| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 31 post(s) |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
749
   |
Posted - 2013.02.12 10:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
The discussion on the EVE forums is pretty cringeworthy but they have a valid point:
Ever since the reorganization in late 2011 Internal Affairs has been part of the security team (source).
It's completely unclear if there is any sort of independent oversight of the security team.
(iirc IA had been part of the statistics team prior to the reorganization)
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
751
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 10:55:00 -
[2] - Quote
I'm very sure that you can't modify 30 orders within a minute - whether with macros or by hand.
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
751
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 10:59:00 -
[3] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:I'm very sure that you can't modify 30 orders within a minute - whether with macros or by hand. Frankly, a bot could not be faster than this guy.
my point is that you get a "slow down, you have to wait x seconds before you are allowed to modify another order" popup if you modify too many orders in a short timeframe.
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
751
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 11:03:00 -
[4] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:I'm very sure that you can't modify 30 orders within a minute - whether with macros or by hand. Hey, we're going from what it says in the original Eve Uni forum post.
the original Eve Uni post was second-hand information and used "update" which is much more ambiguous than "modify"
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
751
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 11:18:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:
3) The only authority higher than the Director of Security for these complaints is the Executive Producer and then the CEO. This is a higher level of escalation than the Customer Service arm and IA automatically looks at our work.
you don't see a potential conflict of interest in IA being part of a team it is tasked to investigate?
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
752
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 11:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Only in a creepy shadow world where nobody in our chain can be trusted. In this case none of us would be employable by anyone so while it might make for interesting eve news tinfoil fodder it really doesn't have much basis in reality.
I wonder how all the unemployable sobs working at corporations that see the need to have Internal Affairs/Internal Investigations report directly to the board (as is standard practice to prevent management from influencing their work) got their jobs...
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
752
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 11:35:00 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Thur Barbek wrote:Wescro wrote:
Thank you for responding substantively instead of closing the thread. I'm sure everyone here wants to see the right thing done. In this situation it's your word against the players. Is there anyway the playerbase can be given assurance that the process is not arbitrary besides simply asking us to have faith in CCP?
CCP Sreegs already said they knew 100% that john was botting. I don't get why deciding to punish him would be an "arbitrary" decision. I think this situation really cuts to the core of actual misconduct. In this case we're actually being asked to treat EVE-U differently, which would by nature be misconduct. Our actions in this regard show exactly the opposite.
the actual misconduct was not removing John's isk while he was banned (which also allowed E UNI to get their hopes up) - being warned that his botting had become unfeasible he could easily have RMTed all his ISK before you managed to confiscate it.
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
753
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 11:41:00 -
[8] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Orbital Dyke wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:Orbital Dyke wrote:It seems that john was a well known player rather than a corp-less disposable botting alt
Its possible that from the very start of this escapade the CCP Representative(s) handling this case have ultimately got it wrong Except for the whole fact that John was botting. I personally don't care how well respected in the community someone is, if they get caught breaking the rules they should be punished in the same way as anyone else would. He wasnt botting CCP interpreted his actions as botting because they didnt understand what he was actually doing in theory 'attack what you dont understand' in this case I'm pretty sure we define botting.
Maybe we would have more confidence in your opinions if you hadn't shown complete cluelessness regarding your own policies before.
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
754
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 12:59:00 -
[9] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:In my opinion cache scraping is illegal. It has always been said that modifying the client, either on the network, on the disk or in memory, is against the EULA.
cache scraping doesn't modify any client files (or memory) - it only reads files that EVE stores on your harddisk.
that modification of cache files would be illegal has been the CCP stance from day one but so far GMs have ruled that accessing them read-only is legal (and as Evemon includes a cache scraper that is activated by default many eve players do this - whether they know it or not).
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
754
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 13:13:00 -
[10] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:Whitehound wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:In my opinion cache scraping is illegal. It has always been said that modifying the client, either on the network, on the disk or in memory, is against the EULA. Cache scraping is read only. No modification. Depends on what "scraping" really means. I understand it as "modifying" the cache. Why would you call it "scrapping" when you are reading it?
it's a standing terms - just like "web scraping" (which doesn't modify any websites either)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_scraping
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
754
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 13:17:00 -
[11] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:
There is an API for it. EVEMon and EVEAsset use it and you can view your market orders, as well as contracts, transactions, journals and assets with it.
you don't know what you are talking about.
cache scraping is used to get a full set of orders for an item (what you'd get when clicking the "Export to File" button in the market window), not just your own orders.
eve caches all market orders for items you view for a few minutes, so a common practice is to use IGB javascript to cycle through items and use a cache scraper to extract the information (and then upload it to eve-central or analyze it in a tool of your own).
you could achieve the same thing by going manually through a list of items clicking "Export To File" on each one.
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
754
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 13:20:00 -
[12] - Quote
Cotic wrote:Cursan Voran wrote:Sreegs you have won this one by a knockout.
Go do something else for a few hours and let us players deal with the dicks in this thread... This. Tesco tinfoil (infected with horse meat) is selling out like nothing I've ever seen before.
he just told a few thousand unsuspecting evemon users that they are in violation of the EULA.
what do you expect to happen?
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
755
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 13:26:00 -
[13] - Quote
Cursan Voran wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:Cotic wrote:Cursan Voran wrote:Sreegs you have won this one by a knockout.
Go do something else for a few hours and let us players deal with the dicks in this thread... This. Tesco tinfoil (infected with horse meat) is selling out like nothing I've ever seen before. he just told a few thousand unsuspecting evemon users that they are in violation of the EULA. what do you expect to happen? Nothing because he never said that?
he said quite clearly that he considers cache scraping illegal (i.e. against the eula as we certainly are not talking about rl laws here).
Quote:Evemon has a cache scraper built into it now.
not just built-in but activated by default - it even turned itself back on after a recent update although I had deactivated it beforehand.
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
755
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 13:29:00 -
[14] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:Cotic wrote:Cursan Voran wrote:Sreegs you have won this one by a knockout.
Go do something else for a few hours and let us players deal with the dicks in this thread... This. Tesco tinfoil (infected with horse meat) is selling out like nothing I've ever seen before. he just told a few thousand unsuspecting evemon users that they are in violation of the EULA. what do you expect to happen? EVEMon does not touch local files from what I know. EVEMon uses the EVE API. There is a thread on the forums for it and CCP has not locked it. So I understand that this tool is officially allowed and it has been for a long time now.
http://i.imgur.com/ulHNYPw.jpg
this box is ticked by default.
now please stop spreading disinfiormation
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
755
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 13:45:00 -
[15] - Quote
Whitehound wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:http://i.imgur.com/ulHNYPw.jpg
this box is ticked by default.
now please stop spreading disinfiormation EVEMon reads your orders from the EVE API and uploads it to EVE Central. It does not touch local files from what I know.
I'd show you the relavant part of the code - but the battleclinic trac seems to be down an all you'd say is "I can't read sourcecode so I still don't know that evemon reads cache files".
then I'd show you how EVEMon reports on the market files it uploads and how my characters have no orders for any of these items and you'd say "sure it says that it uploads information for these items but I don't know where it got that information from and if it actually uploads anything".
Then I'd show you the wireshark output...
Arguing with you is just not worth the hassle.
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
766
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 15:46:00 -
[16] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Well at least we now know who the bot lovers are. I look forwards to the next few weeks of mass bannings and isk vanishings that happens every time the botters wage a troll war against CCP Sreegs.
... and i thought Sreegs had declared the time of mass bannings to be gone for good - in favor of his more systematic & steady approach.
Or do you mean to imply that CCP Sreegs might not be entirely truthful with us?
that's a shocking accusation to make.
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
766
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 15:55:00 -
[17] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:baltec1 wrote:Well at least we now know who the bot lovers are. I look forwards to the next few weeks of mass bannings and isk vanishings that happens every time the botters wage a troll war against CCP Sreegs. ... and i thought Sreegs had declared the time of mass bannings to be gone for good - in favor of his more systematic & steady approach. Or do you mean to imply that CCP Sreegs might not be entirely truthful with us? that's a shocking accusation to make. Quit derailing the thread, you're starting to sound like a botter sympathiser.
so what?
am I going to get banned by goonswarm or something?
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
770
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 16:07:00 -
[18] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:baltec1 wrote:Well at least we now know who the bot lovers are. I look forwards to the next few weeks of mass bannings and isk vanishings that happens every time the botters wage a troll war against CCP Sreegs. ... and i thought Sreegs had declared the time of mass bannings to be gone for good - in favor of his more systematic & steady approach. Or do you mean to imply that CCP Sreegs might not be entirely truthful with us? that's a shocking accusation to make. Lets face it, anyone who is defending the botter and trying to attack CCP Sreegs and his team just screams "Im a botter stop whacking us with that hammer".
If you read my posts you might have noticed that I am not defending the botter.
My posts centered around three issues
(1) CCP IA being part of the security team rather than standing outside the company's regular hierarchies. As I pointed out before it is standard to have Internal Investigations report directly to the board of directors, CCP having their IA team report to some middle management dude is highly unusual and highlights the weak position of CCP IA.
CCP Sreegs chose to address this point with ridicule implying that employees at other companies (who follow best practices) are "unemployable" and not trustworthy.
(2) The claim that it is possible to modify 30 orders per minute by macro or by hand. IMO the only way this claim can be true is if the restriction on order modifications is client-side and can be bypassed with the right tools. But a simple macro should not be able to modify that many orders in such a short time without getting a "wait x seconds until you can continue" message.
(3) The implications of CCP Sreeg's view that cache scraping is illegal paired with the weakest of all possible assurances that we won't get banned for doing it "today" (all the while he was gloating about how I would look when he is going to ban me for using a cache scraper).
It would be a huge deal if Sreegs' view would be adopted by the GM team as cache scrapers are extremely widespread.
It is a big deal that according to Sreegs GM rulings in petition replies do not give any security.
As far as I can see none of these points did defend "John" or botting in general.
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
778
|
Posted - 2013.02.12 17:17:00 -
[19] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Vera Algaert wrote:
If you read my posts you might have noticed that I am not defending the botter.
My posts centered around three issues
(1) CCP IA being part of the security team rather than standing outside the company's regular hierarchies. As I pointed out before it is standard to have Internal Investigations report directly to the board of directors, CCP having their IA team report to some middle management dude is highly unusual and highlights the weak position of CCP IA.
CCP Sreegs chose to address this point with ridicule implying that employees at other companies (who follow best practices) are "unemployable" and not trustworthy.
Having worked in internal investigations for over a decade at very large companies I can inform you from experience that this statement is patently false in common practice. I've actually never even heard of this scenario, though I agree with its spirit.
I'll admit that primarily reading case studies (rather than having first-hand experience) can easily make you take the exception for the norm v.v
The idea that IA should be the board's watchdog is due to (a) the shareholders' equity being ultimately at stake and (b) management often being tacitly complicit in malpractice (as long as is profitable and leaves them room for plausible denial).
(the recent tax fraud scandal at Deutsche Bank is a good example for the role of IA as their internal investigations team had been unsuccessfully racing to uncover the scheme [and contain the damage] before the prosecutor's office could do so; now Deutsche's top management is under investigation for signing off on fraudulent reports and very possibly having been aware of the fraud.
Their Head of Internal Audit and Head of Compliance report to the Supervisory Board's Audit Committee btw to ensure independence from the Managing Board. Also Internal Audit's budget must not be touched by the Managing Board without the Audit Committee signing off on the change.)
I am speculating here but I guess that CCP IA suffers from being established in reaction to relatively minor, and, most importantly, in-game incident. If it had been established in reaction to, say, an Executive funneling money out of the company its standing would probably be quite different. Currently they seem to be perceived as glorified GMs.
On the other hand (and to stay realistic) it is great that CCP has an internal affairs team at all - it seems to be very hard to establish that sort of department in small and medium-sized companies as its mere existence is often taken as a personal slight by employees and management alike.
I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
| |
|