Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
LilRemmy
Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi
67
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 03:19:00 -
[121] - Quote
Darth Gustav wrote:LilRemmy wrote:FA defending exploits? Not surprised. Actually if you read the thread you'd see that I think they need to deal with this server-side. Then it goes away. But no. You just do the ad-hominem thing. Nice job.
Like I said, not surprised one bit at all. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
688
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 03:21:00 -
[122] - Quote
Darth Gustav wrote: You're probably missing my point. Spies won't be a source the GMs are going to refer to.
A good spy in the right fleet is going to pass on who this is happening to. If that person suddenly drops out, it's not exactly hard to figure out what happened. True that the GM's won't ask the spy, but that wasn't the point in the first place. Mining Barge buff: CCP-áhas acknowledged that miners in general-áare too stupid to make the correct fitting choices to make ganking them unprofitable. |
Darth Gustav
Interwebs Cooter Explosion Fatal Ascension
1329
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 04:24:00 -
[123] - Quote
LilRemmy wrote:Darth Gustav wrote:LilRemmy wrote:FA defending exploits? Not surprised. Actually if you read the thread you'd see that I think they need to deal with this server-side. Then it goes away. But no. You just do the ad-hominem thing. Nice job. Like I said, not surprised one bit at all. Well I guess nothing can surprise you, then? He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1782
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 04:47:00 -
[124] - Quote
It could be proven to see if convo-bombing, even if rejecting is set, still creates traffic on the router.
Just follow the stream in Wireshark and look to see if packets flood in. I bet any corporation with a good plurality can do this.
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
851
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 14:35:00 -
[125] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:It could be proven to see if convo-bombing, even if rejecting is set, still creates traffic on the router.
Just follow the stream in Wireshark and look to see if packets flood in. I bet any corporation with a good plurality can do this.
I might try this whenever I have time. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Inquisitor Kitchner
Galaxy Punks Executive Outcomes
112
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 14:48:00 -
[126] - Quote
Ohanka wrote:Touval Lysander wrote:Kalen Vox wrote:I cannot imagine why people are popping up even to defend this, which, in my opinion is clearly an exploit.
Jetting a single can is not an exploit. A whole fleet jetting hundreds of cans to cause grid loading lag is. This we know.
Starting a single convo is not an exploit. A whole fleet starting hundreds of convos to cause lag is.
Simple.
So dropping 1,000 ships onto a gate is........ Half of Deklein was won because of lag. Intentional or otherwise. t's clear that the Committee has agreed that your new policy is really an excellent plan. But in view of some of the doubts being expressed, may I propose that I recall that after careful consideration, the considered view of the Committee was that, while they considered that the proposal met with broad approval in principle, that some of the principles were sufficiently fundamental in principle, and some of the considerations so complex and finely balanced in practice that in principle it was proposed that the sensible and prudent practice would be to submit the proposal for more detailed consideration, laying stress on the essential continuity of the new proposal with existing principles, the principle of the principal arguments which the proposal proposes and propounds for their approval. In principle.
Was that a Yes Minister/Yes Prime Minister quote? Because it sounds like one. If it was I need to seriously High 5 you. |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
209
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 14:56:00 -
[127] - Quote
ISD Suvetar wrote:Hi Gustav,
Not intentionally; I don't have many people blocked anyway.
This is why it's best to take it to the GMs though - they can see the server logs and would know explicitly what has happened.
You have never fought the CFC. A lot of us blocked them at the alliance level in Delve. So much more peaceful.
Convo away. |
Lucy Ferrr
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
196
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 16:36:00 -
[128] - Quote
Argh... my post got all messed up and didn't post. Perhaps I will come back and edit later |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
377
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 16:45:00 -
[129] - Quote
Darth Gustav wrote:[Let me address this:
The EULA clearly says "You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System."
Sending somebody a convo is an action "you" perform. The system is designed to support a conversation request from "you." One request does not break the game.
But hundreds do & spamming the convo does when performed multiple times by that single pilot. 0/10 bad trolling with bull crap justification Any GM that used your justification should be fired Nostalgie ist die Faehigkeit, darueber zu trauern, dass es nicht mehr so ist, wie es frueher nicht gewesen ist. -- Manfred Rommel-á |
Darth Gustav
Interwebs Cooter Explosion Fatal Ascension
1346
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 17:14:00 -
[130] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:Darth Gustav wrote:[Let me address this:
The EULA clearly says "You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System."
Sending somebody a convo is an action "you" perform. The system is designed to support a conversation request from "you." One request does not break the game.
But hundreds do & spamming the convo does when performed multiple times by that single pilot. 0/10 bad trolling with bull crap justification Any GM that used your justification should be fired The question was: "Why isn't this an exploit?"
I answered it with, to my knowledge, the status-quo answer used by every major FC in Eve who uses (uesed) this tactic.
It may not be a good justification, but it was the one in use. He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom |
|
Cpt Roghie
Deadly Shadow Clan Silent Infinity
53
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 21:42:00 -
[131] - Quote
I don't see how it's an exploit. Game mechanic used as intended. We all just want to have a chat! It's a dirty tactic, yes. Still haven't seen anyone get banned for it and if anyone was to get banned, would you ban the FC or the entire fleet? But if they ban someone now, they have to ban them all. We're screwed. This could be fun. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
861
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 23:04:00 -
[132] - Quote
Cpt Roghie wrote:I don't see how it's an exploit. Game mechanic used as intended. We all just want to have a chat! It's a dirty tactic, yes. Still haven't seen anyone get banned for it and if anyone was to get banned, would you ban the FC or the entire fleet? But if they ban someone now, they have to ban them all. We're screwed. Retroactive bans would obviously pose problems, so they wouldn't do it.
But yeah, I'd suggest starting with a temporary ban for all parties involved, say, a day to start for the first offense, then getting progressively longer. That's mild seeing as this could potentially be considered illegal in several countries. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Core Federation Black Core Alliance
122
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 23:09:00 -
[133] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:That's mild seeing as this could potentially be considered illegal in several countries. Someone's got a flair for hyperbole.
I'm sure something like this would be priority #1 for the FBI Cybercrime Task Force. Maybe Interpol would get involved to coordinate a multinational investigation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
861
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 23:13:00 -
[134] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:That's mild seeing as this could potentially be considered illegal in several countries. Someone's got a flair for hyperbole. I'm sure something like this would be priority #1 for the FBI Cybercrime Task Force. Maybe Interpol would get involved to coordinate a multinational investigation. I think you're the only one here who's hyperbolizing. I never said anything about crime investigations, international or otherwise. Saying that denial of service attacks are illegal is not hyperbole, it's fact. The only question is whether for purposes of law this would be considered a type of DoS attack.
Whether anyone would bother prosecuting is irrelevant to its legality. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Core Federation Black Core Alliance
122
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 23:26:00 -
[135] - Quote
Wow, somebody's completely unable to comprehend sarcasm.
Pretty sure there are no countries where this kind of crap would be even remotely considered a criminal matter, or a DoS under the letter of the law. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
861
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 23:28:00 -
[136] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:Wow, somebody's completely unable to comprehend sarcasm.
Pretty sure there are no countries where this kind of crap would be even remotely considered a criminal matter, or a DoS under the letter of the law. And you happen to be a legal expert? I obviously got your sarcasm, by the way. Seeing as, you know, I responded to the sarcasm itself. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Core Federation Black Core Alliance
122
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 23:32:00 -
[137] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:Wow, somebody's completely unable to comprehend sarcasm.
Pretty sure there are no countries where this kind of crap would be even remotely considered a criminal matter, or a DoS under the letter of the law. And you happen to be a legal expert? You know what you're coming across as?
James Amril-Kesh: requested hundreds of times to convo-bomb, never petitions the people asking him to do so. Loses a carrier, makes a whiny threadnaught.
You sitting here claiming there's criminal acts being carried out is beyond stupid. I don't think there's any provisions under any criminal laws dealing with flawed game mechanics that cause you a bit-o-lag.
Since you're so serious, life and death about this issue, why don't you file a petition on your next FC who asks you to convo-bomb, and take a screenshot to show the rest of us just how seriously you take this issue? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
861
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 23:40:00 -
[138] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:James Amril-Kesh wrote:Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:Wow, somebody's completely unable to comprehend sarcasm.
Pretty sure there are no countries where this kind of crap would be even remotely considered a criminal matter, or a DoS under the letter of the law. And you happen to be a legal expert? You know what you're coming across as? James Amril-Kesh: requested hundreds of times to convo-bomb, never petitions the people asking him to do so. Loses a carrier, makes a whiny threadnaught. K. You're free to point out any particular post in which I've whined and how it qualifies as such. There's obviously no point in mentioning that I have never even flown a carrier, seeing as it's unprovable due to alts and such.
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:You sitting here claiming there's criminal acts being carried out is beyond stupid. I merely pointed out the possibility. What's not ambiguous is that this behavior IS in violation of both the EULA and the TOS.
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:Since you're so serious, life and death about this issue, why don't you file a petition on your next FC who asks you to convo-bomb, and take a screenshot to show the rest of us just how seriously you take this issue? I might if that weren't also a clear violation of the TOS. As far as being life or death serious, it would seem that you're projecting. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Spurty
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
494
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 02:32:00 -
[139] - Quote
http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/eula.asp
Quote:You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System.
So any alliance that's bigger than the biggest the system can handle is against the EULA?
"We were all just meeting up in one place for a sing song in local and when pod pilot 2900 jumped in, your server fell over. You should fix that!"
:-)
I really don't think CCP mean what that one says.
I agree, its bollox, but CCP want it, so it is what they want.
---- CONCORD arrested two n00bs yesterday, one was drinking battery acid, the other was eating fireworks. They charged one and let the other one off. |
Anya Ohaya
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
170
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 03:14:00 -
[140] - Quote
Deliberately causing a client to crash should be an exploit. "Everyone else was doing it" is not an acceptable defense.
Technically it's probably illegal in many jurisdictions; as is any unauthorized action that may interfere with another computer. Although I suspect that if reported it would get prioritized somewhere between rescuing cats in trees and handing out parking tickets. |
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2502
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 04:38:00 -
[141] - Quote
Kalen Vox wrote:I cannot imagine why people are popping up even to defend this, which, in my opinion is clearly an exploit.
Jetting a single can is not an exploit. A whole fleet jetting hundreds of cans to cause grid loading lag is. This we know.
Starting a single convo is not an exploit. A whole fleet starting hundreds of convos to cause lag is.
Simple.
This post should have ended the thread. It is spot on.
I would imagine that it's use is so common CCP is reluctant to open this particular can of worms as it could potentially eat up huge amounts of time to verify.
A better solution would be when you have your client set to auto reject convo's from people not in your address book they should be stopped at the server level so that they do not affect your client. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
863
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 04:41:00 -
[142] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:A better solution would be when you have your client set to auto reject convo's from people not in your address book they should be stopped at the server level so that they do not affect your client. To be honest that would be much preferred.
EDIT: Actually, instead of making it dependent on a client setting, the server could throttle conversation requests. Anymore than 5 requests in 30 seconds and the server doesn't let any more through for, say, another minute. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Arec Bardwin
757
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 13:20:00 -
[143] - Quote
Or make the server handle the blocking of chat requests, and only pass on the ok'ed ones to the client. |
Doc Severide
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
192
|
Posted - 2012.10.06 13:43:00 -
[144] - Quote
Kalen Vox wrote:I cannot imagine why people are popping up even to defend this, which, in my opinion is clearly an exploit. Because they are pricks who can't win otherwise...
|
Ptraci
3 R Corporation The Irukandji
645
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 20:39:00 -
[145] - Quote
Anya Ohaya wrote:Deliberately causing a client to crash should be an exploit.
Continuing to let people use a software setup that allows people's clients to be crashed by others is irresponsible. This is a problem at the CCP level and instead of working on shiny crap for PLEX like they are doing, THIS IS EXACTLY THE KIND OF CRAP WE ASKED TO BE FIXED over a year ago.
Players are taking advantage of a weakness in the design of the software. Rather than argue about if it is or not acceptable behavior and pay GM's to review cases, fix the darned software so it can't happen. Period. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
904
|
Posted - 2012.10.07 21:05:00 -
[146] - Quote
Agreed. The fact that were even capable of this is a result of a flawed design. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 01:23:00 -
[147] - Quote
I'm relatively new to the game, but can't you just set the CSPA charge to 1 Billion ISK before you go on a roam (and back to 0 after)? This discourages spammers, and if they try to spam you, they'll notice that you just drained their whole wallet. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
904
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 01:27:00 -
[148] - Quote
The largest CSPA charge you can set is 1 million ISK, which isn't a particularly good deterrent, considering the stakes are likely much higher if someone wants to convobomb you. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
1397
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 01:27:00 -
[149] - Quote
Nyancat Audeles wrote:I'm relatively new to the game, but can't you just set the CSPA charge to 1 Billion ISK before you go on a roam (and back to 0 after)? This discourages spammers, and if they try to spam you, they'll notice that you just drained their whole wallet. 1 million ISK is the cap iirc.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Phill Esteen
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
122
|
Posted - 2012.10.08 01:41:00 -
[150] - Quote
If the request is sent to the client even if auto-reject is on, then presumably it's also sent regardless of CSPA charge.
If that's not the case then this problem should be trivially easy to fix. GÇô postum faex est GÇô-á
never forget
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |