So long Sreegs! Nice having you!

One part of the current policy that is missing (at least I hope its still part of policy) is removal of ill gotten ISK. Is that still being done?

One part of the current policy that is missing (at least I hope its still part of policy) is removal of ill gotten ISK. Is that still being done?

Secondly, does the 3rd strike represent rmt and client modication bans on the graph?

what exactly is "client modification"?

thats a pretty important question, there is a bunch of tools out in the wild that can access some kind of cache. does that count as a client modification ?

some kind of posting to clear that up would be greatly appreciated

thats a pretty important question, there is a bunch of tools out....

Firstly, who the hell is CCP Peligro?

Hi! That would be me. I've been at CCP since April 2006, but my work is done largely behind the scenes, so you might not have heard of me.

My main responsibilities within Team Security is to analyze and act on data.

In other words he's the brains of the outfit.

So here's a concern I have. In the past, there have been false positives that pop up - people wrongfully banned because (to use the example from one instance involving a fellow pilot) they legitimately bought a character through the forums which had been involved in RMT, and so were caught up in the sweep. Reversing these bans has been an agonizing process, in no small part due to their communications more or less being ignored by your team.

I understand that many botters and RMTers will protest their innocence as a matter of course which can make "ignore everything" an appealing option, but in the case I referred to above, the person was on the verge of quitting before loud and public action by his CEO on his behalf finally prompted a response. I have to imagine there may be other cases where wrongfully banned people had no one looking out for them and simply quit instead.

My question to you then is, what do you plan to do about this?

I apologize for being ignorant - but what is RMT? I know if I don't know what it is then I am probably not doing it, but I like to ask anyways to be sure.

I apologize for being ignorant - but what is RMT? I know if I don't know what it is then I am probably not doing it, but I like to ask anyways to be sure.

I apologize for being ignorant - but what is RMT? I know if I don't know what it is then I am probably not doing it, but I like to ask anyways to be sure.

That is a legit concern.

However, I can see how complicated it can be if you take into account the possibility that the person petitioning the ban may be lying through their teeth (if they have any) and pretending to be an innocent player.

A player who wants to RMT goes to a friend who does not play eve and says:

"Could you start a character in Eve, buy a pile of ISK via RMT, then sell me the character?"

How would CCP stop that from happening, other than swinging the ban hammer even after the character has been sold?

With regards to CCP Sreegs, I wonder why he left?

I've always been curious about how the RMT/Negative wallet works. If someone sells something to a RMTer, either by accident or supposed collusion (lol eve money laundering), how far do you trace the funds? For example:

An alt Scumbag 1 (SB1): RMTs say 1 Billion
The main Scumbag 2 (SB2): Sells SB1 an item worth ~1 Billion on market.
SB1: Then trades that item to a another alt/player (SB3)
SB3: Sells that item to a random buyer in Jita at nearly the same price (nominal loss on "high ticket" items)
SB3: Gives money to SB2
SB2: Now has the RMTed money and a bit of occurs.
SB1: Gets banned/negative walleted, but who cares, he was an alt.


Sorry if that's complicated, I just absolutely hope the entire chain is brought down, RMTer is literally the death of economies in games.

But client modification right now are anything that injects/touches the running EVE process. That is, reads or writes memory into it, injects and executes code. Basically anything that modifies the client to change the client or extract information that's not normally accessible. That includes bots of course.

And he does all the heavy lifting too. He is, after all, The Enforcer Of The LawGäó

that description also applies to widely used tool such as the Mumble/Teamspeak overlay and fraps

I am happy to see that the BOT war is falling under more strict punishments. YAY!!!

I am curious on this as other folks in Eve have been curious as well. There is a software called ISBOXER that runs client side where it managed your clients with single key activation. Will this also be addressed in some fashion? Some folks feel that this is wrong. Will there be a new stance on t his where some of these ISBOXER users control anywhere from 4 to 20 some odd toons only to farm isk. Not talking about mining but making ISK from farming in null sec anomalies to empire mission running of some type.

Please I like to hear your thoughts on this

3rd strikes have become rare since the end of Q3, and even then it was sporadic

To some degree, it does. But in some ways, it also doesn't. But do you really think we want to ban people using fraps or mumble/teamspeak? That'd be silly

I don't know... after all you're not going to whitelist specific programs

(with 100% less tongue-in-cheekness: I am a bit afraid that one day you will introduce a poorly tested client integrity check that accidentally flags tools such as the ones I mentioned and that getting the permabans undone will be a massive hassle.)

To some degree, it does. But in some ways, it also doesn't. But do you really think we want to ban people using fraps or mumble/teamspeak? That'd be silly

EDIT: On a different note, with Sreegs gone, who will tend to the Edge of Glory?

I understand your concern. We'll address that concern in more detail in the possibly near future when it's relevant :)

I understand your concern. We'll address that concern in more detail in the possibly near future when it's relevant :)

I like to hear more about this too!
Run 10 accounts by playing one? 9 Accounts are played by IS Boxer, not the player.

o7 Sreegs. Goonswarm will be glad to have their Darius JOHNSON back.

A player who wants to RMT goes to a friend who does not play eve and says:

"Could you start a character in Eve, buy a pile of ISK via RMT, then sell me the character?"

How would CCP stop that from happening, other than swinging the ban hammer even after the character has been sold?

Edit: Ill answer my own question: Ban the person who did the RMT and remove the ISK. That way the receiver of the character gets zero benefit from the transaction.

Your idea is terribly unfair to players who sell their characters for ISK and end up getting screwed out of billions because the other guy paid for the character with botted or RMTed ISK. Unless, of course, CCP reverses the character transfer as well, but that'd probably be a gross violation of CCP's confidentiality policies.

I understand your concern. We'll address that concern in more detail in the possibly near future when it's relevant :)

Will you also address the concern I voiced on the previous page, namely the one where instances of innocent players being wrongfully banned was basically swept under the rug and ignored until loudly and publicly called on it? Because that past action makes Vera's concerns all the more troublesome.

EDIT: On a different note, with Sreegs gone, who will tend to the Edge of Glory?

mynnna

I was always under the impression that if a player was banned for botting, and the character in question had just been purchased legitimately, a deeper investigation would be initiated at the players request... and if necessary the ban would be reversed AFTER the investigatioin was concluded.

So are you saying this didn't happen and that further investigation was refused until a stink was made?
Or is this a case of the investigation was under way and just didn't get concluded until after loud rumblings were made?

The former is a problem that needs to be worked on, the latter is simply taking credit for something that would have eventually happened anyway.

Discussing individual cases is not something we do. In the cases where we make a mistake, we do our best to correct that and make sure to compensate the player for time lost. It's really that simple.

[re: TS/Mumble overlays, fraps]
I understand your concern. We'll address that concern in more detail in the possibly near future when it's relevant :)

First off thank you all, and very well done for all the effort that CCP is putting into banning bots. I rabidly despise cheating in all multi player games and I fully support any and all efforts to eradicate it.

Secondly I have a question.

How does someone bot without client modification?
.........

I use this individual case in question only because I'm familiar with it. While you guys do not (rightly so) share details, the player in question was. But in the broader sense, I have a sneaking suspicion that other similar cases exist, and that they're just as often ignored. A real good step towards correcting this sort of problem would be, if a preliminary investigation shows that hey maybe they are innocent, to actually tell them that their case is being looked at, instead of taking what appears to be the preferred route of "ignore them and hope they go away." Unless, that is, the goal actually is to lose customers and generate some bad PR, in which case carry on!

mynnna

I was always under the impression that if a player was banned for botting, and the character in question had just been purchased legitimately, a deeper investigation would be initiated at the players request... and if necessary the ban would be reversed AFTER the investigatioin was concluded.

So are you saying this didn't happen and that further investigation was refused until a stink was made?

Or is this a case of the investigation was under way and just didn't get concluded until after loud rumblings were made?
The former is a problem that needs to be worked on, the latter is simply taking credit for something that would have eventually happened anyway.

To some degree, it does. But in some ways, it also doesn't. But do you really think we want to ban people using fraps or mumble/teamspeak? That'd be silly

Another issue I want to quickly mention is your policy on ISBoxer. ISBoxer used to be "approved", but it's not anymore.

Just a thought but banning just the account for 30 days is not going to hurt a botter with multiple accounts.

Might I suggest a ban on the IP used also for 24 hrs to make the point clear that botting is not acceptable. This will do more then just effect their botted account but any other account coming from that IP.
Yes I understand that it might adversely effect players in the same household who are not botting but an IP block might help to put on the added per pressure that its not OK to bot.

How many times does CCP have to say "our stance on this has not changed" before you get that it hasn't changed?

Furthermore CCP is aware of players using teamspeak and mumble overlay programs and the like and have never indicated any desire to ban them.

Sorry mate, GM Nythanos says otherwise. The answer to my petition was, not quoting, "we cannot allow such software to be used". The petition was basically "Is ISBOXER allowed?".

A player who wants to RMT goes to a friend who does not play eve and says:

"Could you start a character in Eve, buy a pile of ISK via RMT, then sell me the character?"

Then GM Nythanos is wrong.

You made me chuckle :D 3/10! A senior GM answering a EULA petition is wrong. And who are you anyway? :)

Someone who happened to read several recent replies by CCP explicitly stating that ISBoxer is not banned.

Respond and ask who takes precedence.

... instead of taking what appears to be the preferred route of "ignore them and hope they go away."

Someone who happened to read several recent replies by CCP explicitly stating that ISBoxer is not banned.

1 key stroke affect more then 1 client.

Our policy is that we do not make any guarantees about any tools being allowed and safe to use. We can't feasibly do that.

But client modification right now are anything that injects/touches the running EVE process. That is, reads or writes memory into it, injects and executes code. Basically anything that modifies the client to change the client or extract information that's not normally accessible. That includes bots of course.

...

What I am saying is that the particular player in question had absolutely no communication back from CCP whatsoever despite multiple requests to look into it and even pointing out the likely cause why he had been banned. The timing of sudden action on the case coming only after his CEO and others made loud noises on the forums on his behalf may have been coincidental, but doesn't look good, nor does the fact that he was wholly ignored.

I use this individual case in question only because I'm familiar with it. While you guys do not (rightly so) share details, the player in question was. But in the broader sense, I have a sneaking suspicion that other similar cases exist, and that they're just as often ignored. A real good step towards correcting this sort of problem would be, if a preliminary investigation shows that hey maybe they are innocent, to actually tell them that their case is being looked at, instead of taking what appears to be the preferred route of "ignore them and hope they go away." Unless, that is, the goal actually is to lose customers and generate some bad PR, in which case carry on!

- move L5 missions to low and nullsec

Couple of small tweaks...
...
- (change local completely)
- (change asteroid mining completely)

- finally revamp asteroid mining mechanics and UI completely to encourage active user participation

Just a thought but banning just the account for 30 days is not going to hurt a botter with multiple accounts.

Might I suggest a ban on the IP used also for 24 hrs to make the point clear that botting is not acceptable. This will do more then just effect their botted account but any other account coming from that IP.
Yes I understand that it might adversely effect players in the same household who are not botting but an IP block might help to put on the added per pressure that its not OK to bot.

Something in Jita local says (at least to me) anti-botting team isn't too efficient.

Another issue I want to quickly mention is your policy on ISBoxer. ISBoxer used to be "approved", but it's not anymore. This change in policy was announced by ninja-editing a 3 year old GM post. This is a terrible way to announce policy changes, because people don't read 3 year old GM posts every day to check if they've been ninja-edited. Please don't do this in future, make a new sticky somewhere telling people you've changed the policy.

Umm, no. CCP is banning for bots and hacks, not multiboxing. Their policy is pretty much the same as with other games. ISBoxer was never "officially allowed", it's just not prohibited.

Local change is minor...

I too hope to hear CCPs stance on ISBOXER (I am looking to get it myself), but on the contrary i believe it should not be removed, because the player is present when all actions are being given. And all actions are human. Botting is the use of software applications that run automated tasks over the internet. ISBOXER does not automate tasks, and certainly does not hack the client. It simply broadcasts keystrokes and mouse, but if left alone the program itself CANNOT play the game, it simply makes multiboxing easier.

I can't really read or express my thoughts in complete sentences but I like posting anyway

This account along with ALL my accounts are -13Billion isk because of buying it on the forums correctly.

Just a thought but banning just the account for 30 days is not going to hurt a botter with multiple accounts.

Might I suggest a ban on the IP used also for 24 hrs to make the point clear that botting is not acceptable. This will do more then just effect their botted account but any other account coming from that IP.
Yes I understand that it might adversely effect players in the same household who are not botting but an IP block might help to put on the added per pressure that its not OK to bot.

What is your plan, CCP, on combating the FALSE positives you have on RMT transactions? Are you going to change you policies on how you do your investigations so you stop taking isk (banning I guess now) from innocent people. Especially the ones who buy characters from the bazaar who did the RMT transaction before being sold?

This account along with ALL my accounts are -13Billion isk because of buying it on the forums correctly. What is your new plan to combat false positive and rectify your ineffectiveness to get it right the first time?

At some point didn't you think about stopping buying negative isk accounts?
Once burnt twice shy and all that?

Based on the lack of responsiveness it seems to be same as the old plan: Ignore it until or unless called out as loudly as possible in public, perhaps not even then.

"We don't comment on individual cases" is understandable and expected but it does not or at least should not preclude them from commenting in a general sense. "We investigate all claims" is all well and good, except for the evidence to the contrary, and the willingness to leave people in the dark in the meantime.

At some point didn't you think about stopping buying negative isk accounts?
Once burnt twice shy and all that?

We hope to see you all at Fanfest!

I've always been curious about how the RMT/Negative wallet works. If someone sells something to a RMTer, either by accident or supposed collusion (lol eve money laundering), how far do you trace the funds? For example:

An alt Scumbag 1 (SB1): RMTs say 1 Billion
The main Scumbag 2 (SB2): Sells SB1 an item worth ~1 Billion on market.
SB1: Then trades that item to a another alt/player (SB3)
SB3: Sells that item to a random buyer in Jita at nearly the same price (nominal loss on "high ticket" items)
SB3: Gives money to SB2
SB2: Now has the RMTed money and a bit of occurs.
SB1: Gets banned/negative walleted, but who cares, he was an alt.


Sorry if that's complicated, I just absolutely hope the entire chain is brought down, RMTer is literally the death of economies in games.

Oh most likely that's not what happened. What happened is he did RMT then tried to hide it with various transactions and character transfers. When CCP caught him he came here to the forums to whine about it and proclaim his innocence. Well, as CCP Sreegs was fond of saying: People who do bad things have been known to lie.

Its my experience of online gaming that a significant portion of exploiters and cheaters like to spread fear uncertainty and doubt about the methods that companies use to defeat them. Exploiters like to introduce doubt within the larger player base that the company is acting fairly or transparently in order to undermine player confidence in the system. If this player confidence in the company's good faith can be undermined sufficiently then the player base starts calling the company out.

Edited by: GM Lelouch on 18/02/2013 08:29:22
Addendum by GM Lelouch:
This post was originally written almost three years ago and as software/hardware evolves, so must our stance on what goes within our game. It has become increasingly difficult for us to track the capabilities of various pieces of software over the years as their number, as well as the features they offer, increase greatly in number.

In other words, it is unfortunately impractical for us to evaluate whether specific pieces of software can be used without breaking EVE's EULA/ToS. This post should not be taken as endorsement for utilizing specific pieces of software/hardware with EVE, but as a guideline to what is acceptable.

Our general stance towards the concept of multiboxing has not changed but we cannot guarantee that the EULA is being upheld should you use any of the software/hardware mentioned by name in this post, nor will we at EVE customer support be able to officially endorse or sanction specific third party multiboxing programs.

Players wishing to multibox are responsible for familiarizing themselves with our EULA and Terms of Service, the following clauses in particular are of much relevance to this topic:

EULA:
6. CONDUCT
A. Specifically Restricted Conduct
2. You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played.
3. You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.

ToS:
21. You will not attempt to decipher, hack into or interfere with any transmissions to or from the EVE Online servers, nor will you try to create or use any third party add-ons, extras or tools for the game.

The old, out of date, post can be seen below as it originally appeared:

"Hello there,

To make a long story short, automation of gameplay is not permitted; players must be manually issuing the commands to control their character(s) at all times.

Our stance on programs such as Synergy and hardware/software combination such as the G15 keyboard is that they can be legitimately used as long as gameplay isn't automated. Synergy allows you to move your mouse cursor to multiple different monitors which are hooked up to different computers and we do not have any qualms with players using the program for this purpose. If Synergy was used in some way to control your accounts for you without a need for you to be at your keyboard, then that would not be allowed, but I am not aware of such a functionality with this program. If Synergy is used in conjunction with some other program to automate gameplay, it would not be permitted. G15 "macros" which allow you to group different commands into one keypress are allowed. For example, setting your G1 key to press F1, F2, F3 and so on for you with one key press is allowed (although this specific command is not as useful as it was before now that we have weapon grouping).

An exceedingly complex G15 macro which would effectively automate gameplay, such as mining, without a need for the player to be present at his keyboard would be against the EULA, regardless of whether the player utilizing said macro is sitting at his keyboard at the time!

Lastly, multiboxing is allowed, and programs designed for multiboxing in mind which allow a player to manually issue the same command to multiple game clients at the same time are allowed. In the same vein as what has been stated above, the player must be manually sending the commands; if a program is automating those commands for you, then it would be considered a breach of our EULA.

I hope this clears up this matter."

CCP, please, this is not complicated. Will we get banned for using ISBoxer for simple multiboxing?

We can and will trace illegally obtained ISK and/or assets as far as is necessary. I'm not going to put a disposable alt billions of ISK into the red; I will find your main.

-/-

For those interested in history, Kromtor was the player who used a crazy-cool set-up using wooden dowels and tape, among other things, to multi-box with until CCP gave Synergy the thumbs up.

Please go to the Lari solar system for a day... plenty of bots there.

...

Can we just take off the tinfoil hats a bit here and assume CCP is a rational level-headed company and has no intention of just screwing people over for the lewls?

...

CCP cannot just blanket white list 3rd party software that they have no control over, which is why they have stated things the way they have.

Rational? That's the first word that pops up in your head when you think of CCP? First they ninja edit the post that says it's cool, very similar to the one on this thread saying that they're not going to ban people who use TS.

Then, when people start asking if anything has changed, they say nothing changed. Suddenly GMs say that ISBoxer is grey area stuff and use at your own risk. This is a real and obvious change in policy.

There's multiple uses for the same software and I find it funny that one is simply written off without publicly saying so and the other is "silly" to think they'll ban you for it.

Changes in policy that lead to bans should be announced somewhere visible.

So basically the way it works is that if I can provide proof of human capability, then use software to duplicate that, it is probably ok?

IE how isoboxer got shown after the genius guy with the hot glue and sticks.

And that anything which plays with EVE files while the client is running is a banning offense?

IE every bot since ever or more particuarly the usage of python injection to find the wh local list.

emotionless evil Caldari State corporation.

A current example is ISBoxer. As GM Nythanos answered me (can't copy the text), you can't allow that software. If this is the case, why not make a simple public statement saying that X software is simply not allowed? You end up banning paying customer who actually thought they were playing straight!

Hello there,

To make a long story short, automation of gameplay is not permitted; players must be manually issuing the commands to control their character(s) at all times.

Our stance on programs such as Synergy and hardware/software combination such as the G15 keyboard is that they can be legitimately used as long as gameplay isn't automated. Synergy allows you to move your mouse cursor to multiple different monitors which are hooked up to different computers and we do not have any qualms with players using the program for this purpose. If Synergy was used in some way to control your accounts for you without a need for you to be at your keyboard, then that would not be allowed, but I am not aware of such a functionality with this program. If Synergy is used in conjunction with some other program to automate gameplay, it would not be permitted. G15 "macros" which allow you to group different commands into one keypress are allowed. For example, setting your G1 key to press F1, F2, F3 and so on for you with one key press is allowed (although this specific command is not as useful as it was before now that we have weapon grouping).

An exceedingly complex G15 macro which would effectively automate gameplay, such as mining, without a need for the player to be present at his keyboard would be against the EULA, regardless of whether the player utilizing said macro is sitting at his keyboard at the time!

Lastly, multiboxing is allowed, and programs designed for multiboxing in mind which allow a player to manually issue the same command to multiple game clients at the same time are allowed. In the same vein as what has been stated above, the player must be manually sending the commands; if a program is automating those commands for you, then it would be considered a breach of our EULA.

I hope this clears up this matter.

Best regards,
Senior GM Lelouch
EVE Online Customer Support

I think botting is another issue that can best be SOLVED by PLAYERS. The CODE alliance is already moving to do so. CCP can help by allowing greater freedom of action:

(1) Remove CONCORD protection from miners who do not respond to chat or who have not moved or changed maneuvers in the last 3-5 minutes. An active miner is constantly in motion moving to better roids.

(2) insert new modules that allow taking prisoners (anchoring capsules in space) after 3-5 minutes. If no one comes to save you in 3-5 minutes you a waste of game space and quite probably a bot as well. Anchoring your capsule in place prevents profiting by botters and reduces server deadweight from people who just aren't following the CCP game vision of PVP shooter and fleet battles.

I am happy to see that the BOT war is falling under more strict punishments. YAY!!!

I am curious on this as other folks in Eve have been curious as well. There is a software called ISBOXER that runs client side where it managed your clients with single key activation. Will this also be addressed in some fashion? Some folks feel that this is wrong. Will there be a new stance on t his where some of these ISBOXER users control anywhere from 4 to 20 some odd toons only to farm isk. Not talking about mining but making ISK from farming in null sec anomalies to empire mission running of some type.

Please I like to hear your thoughts on this

I think botting is another issue that can best be SOLVED by PLAYERS. The CODE alliance is already moving to do so. CCP can help by allowing greater freedom of action:

(1) Remove CONCORD protection from miners who do not respond to chat or who have not moved or changed maneuvers in the last 3-5 minutes. An active miner is constantly in motion moving to better roids.

(2) insert new modules that allow taking prisoners (anchoring capsules in space) after 3-5 minutes. If no one comes to save you in 3-5 minutes you a waste of game space and quite probably a bot as well. Anchoring your capsule in place prevents profiting by botters and reduces server deadweight from people who just aren't following the CCP game vision of PVP shooter and fleet battles.

that description also applies to widely used tool such as the Mumble/Teamspeak overlay and fraps

Sorry, but what's "RMT"?

Real-Money Trading

An illegal activity (to CCP at least) in which a player sells in-game currency for real-world cash.

This subject has been covered multiple times by DEVs.

The only negative comment was made by CCP Sreegs about it (in his security blog).
http://tinyurl.com/byebyescreegs Post #264.

Other posts:
http://tinyurl.com/CCP-Eterne Post #13


Those proponents against programs like ISBoxer, Synergy, etc. seem to have little to no understanding of what "multiboxing" is and how exactly it is used. How many times does CCP have to answer this "dead horse" of a question?

There is a long list of games that embrace multiboxing: World of War Craft, Diablo 3, Planetside 2, SWTOR, and so on. . .

Ban the multiboxing.
Recently digging the net for some information about IGB i found next? generation of eve bots.
They don't touch EVE at all - just connect them self to the multi boxing programs.

As if this didn't changed - multiboxing is allowed.

To some degree, it does. But in some ways, it also doesn't. But do you really think we want to ban people using fraps or mumble/teamspeak? That'd be silly

What if they told you "If you want to multi box safely, do the hot glue and stick trick".

Ban the multiboxing.
Recently digging the net for some information about IGB i found next? generation of eve bots.
They don't touch EVE at all - just connect them self to the multi boxing programs.

As if this didn't changed - multiboxing is allowed.

-/-
At the same time, you'd be trying to get rid of extra income that CCP receives from all these players with their multiple accounts... Is that really what some of you are advocating?

I have the feeling this thread is now dead - no more CCP posts.

This isn't a question of the EULA - the EULA is maybe fine - but with a question hanging over the facilities we use to operate across multiple desktops, (in and out of game), being interpreted now as "at your own risk" I'm left feeling like rather than any clarification I've just had the carpet pulled right out from under me.

Our fantastic Team Security has great news for all good people in New Eden regarding the ongoing war on bots (for the bad people it is tough news though).

Read all about the war on bots in 2012 and future changes (such as moving from a 3 strike policy to a 2 strike policy from effectively today on) in the latest dev blog of CCP Stillman here.

That was not my intention nor is my concern based upon your "feelings". My concern is what is the security team doing to insure less or no false positives on the character bazaar. Thanks to the help of CCP after my post, I know it wasn't an issue with the security team. My concern here was related to their DevBlog. I don't think CCP acts unfair but I do know that sometimes there are false positives. There is a petition system to correct it, but it is a slow moving cog of guilty until logs prove you're innocent.

I am here as a paying customer asking a question. My question was partially answered with an EveMail with CCP Peligro about my specific concerns. I am not happy waiting a month now and probably longer, but at least I have some answers on what took place. I am content to know this will be cleared up.

I think people need to get a grip a little. . . CCP is not an emotionless evil Caldari State corporation. They are not going to just suddenly start banning people out of the blue for using software that they have been OK with for a long time.

Can we just take off the tinfoil hats a bit here and assume CCP is a rational level-headed company and has no intention of just screwing people over for the lewls?

I am using ISBoxer to multibox. I will continue to use ISBoxer to multibox until CCP tells me otherwise. I do not think CCP is hiding behind a bush waiting to jump out and say "boo". I assume that as a rational corporation they would give us some advance warning if they were to suddenly have an issue with ISBoxer.

CCP cannot just blanket white list 3rd party software that they have no control over, which is why they have stated things the way they have.

You should clarify that JavaScript code executed in the IGB is fine.
Also that cache scraping is still ok as per the previous GM/Dev ruling.

CCP Sreegs is leaving?

The Goonspiracy club members will be struggling for a new scapegoat.

This team will be overseen by the VP of Not In Our Logs, and this will not impact the work being done by the team.

It absolutely is, and is done automatically in all cases where the amount can be determined by our backend system. It's rare that manual intervention is needed, but does happen.

If you want to hit botters where it hurts, just go to Jita and look for the 'plus .01 isk' when you put products on the market. A mere 2 seconds later, the price goes up on 5 other sellers. That's where it runs rampant.

If you want to hit botters where it hurts, just go to Jita and look for the 'plus .01 isk' when you put products on the market. A mere 2 seconds later, the price goes up on 5 other sellers. That's where it runs rampant.

Confirming all 0.01 isk'ers are bots, as it's unthinkable that any of 1 to 2 thousand pilots in Jita are babysitting their orders.