b0rsuk
Level: Smiter

Rank Points: 489
Registered: 11-23-2003
IP: Logged

NiroZ wrote:
AFAIK, it just accesses that file. I haven't heard anything yet about what it does in there.

In my opinion it has no business touching these files at all.

____________________________

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20051128/adams_01.shtml

Maurog
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 1501
Registered: 09-16-2004
IP: Logged

b0rsuk wrote:
Maurog:

if paranoid freaks won't even buy an original game if it's suspect, they are definitely not gonna get a pirated version.

I fail to see the reasoning behind this.

Because, dude, if anything ever is crammed full of malware, it's illegitimate software. The guys that crack the protection of games are the same guys that write viruses for fun. And if they are distributing pirated stuff anyway, they'd be stupid to ignore a willing population of test subjects for their new generation of viruses.

What kind of paranoid freak trusts a shady stranger more than an official company anyway?

____________________________
Slay the living! Raise the dead!
Paint the sky in crimson red!

b0rsuk
Level: Smiter

Rank Points: 489
Registered: 11-23-2003
IP: Logged

Maurog wrote:
Because, dude, if anything ever is crammed full of malware, it's illegitimate software. The guys that crack the protection of games are the same guys that write viruses for fun.

1. I still think pirated software is easier to use, not just obtain. Besides, there are ways of running software in such way that it can't do any harm.
Example:
Prey has platinum rating at appdb.winehq.com . It's supposed to mean that it's trivially easy to run on Linux - via Wine (Wine Is Not an Emulator). However, upon examining several reports I noticed some of them said the game contains Securom, and it prevents it from working.
It was not said explicitly, but I think they just used a crack to make it work.

Wine has its own microsystem - fake file structure, fake Program Files, even .dll's if you have access to genuine windows installation. I believe it's effectively sandboxed.
There's a tendence of pirated software to contain malware, but not a rule.

2. Not so much for fun as for money. Botnets, sending spam or even executing coordinated attacks on corporate servers are money. I read as much as 55% Americans read spam and believe it.

____________________________

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20051128/adams_01.shtml

kyevan
Level: Disabled
Rank Points: 54
Registered: 08-29-2007
IP: Logged

NiroZ wrote:
Before the hysteria gets too carried away, let me point out some things.

There is no rootkit, check Ars Technica for the details.
You can install it on two (windows) computers. For most people that will be more than enough. (unless you're giving it to a friend, which is exactly what they're trying to stop). They've promised to increase that to 5, and eventually remove it.

Don't forget, you can't sell it used either. I mean, geeze, even Steam lets you do that (after jumping through hoops to deactivate the key and everything, and if the copy you bought was VAC banned, you're screwed)

mrimer
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5064
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

b0rsuk wrote:
1. I still think pirated software is easier to use, not just obtain.
...
It was not said explicitly, but I think they just used a crack to make it work.

It's possible I misunderstood b0rsuk's point, but I'll chime in here for a second to underline the fact that cracks can potentially be used on legitimately purchased software to make them run more safely. My point is that it's not the fact that the software was pirated that makes it easier to run, but the crack. I see these as distinct factors.

____________________________
Gandalf? Yes... That's what they used to call me.
Gandalf the Grey. That was my name.
I am Gandalf the White.
And I come back to you now at the turn of the tide.

---

[Last edited by mrimer at 08-31-2007 06:22 PM]

Krishh
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 282
Registered: 06-05-2004
IP: Logged

Maurog wrote:
Because, dude, if anything ever is crammed full of malware, it's illegitimate software. The guys that crack the protection of games are the same guys that write viruses for fun. And if they are distributing pirated stuff anyway, they'd be stupid to ignore a willing population of test subjects for their new generation of viruses.

What kind of paranoid freak trusts a shady stranger more than an official company anyway?

Me. It's quite simple really, the guys who crack protections do so because they find it fun, but also for bragging rights, so they have a good reason not to include malware. Plus, they're peer reviewed by other crackers, who are more than willing to expose dubious cracks. You'd be hard pressed to find a crack with malware in it, and if it's there, it was probably added by someone along the distribution chain, not the crackers. If anything contains malware, it's shoddy middling software where the market is so oversaturated, like, at one time, music players, that the only reason to distribute a new one is to push something along with it, like malware. So, yes, I do trust a bunch of guys playing internet heroes more than companies whose sole purpose is to limit your access to data you own, often through any means necessary, even rootkits. (Not that far in Securom's case, at least.)

NiroZ
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1302
Registered: 02-12-2006
IP: Logged

malkav11 wrote:
It doesn't disable Process Explorer - but if you've run Process Explorer during that boot, it won't let you run Bioshock.

It sucks. Big time

---

[Last edited by NiroZ at 09-05-2007 09:05 AM]

malkav11
Level: Delver
Rank Points: 59
Registered: 01-05-2007
IP: Logged

Maurog wrote:
Because, dude, if anything ever is crammed full of malware, it's illegitimate software. The guys that crack the protection of games are the same guys that write viruses for fun. And if they are distributing pirated stuff anyway, they'd be stupid to ignore a willing population of test subjects for their new generation of viruses.

What kind of paranoid freak trusts a shady stranger more than an official company anyway?

As someone else already said - the people who actually create the cracks have no desire whatsoever to contaminate their release with malware. I suppose there may be some overlap between the virus scene and the application/game crack scene, but the latter explicitly forbids any such thing and there's machinery in place to prevent bad cracks and the like from achieving widespread distribution through the usual pirate channels.

You definitely take your security into your own hands if you venture into the shadier end of the crack websites. The ones laden with porn ads and .zip files of dubious provenance. But that's a separate issue. There are relatively legit sites that are much better bets on no-CD cracks. The kind that proudly proclaim themselves to only exist to make things more convenient for the legitimate end-user.

Edit:
Oh, also - if a pirate release were to be infected with a virus or spyware, well, most people have installed programs to find and eliminate precisely such things. Odious DRM, on the other hand, is perfectly legal and legitimate and will thus pass completely below the radar unless you are forewarned. (I don't mean it won't cause problems, just that you won't easily be able to identify what's doing it. Or deal with it, without your friendly neighborhood pirate.)

---

[Last edited by malkav11 at 09-06-2007 06:36 AM]

Tim
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 1979
Registered: 08-07-2004
IP: Logged

I must say that I'm not interested in any cracks. I'm not bothered by those anymore. If a game has any thing on it that might affect my computer, why even bother? I'm not interested.

Since more gamers are now computerliterate and wiser than years ago, I wouldn't be surprised if many other people think the same. Usually the statistic is used that if for every complainer, there are 99 people that agree but doesn't complain.

Since this case was voiced by a lot of people on the many forums, I would predict that they lost about 100000 sales of Bioshock just for this. And I don't even count the pirates, because I think that's marginal, but just to the publisher's decision to include DRM.

A while ago, a publisher might just lose 100 copies of 1.99 games for this kind of protection, but nowadays, I just don't believe anyone can justify for losing that much of revenue (100000 times 50 euros/dollars) by including DRM.


____________________________
The best way to lose customers is to let little kids running loose on a forum with too many mod points.

---

[Last edited by Tim at 09-06-2007 08:43 AM]

NiroZ
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1302
Registered: 02-12-2006
IP: Logged

But of course, their argument would be that they may have lost even more than that due to pirating.

Not that I agree with it.

Mattcrampy
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 2388
Registered: 05-29-2003
IP: Logged

I bought it, and Bioshock having DRM on there wouldn't have affected my purchase. I could have bought it through Steam, after all, and that's a kind of DRM in itself.

The key issue here is that, while it'd be nice for games to have no DRM, for high-profile titles like Bioshock, which looks like it's going to be game of the year unless Mario Galaxy or Halo 3 comes along and tops it, slowing down the pirates a week or two equates to hundreds of thousands of sales, as everyone wants the game day one and pirates can't get that crack out fast enough. It's a no-brainer. As the game gets older, the DRM will most likely be patched out - that's how it usually works, as there's no value in DRMing even a two-month old game up.

I have needed to crack legitimately bought games in order to get them to run, so I'd far prefer publishers ensure that the DRM doesn't affect legitimate usage of the product, but at the same time I accept that extraordinary measures must sometimes be taken to ward off those who talk about 'product freedom' and 'defective by design' with their fingers crossed behind their back. Information might want to be free, but creators want to be paid and a lot of people want to be cheap.

____________________________
What do you call an elephant at the North Pole?

malkav11
Level: Delver
Rank Points: 59
Registered: 01-05-2007
IP: Logged

It may be a no-brainer, but that doesn't mean it's the correct course of action.

I did buy it through Steam (before I heard about this), by the way, and the Steam version has the same DRM. I wouldn't have been willing to miss out on Bioshock even if I had known, but I don't appreciate it, and my willingness to buy 2K's products in future has gone down substantially.

NiroZ
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1302
Registered: 02-12-2006
IP: Logged

Mattcrampy wrote:
It's a no-brainer. As the game gets older, the DRM will most likely be patched out - that's how it usually works, as there's no value in DRMing even a two-month old game up.

Splinter cell 3 still needs to be un-DRMed

b0rsuk
Level: Smiter

Rank Points: 489
Registered: 11-23-2003
IP: Logged

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Bioshock makes some directory invisible for windows, right ? Even if Bioshock doesn't do any evil stuff, viruses/trojans could use the directory to hide. In other words: it makes your system vulnerable.

____________________________

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20051128/adams_01.shtml

---

[Last edited by b0rsuk at 09-10-2007 01:14 PM]