We donGÇÖt like releasing bad code to you or leaving it broken for a long time, and we hope this is a big step forward in fixing that. I hope that in the next few weeks we can put a measurable dent in the number of crashes that happen in EVE

Soooo the only thing that matters for me is: does it use any additional Windows OS components and therefor does it still work on Linux through WINE?

first
So this will be turned on with the next patch?
Or just on SiSi?

Soooo the only thing that matters for me is: does it use any additional Windows OS components and therefor does it still work on Linux through WINE?

... and Mac?

This uses some very standard libraries - I would be surprised if Eve works without this, but doesn't work with it (although that's not a guarantee).

We reached a point where weGÇÖve actually improved the stability of our tools and fixed a large number of crashes that we were getting internally

Thanks for the reply. Standard libraries sounds good, it's probably just working ootb. Guess we have to wait for tomorrow. (Setting long skill to be trained.)

If you've been on SISI in the last week or so, then you will have been running with this.

The current SiSi build (304168) works without issues on wine 1.3.30. So no need to worry

What is defined as a 'crash' ?

Does that include when clients stop responding, but never close?

Does that include when internet connection drops causing the client to stop receiving packets?

What events will cause the crash report to actually be filed?

I'm a bit curious as to whether this will only catch EVE-specific crashes or whether it will be able to report cider-related ones as well (or, worse, I'd imagine, ones where EVE and cider collude to make my life miserable)?

I assume that the uploading of this crash data will be optional? The applications you hold up as examples are opt-in for crash reporting. They do not automatically upload crash information without consent. In fact they bring up nice dialogue boxes on crashing that ask you if they can send the information and include a form for you to give more information on what you were doing when the crash occurred and allow you to review the information that's being sent.

Also, a lot of these do include information not directly related to the application such as applications running at the same time. I know you stated in the blog that this isn't the case for the CCP's collection but give the track record of coding "incidents" (boot.ini anybody?) I'd just like to re-confirm that you've checked whatever library it is you're using to make sure that you actually unset all the flags you meant to.

Technically speaking, unhandled C++ exceptions cause this to trigger. This would probably normally be when the client closes and it asks you if you want to upload the information and check for fixes. I've left the normal windows error reporting in case there is an issue with our stuff.

From a post in above yours.

From a post in above yours.

That refers to the standard Windows thing, and is unclear on the CCP error reporting.

It's currently mandatory, but we'll patch it asap to make it optional.

It's currently mandatory, but we'll patch it asap to make it optional.

It's currently mandatory, but we'll patch it asap to make it optional.

I appreciate that, thanks.

Will this report when the entire computer hangs up and becomes unresponsive and needs a reboot? I had one last week while playing Eve. I was going to write a bug report but I couldn't think of anything out of the ordinary that was happening when it crashed like that. CPU, GPU, case temps within norm...

Solo Drakban makes a good point - is mandatory reporting being patched out before release, or in winter expansion 1.1

In the short term, if you're worried about this feature then the best workaround would be to block your computer from accessing http://crashes.eveonline.com

Excellent addition.

Now onto the test server and ease of using it ..?

What operating system are you using. Win = Sisilauncher a big win
Mac I think is getting a launcher too- hopefully the new cider engine was required before it could be released.

CCP an update please

In the short term, if you're worried about this feature then the best workaround would be to block your computer from accessing http://crashes.eveonline.com

This won't cause any issues with Eve, but it will mean that we won't be able to see and fix your crashes.

Why on earth would you not want to help CCP to fix crashes?

Like Solo, I prefer to know what information is being collected from my computer before approving it.

When clients stop responding but don't close, that's probably a deadlock or an infinite loop. Neither of these counts as a crash, even if they are sucky.

Why on earth would you not want to help CCP to fix crashes?

That being said, it's unfortunate that we have to work in such an environment of paranoia where even a beneficial crash reporting tool could be perceived as having an evil ulterior motive.

Replace iteration with recursion. Infinite loops cause StackOverflowExceptions. Win.

(In all honesty don't do that.)

That being said, it's unfortunate that we have to work in such an environment of paranoia where even a beneficial crash reporting tool could be perceived as having an evil ulterior motive.

No, iterations do not cause a stack overflow per se.
In Python, recursions cause a "RuntimeError: maximum recursion depth exceeded" but Python does not have a StackOverflowException, .NET does.
In fact, you cannot cause a stack overflow in Python unless you access the language using its C API.

Like Solo, I prefer to know what information is being collected from my computer before approving it.

Some people aren't comfortable with information leaving their computer and going to somebody else when it has information about said computer. Privacy issues and all.

You do realize that your computer already sends an endless stream of data to CCP that you are not pre-approving. That is the command stream. And if CCP was out to hijack your disk content, they could easily slip/mix that data into the command stream.
Granted it would take forever at low rates that did not raise your suspicion but then again you are logged on forever.

If your entire system freezes it won't be possible for the bug reporting mechanism to fire, so, no.

Though in general a complete system lock like this is rarely ever the fault of an application, but an indication of a lower-level issue with your system (faulty drivers, bad power, flakey RAM, RF interference, etc).

Indeed.

You left our solar flares.

The old adage of if you have nothing to hide with the eve client why worry.

Don't worry ccp aren't worried about your goat pron and the fact you play hello kitty online at the same time as eve. The old adage of if you have nothing to hide with the eve client why worry. Plus if there is no personal infp they won't know about your bots and python injections :-p

Why does everybody always go to the "if you have nothing to hide..." argument. I use my computer for more things than EVE and I take an NDA a lot more seriously than Darius III does. Let's say that CCP's data collection does actively collect a list of running applications (and I want to state that I have no objections to this, in fact it can be useful debugging if you want out that 80% of your crashes have occurred with a particular AV running or driver applet, etc) and I am running an application along side EVE that I am beta testing under NDA (be it game relation or otherwise) and EVE crashes, snapshots this list and sends it to CCP. I may now have violated an NDA as it relates to not revealing to anybody that I am in the beta, or that a beta even exists.


Had I had the chance to review crash logs ahead of time I would have seen that this application appears in the list and would have not sent the debug information to CCP, not because I don't want to, but because I would be breaking a contract with another entity. If the crash happened and I was not running this particular beta application I would have no issues sending a list of my other running applications to CCP. This has happened with other crash reporting software, things crash while I may be doing something under NDA or protected by other regulations or certifications (HIPAA, SOX, PCI, SAS70 take your pick, I deal with systems covered under some or all of these things) and I have to refuse to send a crash report.

I'm not worried about playing EVE and CCP transmitting the contents of my hard drive to them because I am not attributing malice to CCP's actions. We have an agreement (partially implied, partially explicitly laid out in the EULA) that CCP will send data back and forth between their servers and I'm reasonably certain that it's just data related to playing EVE Online. The addition of the crash reporting system is a very good step forward and my objections to it (which are past tense, CCP has responded that they are making it optional) were not based on my assumption that CCP was doing anything untoward, but by a need to protect myself from leaking data that I shouldn't, that under normal circumstances I would be perfectly fine with sending in a normal crash report.

So yes, I do have things to hide, but they aren't related to EVE online, and what I'm hiding is, quite frankly, should be of no concern to you, CCP or any other entity that does crash reporting.

Dude seriously if you are dealing with software under such severe NDA restrictions what on earth are you doing installing MMO games on the same hardware ? Not downplaying your argument here because it is valid, but if the business you're in is so sensitive against this kind of violations then you should be looking for hyper-secure dedicated hardware to put the NDA stuff on - not your gaming rig wth :-)

I don't necessarily believe that CCP has an ulterior motive or that they are going to be malicious with the tool. I simply like to review what data is being presented from my computer, especially when it has the possibility of leaking information, not unintentionally, due to a missed flag.

Dude seriously if you are dealing with software under such severe NDA restrictions what on earth are you doing installing MMO games on the same hardware ? Not downplaying your argument here because it is valid, but if the business you're in is so sensitive against this kind of violations then you should be looking for hyper-secure dedicated hardware to put the NDA stuff on - not your gaming rig wth :-)

Because the NDAs are fairly standard and there is no need to separate them onto different machines because I am aware of what applications report what and so long as applications are upfront with what they are doing and allow opt-in/out then there is no issue. I honestly would have no issues with EVE doing mandatory crash reporting so long as they were upfront with that happening and what data was being collected and more importantly, had a history of open communication on changes. It's the last one that concerns me for which is why I like the compromise of opt-in with the ability to review the data. Once CCP builds back up a level of trust, I'll be more willing to accept what they state at face value.

I'm also the kind of person that browses the web with plugins designed to turn everything off (no cookies, noScript, etc) and grant access as I trust sites, rather than just blindly jumping onto websites with a browser fully open and loading everything, getting hit by 0-day Flash and PDF exploits and ending up with more trojans and tracking than I can shake a stick at. Partially to protect myself, partially because I believe that I should be asked if a website can open up 15 flash programs, rather than forcing it open me.

In the mean time, stop running these super-double-secret beta programs that you're bragging about on an online forum at the same time as you're running EVE. EVE is a pretty busy game, and unless these other programs are batch processing programs that need to sit and calculate for a while, there's no reason they need to remain open while you're playing EVE. I agree that a send/don't send button would be nice, but in the end the NDA is your responsibility not CCPs and I wouldn't be running ANYTHING at the same time as a program whose publicized existence could make me liable.

and... there is always the possibility that a flaw in the tool or a hacking event might turn it into something malicious that grabs personal info. If you willy nilly allow data to be sucked off your computer then be prepared for serious RL consequences.


+1 to the Dev's!

First, I believe you need to look up the definition of "bragging". I was not bragging, I was merely stating an example. Also, I'm not sure what game you're playing, but EVE is generally not a 'busy' game. Except during instances of combat, a lot of EVE can be played with it in a window with only one eye paying attention to things happening while you actually do useful things in another window.

Also, I am aware that it's my responsibility, which is why I was asking for the ability to opt into the data collection with the ability to review the data being sent so that I can verify what CCP is collecting and make the determination on if the data can be sent. The alternatives are to not load EVE while doing other things (which may be a blessing in some respects) or take actions to block their crash reporting system (which wouldn't be of benefit to anybody as they would then never receive a crash report as I would just set it and forget it).

I honestly don't get why people are still on about this. CCP said "Hey, awesome crash collection stuff coming up!" to which the question was asked "Is it optional?" CCP quite reasonably said "Oops, not now but we'll make it so!" and everything was fine. I would have preferred it be optional on launch but, again, a Dev gave a reasonable alternative if there were any reservations about the system until they could add the opt in, and again, everything was fine.

Then people came out of the woodwork with "if you have nothing to hide..." crap which is why some of us were giving examples of why we would indeed care. Regardless of how relevant you think they are, I do appreciate that CCP has addressed the concerns.

I'm told the crash dumps are also saved to the cache folder so you're welcome to take a look at them as you like. While I can't promise anything I'm sure we can look into the feasibility of allowing you to view a dump prior to submission as part of the opting in/out process, but that might be farther down the line if at all.

This does not explicitly state that this is for EVE crash reporting, rather than Windows error reporting or 'this is normally what happens during a crash, but we've turned off the dialogue'.

Personal information is not collected in these reports, and it doesnGÇÖt look at anything else you have installed or are running on your computer (unless you have external binaries that have injected themselves into the running EVE process).

I see what you did there, and I approve.

This is what is getting the people pretending to be worried about their privacy all jittery.

Actually, no, that's not what has us 'all jittery'. I'm fine with CCP getting a list of all my running applications (as I have said before), injected into EVE or not, so long as they are up-front about it (hell, Sreegs is welcome to show up at my place unannounced, crash on my couch and go through my computer himself looking for bots) so I can make the decision as to what applications to run at the same time as EVE. I also want the chance to review what they are sending as they currently have some ground to cover to regain my full trust in their statements.

It's all about informed consent balancing against the need for privacy.

I can't make up my mind where on the creep-o-meter showing up at someone's house to rifle through their computer should be placed. It's somewhere below trying on their clothes and above peeking in their medicine cabinet.

I can't make up my mind where on the creep-o-meter showing up at someone's house to rifle through their computer should be placed. It's somewhere below trying on their clothes and above peeking in their medicine cabinet.

This shows the number of crashes per day from our main code line at CCP, generally being worked on by most of the developers (400 people).

Love it,

Will this be an automatic behavior? or will there be any indication that it is happening on the users end? ( I am sure it will be re-assuring to most to see this behavior )

Why on earth would you not want to help CCP to fix crashes?

Companies have lied before about what data is being collected in these types of "it is all benign data, trust us" transmissions. Either for nefarious reasons or, more often, due to mistakes.

*After* I verify the contents of these data dumps I'll be happy to allow their submission.

Trust, but verify. <-- If it is good enough for nuclear weapon treaties it is good enough for personally identifiable information (PII) protection.


I'll unblock it at the DNS server for this house after I see what is being gathered and transmitted.
Until then:
$ nslookup crashes.eveonline.com
Server:10.11.1.3
Address:10.11.1.3#53

** server can't find crashes.eveonline.com: NXDOMAIN

I want to quash this argument right at the beginning. Everybody has something to hide. Maybe not in the EVE client, but that's why people want to check what data is actually being transmitted. It's not your business to know whether I have a **** site open in my browser, or if I'm watching a live stream of Bill O'Reilly.

We are not currently doing anything to enumerate any applications. All that we're retrieving is crash dumps from the EVE Online client which are limited to our own process space.

I can't make up my mind where on the creep-o-meter showing up at someone's house to rifle through their computer should be placed. It's somewhere below trying on their clothes and above peeking in their medicine cabinet.

So yes, I do have things to hide, but they aren't related to EVE online, and what I'm hiding is, quite frankly, should be of no concern to you, CCP or any other entity that does crash reporting.

Thanks, it's good to hear that it will be optional, but there is still a little bit of ambiguity I'd like clarified: "We'll release with it being mandatory then patch it as some undetermined later date"? Or "we'll get this patched prior to the release"?

this indeed can be a good base for a new tool to check for RMT. Regular autoupload of memory dump to eve servers, no optout, autoban if bot is found. simple :)

I would love to see a graph of the crash data that you have collected thus far.

Imagine a massive red spike on the right hand side that crushes everything else down to insignificance.

... wonders why are you so paranoid about, unless you are doing something you're not supposed to like code-injection.

... wonders why are you so paranoid about, unless you are doing something you're not supposed to like code-injection.

As long as the software keeps a readable log on my system of what it does (1:1 of what has been sent), when it does it, and I have to option to opt out entirely of any type of datacollection, then I'm onboard.

Like Solo, I prefer to know what information is being collected from my computer before approving it.