht the heck is a measly watermark compared to that?

  107. do they really care about their own ToS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is this the same blizzard that frowns upon people selling gold for cash, but turns a blind eye if that cash is used before-hand to purchase blizzard's own time cards or vanity pets/mounts? pet..kettle...black.

    1. Re:do they really care about their own ToS? by petteyg359 · · Score: 1

      For future reference, the phrase usually involves a pot, not a pet.

  108. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by gweihir · · Score: 1

    More people should read anything before commenting. Seems half of the people here post by gut-reaction, not any fact they have observed. The thread linked in the story is conclusive for anybody with half a brain. Of course that assumes that half brain is actually put to use...

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  109. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by fche · · Score: 1

    In my defense -- the first page of the linked comments was heavy on insinuation, light on actual decoding work.

  110. Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its ironic that there is an add for WoW on this article.

  111. Re:That's no watermark... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    My apologies- I thought your comment came across a bit like you (personally) were trying to excuse the company with that rationale, rather than merely explaining their position. I'm happy to accept that this was a misinterpretation.

    What? No, dude, that's not how Internet debates are supposed to work! Dig in your heels, accuse the GP of backpedaling, and burn that strawman to the motherfucking ground!

  112. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

    That's exactly my point, much as you might attempt to trivialize it. I don't have a problem with the watermarking because the rootkit behavior is so much more severe in comparison. I don't see why anyone else would get bent out of shape over the watermarking if they're willing to put up with the rootkit.

    --
    You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
  113. Re:That's no watermark... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    there's no anonymity to begin with, its a game server. it IS paywalled, but that isn't perfect security either.
    you can look up any WoW character and see their equipment grade from blizzard's site. that doesn't help hackers steal accounts and neither will this.

  114. Re:Unsubstantiated Rubbish by KhabaLox · · Score: 1

    My kingdom for a mod point.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  115. Decode and Exploit? Really? FUD, FUD, FUD by rocket+rancher · · Score: 1

    The reason why the watermark is not mentioned in the TOS is because there is no moral, ethical, or most importantly legal reason to do so, because nothing in the watermark payload is information that can compromise a user's privacy. Blizz started using the watermarks to enforce NDAs with its beta testers, and probably also to locate non-licensed private game servers. Hard to see how you could get your knickers in a twist about this, unless you are a paid shill for one of Blizz's competitors, in which case you've now outed yourself and will be hitting our plonk files in short order.

  116. SSDD by Nerdasor · · Score: 1

    I haven't seen anyone mention why this matters. If you get a kill in the game, you used to be required to post a screenshot to prove it in the online forum, although this isn't necessarily de rigueur anymore with the advent of the achievement system. Thus, SSDD, screenshot or it didn't happen. It could still be important though to back up your argument in some type of situation.

  117. Re:That's no watermark... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "There is no privacy get over it" - Scott McNealy. If Blizz had put this out in the open it would have been self-defeating, cheaters would have taken steps to blur or remove it. As a Wow player, I'd rather they caught the cheaters and removed the privacy of the attention whores who post their shots up on youtube.

  118. Bad command or file name by tepples · · Score: 1

    what's wrong with wget?

    What's wrong is that "'wget' is not recognized as an internal or external command, operable program or batch file." In order to download, install, and use Wget without ever opening IE, one has to already know on what FTP server the Windows binary of Wget is stored.

    1. Re:Bad command or file name by fisted · · Score: 1

      I should've read grandparent before posting. Turned out parent wasn't mocking on wget, but rather stated it as a suggestion. He implied a windows user could possibly have a geek badge, probably that was what confused me. I.e. i didn't realize that it's a windows context, disregard me.