GGG. About your spyware.

"

Esto wrote:

it hasent been used !yet! might be because only code gets used currently that is to detect maphacks and bots and seeing how new that stuff to poe is it is safe to assume that currently its in a testing phase where they will iron it out but you can be sure that at some point after enoughe of the code has been tested and fixed the parts that are in but are "silent" will be used.

also standing still in town doesnt trigger the mentioned parts to be activated, in fact standing still in town will make like 90% of the code seem to be not used ;)


also if you reversed it go and search for "stdcall CheckForExeFileName" and you will see that it actively scans every process no matter if it is doing stuff to the poe exe or not.

Well I suppose who am I to say if your assumption is or is not correct. But you're also probably right that this is a testing phase of some kind, and given the huge outcry over the process and window enumeration, it may be that they will never turn those features on.

"

Halcion wrote:

<...>it may be that they will never turn those features on.

Or maybe they will. You won't know until GGG backstab you. Do you imply we just 'trust' them not to? No, thanks, people who don't have the decency to admit what they are doing are not trustworthy.

"

Lorginir wrote:

"

Halcion wrote:

<...>it may be that they will never turn those features on.

Or maybe they will. You won't know until GGG backstab you. Do you imply we just 'trust' them not to? No, thanks, people who don't have the decency to admit what they are doing are not trustworthy.

I went over this, though. You can't just publicly announce that you're introducing an anti-cheat as that tips off the cheaters and cheat developers. As it stands, even though cheat developers noticed, they likely caught hundreds if not thousands of people who just carried on using the cheats after the patch.

"

Halcion wrote:

"

Lorginir wrote:

"

Halcion wrote:

<...>it may be that they will never turn those features on.

Or maybe they will. You won't know until GGG backstab you. Do you imply we just 'trust' them not to? No, thanks, people who don't have the decency to admit what they are doing are not trustworthy.

I went over this, though. You can't just publicly announce that you're introducing an anti-cheat as that tips off the cheaters and cheat developers. As it stands, even though cheat developers noticed, they likely caught hundreds if not thousands of people who just carried on using the cheats after the patch.

chris has stated on reddit that they mainly dont explain what they do to not play into the hands of the hack authors. the problem there is however that it doenst matter to those hack authors. they alread have the full anti-cheat code and know what it does, so the reason that he mentioned why they dont talk about it is actually non existant.

and i find it hard to believe that he doesnt know about it.

and please dont misunderstand my posts as hating or whatever, i love this game its just that during recent events GGG has acted rather sketchy and in some parts chris gave explanations that are hard to understand if at all.

GGGCSB

"

Esto wrote:

chris has stated on reddit that they mainly dont explain what they do to not play into the hands of the hack authors. the problem there is however that it doenst matter to those hack authors. they alread have the full anti-cheat code and know what it does, so the reason that he mentioned why they dont talk about it is actually non existant.

and i find it hard to believe that he doesnt know about it.

and please dont misunderstand my posts as hating or whatever, i love this game its just that during recent events GGG has acted rather sketchy and in some parts chris gave explanations that are hard to understand if at all.

Sure, maybe it doesn't matter to the hack authors, because they eventually figure out what the anti-cheat is doing. But it's a lot harder to reverse engineer the anti-cheat code and employ some guesswork and deduction than it is to just read a post from Chris about the techniques used. That's why they won't just talk openly about the techniques used. In fact, I don't know a company that has ever done that.

And anyway, even if the hack authors know, that's not the point. It's the time between when the patch goes live and when the hack authors create a bypass that counts. In that time, thousands of cheaters can be caught off guard.

"

Halcion wrote:

"

Esto wrote:

chris has stated on reddit that they mainly dont explain what they do to not play into the hands of the hack authors. the problem there is however that it doenst matter to those hack authors. they alread have the full anti-cheat code and know what it does, so the reason that he mentioned why they dont talk about it is actually non existant.

and i find it hard to believe that he doesnt know about it.

and please dont misunderstand my posts as hating or whatever, i love this game its just that during recent events GGG has acted rather sketchy and in some parts chris gave explanations that are hard to understand if at all.

Sure, maybe it doesn't matter to the hack authors, because they eventually figure out what the anti-cheat is doing. But it's a lot harder to reverse engineer the anti-cheat code and employ some guesswork and deduction than it is to just read a post from Chris about the techniques used. That's why they won't just talk openly about the techniques used. In fact, I don't know a company that has ever done that.

And anyway, even if the hack authors know, that's not the point. It's the time between when the patch goes live and when the hack authors create a bypass that counts. In that time, thousands of cheaters can be caught off guard.

you will always catch the same amount, because those who get caught anyway dont read forums on a daily basis. in fact only several minutes after the patch went life the first post emerged that has shown that an anti-cheat has been implemented and like 2 hours later it was already reversed with people already posting how it works and how it catches hacks

and im not talking about the hack detection methods used dont care for those, but that they implement something that scans every single process no matter if it alters the poe client or not and dont talk about adding such things is kinda sketchy.

"

Esto wrote:

and like 2 hours later it was already reversed

Bit of an exaggeration.

"

Esto wrote:

implement something that scans every single process no matter if it alters the poe client or not and dont talk about adding such things

Good. God. I give up. It's like you repressed the entire conversation we just had.

What's funny if any of this is true is that, outside of the obvious privacy issue, this is a total backtracking of their strategy.

Today we get desync because everything runs serverside to avoid hacking, and instead of going further into that passing in less information to the client, they implement intrusive measures CLIENT SIDE.

GGG you're making a mistake, this will change N O T H I N G except for maybe a couple of days, the only thing it will do is (assuming the only "hack" available was a maphack)

- Raise whining over privacy
- Raise support cost (answering over this / handling false positives on your side / handling cusomers with false (or not so false in the end) positives in their AV software).
- Only delay something you cannot touch for a few days : switching to network based detection, people will run their maphack on another computer or in a VM and monitor network traffic directly.

You knew it from the start since it was part of the tradeoffs you picked (desync over cheating) you cannot do anything about anything you send to the client or trusts the client on, in the case of map data, anything you send to the client "will" be retrieved, you're simply pushing this into either harder to detect (and then you'd have to fight with yet more intrusive detection) or on another PC or virtual machine (can be setup to be undetectable).

Personally i never used any cheating app nor even macros in PoE and i DO want an official answer on that as i definately do not agree to toying around with my privacy (regardless of wether anyone feels the transmited data is "important" or not).

- Are you actively monitoring computers and if so what and how?
- Are you collecting any of the monitored data remotely or is it only used locally? If so what are you collecting on your end and in what form and by what rights?

Every time the phrase "my privacy" is uttered in this thread...