[RC5] Cheaters removed?

Floris Dansen Floppus at Chello.nl
Fri Apr 22 08:41:54 EDT 2005


Firstly, only account were removed that sent in MAINLY false blocks, as in
not a few, but hundreds per day.
Secondly, We have 100% certainty these blocks have not been generated with
unaltered clients. Computers with computational errors could not have
generated what we have seen.
Thirdly, Accounts have not been deleted until a decent means of filtering
was created: future blocks from such clients are discarded automagically.

I hope you understand I cannot give any more details, as that would be like
pointing out to a burglar that the key is under the mat.
Filtering the accounts currently blocked would result in almost empty
accounts, but would put a lot of pressure on our servers plus probably a
stats outage of a few days. So everyone would have some inconvenience to
allow a few cheaters to continue where they left off before starting to
cheat: no thanks.

I'll say it once more: I have 100% certainty that all users blocked have
submitted significant numbers of invalid results. Impossible to generate by
accident. I also have 100% certainty nobody was blocked that didn't deserve
to be blocked.
Personally, I'd expected some positive sounds about this all.

Floppus


-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: rc5-bounces at lists.distributed.net
[mailto:rc5-bounces at lists.distributed.net]Namens Andreas Gudian
Verzonden: vrijdag 22 april 2005 14:07
Aan: 'D.net Discussion'
Onderwerp: AW: [RC5] Cheaters removed?




> Let's suppose somebody is allowed to install d.net client on company's
> computers. Let's suppose this company has 1000 computers of
> which about 100
> are on 24h a day and other are used by workers. Let's suppose
> for simplicity
> all of those computers are using the same email address in their d.net
> configuration. Let's suppose 99.9% of the computers are
> working correctly.
> Yes, it means one computer makes computational errors. It may mean it
> returns d.net packets which are flawed. If those erros are
> detected - great!
> Discard those block (or even inform the user - I'm sure he'd
> be glad to be i
> nformed that one computer is faulty - he may even try to use
> kind of binary
> search to find out which one and replace it, as d.net is not
> the only thing
> that's likely to suffer).
>
> But don't discard all of the blocks and don't ban the user.
> That would be
> plain stupid.
>
> --
> Slawek Piotrowski


I agree with that. You also pointed out some mails ago that it is possible
to "attack" accounts by sending cheat-client blocks using that accounts
email-address, only to let the account be deleted from stats. Actually,
somewhat a year ago when we kicked a cheater out of our team (we also had
him removed from stats), he threadened us to do exactly that, to "poisen"
our accounts with cheat-WUs. Just for revenge.

> I can assure you that is not how it's done :D
> For all users removed, there was VERY solid proof. Thorsten can verify
that
> now.
>
> Floppus

Floppus, how would the procedure be in the described case? Can you
selectively remove credited but invalid work from such accounts? I also
think about those big one-account subteams at DPC or BugTraq.ru, where one
jerk could destroy the whole work of many honest subteam-members.


Greetings,
Andreas

_______________________________________________
rc5 mailing list
rc5 at lists.distributed.net
http://lists.distributed.net/mailman/listinfo/rc5




More information about the rc5 mailing list