BioShock Installs a Rootkit 529
An anonymous reader writes "Sony (the owner of SecureROM copy protection) is still up to its old tricks. One would think that they would have learned their lesson after the music CD DRM fiasco, which cost them millions. However, they have now started infesting PC gaming with their invasive DRM. Facts have surfaced that show that the recently released PC game BioShock installs a rootkit, which embeds itself into Explorer, as part of its SecureROM copy-protection scheme. Not only that, but just installing the demo infects your system with the rootkit. This begs the question: Since when did demos need copy protection?"
Oh great (Score:2)
Re:Oh great (Score:5, Informative)
I don't care if it is one or not. My point of this article is that the SecuROM service doesn't need to be included in the demo if we don't have to activate it.
Using "rootkit" brings the traffic. It's all about the SEO, and is why this article is on top in Google.
Actually, these rootkits are good... (Score:5, Insightful)
Good for certain uses anyway. I've participated in Iowa State University's Cyber Defense competitions as a red team hacker, and I've found they really help to take out the defending teams. Every team is required to run a regular Windows desktop that any user can access (the teams often play the part of universities or other facilities trying to secure a public lab), and it's fun to just walk up like a normal user, put in a "normal" music CD or game (courtesy of Sony), and then BOOM, rootkited. From there on, of course, things get easier... it's hard to remove malicious files when the OS won't let you know they are there :D.
Re:Actually, these rootkits are good... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Oh great (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh great (Score:5, Funny)
You'll buy what we fucking TELL you to buy. If it crashes your system, then your system requires more RAM.
It's situation fucking normal for a game.
If you don't like it, then millions of idiots will just buy it and install it on their parents' computer anyway. After all, kids are the only ones who play games.
(Not previewing after 5 on a Friday.)
Re:Oh great (Score:5, Interesting)
The outrage over this on the 2K forums [2kgames.com] made them raise the limit to 5 installs on a given copy of windows, and up to 5 installs on different machines. Ever. Problem solved, right? I mean, who ever installs software they buy more than 5 times, right? Must be pirates. They want to carry on playing in a couple of years, they can go buy a new copy.
Oh, and they'll release a utility at some point in the future that when run, will supposedly uninstall the game and 'deregister' your install with the online securom database, thus giving you the privilege of reinstalling your own game on your own computer one more time. Just hope windows doesn't go belly up before you get to unregister. And I can't wait for the day all games do this, and I have to run round manually deregistering all of them prior to a reinstall with different tools. Then calling support when it doesn't work and won't let me reinstall.
This sucks bad, and I won't be buying it now (Score:5, Insightful)
First of all, your link to the forums goes to a thread about achievement points on the Xbox version of the game. This thread [2kgames.com] is much more relevant; it's about the rootkit.
Second of all, I, like many other people, was looking forward to Bioshock's release. I, like I hope many other people will do, refuse to buy it now.
Whether people thing of this as FUD or not, the simple matter of the fact is that:
2K Games has A FAQ about SecuROM [2kgames.com] that is, at best, contradictory in several places. They say:
However, Sysinternals' RootkitRevealer software [photobucket.com] begs to differ. Who am I going to trust, a game company that is practicing Defective by Design [wikipedia.org] tactics, or Mark Russinovich [wikipedia.org], a software engineer who's proven time and again that he is the guru of this stuff, the guy who discovered the infamous Sony rootkit, the guy who knew Windows better than even the Windows people knew Windows, so well that Microsoft bought his company and hired him? I'll gladly cast my lot with Mark any day, even if he does work for Microsoft now.
2K Games also says in its FAQ:
They then go on to say:
Um... If SecuROM doesn't fingerprint my hardware, what is the "machine ID" that a hash is taken of and sent to their servers? And how the hell is it possible that changing several pieces of hardware might result in a required reactivation? The simple answer is, of course, that SecuROM does fingerprint your hardware, and 2K Games lied to our faces in the hopes that computer users who aren't as savvy as us won't get bogged down with the technical details and just read the part where they say that it doesn't fingerprint the hardware.
This is totally inexcusable, and I won't have anything to do with this company. Will the game be cool? Maybe, but nothing is cool enough to install this crap on my computer for. As far as I'm concerned, 2K Games has destroyed its credibility, and they can go to hell for it.
You still don't get it. (Score:5, Insightful)
Not exactly, you're buying a LICENSE to play their game. SecuROM is NOT required to play their game, therefore it is NOT a requirement of the license. As such, it has no place in the game.
Worse, SecuROM actually PREVENTS you from using your computer in other commonly used, non-infringing ways. So by buying the game, you're actually buying the crippling of your system along with it.
You need to read again what SecuROM does. Where you have it installed is irrelevant. It actually alters your operating system in a manner that allows non-privileged applications to run as an administrative user. That means that at the very least, it can affect your entire Windows installation. And before you go with your "I've used Linux..." rationale, you should realize that it can also affect your Linux installation.
Here's how it could work. I write a piece of software that uses the elevated privileges that SecuROM grants to normal users without your knowledge or consent that goes in and wipes all non-recognized partitions on your hard drive. Voila, your system has been compromised because playing a stupid game whose publishers willingly opened up a security hole on your system. That's what I mean when I keep saying that even if 2K Games didn't have evil intentions, what they're unleashing on people can most certainly be used for evil purposes.
The thought that you are paying them for the privilege of having a rootkit installed on your computer and that you're okay with it quite disconcerting to me, but by all means, if the service of having your system compromised is worth $50 to you, go ahead. (There are lots of people who would willingly compromise your system for free, incidentally.) Personally, I find it disgusting that anyone can't see the bigger picture and would support a company that engages in these practices, but it's your computer and your money.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The thought that you are paying them for the privilege of having a rootkit installed on your computer and that you're okay with it quite disconcerting to me, but by all means, if the service of having your system compromised is worth $50 to you, go ahead. (There are lots of people who would willingly compromise your system for free, incidentally.) Personally, I find it disgusting that anyone can't see the bigger picture and would support a company that engages in these practices, but it's your computer and your money.
As others have pointed out, this particular piece of software is NOT a rootkit. I changed my tax preparation software because of issues LIKE this before, but my option here is play the game, or don't. I appreciate that someone who is vehemently against these practices is at least allowing me that it's my decision. I've chosen to do it; doesn't mean everyone has to. If we found that the software did, or even COULD, wipe out other partitions, I would avoid it. Like anything else in computer security, it's a
Another inconsistency... (Score:3, Informative)
(from above post...)
A 2K Games forums administrator, "2K Elizabeth," posted this message [2kgames.com] when a brouhaha started erupting:
This is patently false, as pointed out by several users' follow-up posts. One even took a nice screenshot [trickingq3.com] that shows that this is at best a pretty hideous example of an administrator not knowing what the hell she's talking about, at worst another outright lie that attempts to appease people who don't know better and can't actually check the veracity
Re:Oh great (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree that programmers should be paid for making software, just like musicians should be paid for making music.
But only for making the software/music, not for the copies. So if an artist/programmer spends 100 hours making a song or programming an application, he/she should get paid for the 100 hours they spent, according to their hourly rate. Why do people think it's fair to get paid for work they actually haven't done ?
If you have a plumber install a toilet in your house, you don't have to pay a license fee for every person who wants to take a shit on it, you just pay him for the amount of time he's spent installing it. I don't see how music or software is any different.
Re:Oh great (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Oh great (Score:4, Informative)
The plumber installs one toilet. The bathroom is now only authorized for use by one person. If anyone other than that one person asks to use the bathroom, it requires reauthorization. If your toilet ever leaks, you can only repair it once, unless you've de-authorized the toilet before the leak started. Otherwise, you're required to purchase a new toilet before using it in that bathroom again.
If you move, the next person to use your house has to pay for authorization to use that toilet.
In the end, it all winds up a steaming pile of crap in one way or another.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re-install Windows because of HD crash or OS corruption = your BioShock's SecuROM install count goes up and you eventually lose the ability to install.
WGA servers are down = Vista downgrades to non-genuine mode should you be unlucky enough that it phoned home during an outage.
The company goes out of business = you're fu**ed.
Fair compensation for work is... fair. But the restrictions they impose on legit customers and the r
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Houses are build by teams, should I pay a license fee for every person who visits my house ? No, you pay the guys who build your house according to their hourly rate, doesn't really matter if it's one guy or tens or hundreds.
No, they aren't.
So, if a game sells 2 million copies, do I pay half as much as when the game sells
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Reasonable" my ass. (Score:4, Informative)
Expecting to be paid for your software is reasonable.
Taking tactics which can actually damage your customers' computers is not.
In fact, copy protection is entirely unnecessary to be paid for your work. Just look at record sales -- people do, in fact, still buy CDs, even though most have no copy protection at all. They even buy DVDs, even though the protection there has been so thoroughly cracked that there are one-click programs to rip a DVD and put it on your video iPod. Plenty of people still subscribe to Cable TV, even though most shows are available within a few hours on BitTorrent.
Oh, and by the way, before you mention it -- a pirated copy is not a lost sale. A pirated copy is not a lost sale. A pirated copy is not a lost sale. Repeat this until you understand it, and then take another look at the statistics -- the RIAA/MPAA are still insanely rich, as are the better artists, musicians, directors, and so on. There is simply not significant evidence, anywhere, that they have lost money due to piracy.
I know it's comforting when you can believe the world is black and white, but it isn't.
Re:Oh great (Score:5, Funny)
games aren't just for kids. The fact games are a multi billion dollar industry shows this clearly.
no one can make me part with my money if i don't want to. get a clue.
Re:Oh great (Score:4, Informative)
You guys do realize that Bioshock is NOT a Sony game, right? It's been stated that it won't appear on the PS3 (some
If it's not a Sony game, and it's not even going to be AVAILABLE for the PS3, then who do you think decided to use a rootkit-ish (even if it's not a rootkit) technology? Hint: it wouldn't have been Sony.
If Sony came up with the technology, and then the other guys decided to license it and use it, does this mean Sony had much to do with it? Nope.
I am still laughing at how easily the anti-Sony-fanboy types disengage their brains when reading articles, on totally non-Sony, not-even-Sony-friendly titles. At the very most, if Sony's the one that the technology was licensed from, one could complain that Sony is still providing it. But the folks who decided to USE it, i.e. the Bioshock publishers, are the folks you ought to be mad at.
If I steal your credit card numbers... (Score:4, Insightful)
How the HELL did this get modded informative!!?
The summary never says that Bioshock is a Sony game. In fact, Bioshock isn't even mentioned until well into the summary, and it's clear that they licensed the software from Sony. The summary makes it crystal clear that Sony is the owner of SecuROM copy protection, the copy protection that Bioshock installs.
Are you on drugs? I mean, seriously, are you on drugs!? That's the only way I can think of to explain how stupid that sentence is. If Sony came up with the technology, and then the other guys decided to license it and use it, does this mean Sony had much to do with it? Hell yes, because they wrote it!!! Plus, there's also the little fact that they've done this exact same thing before that you're totally ignoring. Once is a lapse in judgement. Twice is a pattern. I wasn't what you call and anti-Sony-fanboy before all of this rootkit fiasco, but I sure as hell am now. If not wanting rootkits installed on my computer makes me a anti-Sony-fanboy, then I suppose I'm proud to call myself one, and for the mere sake of computer security, I highly recommend to everyone I know that they immediately become anti-Sony-fanboys too.
If I steal your credit card numbers, and then other guys decided to buy them and use them, does this mean that I had much to do with it?
Damn, there's dense, and then there's dense. You, sir, are the latter kind. By all means, feel free to riddle your computer with rootkits for the sake of playing a stupid game, and be happy that at least you know that you're selling your soul to the devil, unlike most of the non-computer-savvy users who will probably buy and play this game that are none the wiser.
Re:Oh great (Score:4, Funny)
Re:But why do they need to install spyware/rootkit (Score:3, Insightful)
It would probably be an unwise business decision to automatically exclude over half of your potential customers at this juncture.
Re:But why do they need to install spyware/rootkit (Score:5, Informative)
Re:But why do they need to install spyware/rootkit (Score:4, Insightful)
(Remember, we are not your personal army.)
Re:But why do they need to install spyware/rootkit (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you make an important point that is seldom stressed:
It really is our internet; we have no one to blame for what it is other than ourselves.
Raaaiiiiiaaaaain on your wedding day (Score:4, Funny)
Looks like you're only doing this because you want to join in the groupthink and look cool!
Sorry, couldn't resist
Yet another game (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yet another game (Score:5, Informative)
So does that mean I'll have to get the cracked version from BittTorrent in order to NOT infect my machine ?
It is very sad that the underground world is nicer than the official one. It's Demolition Man [wikipedia.org] all over again.
Re:Yet another game (Score:5, Interesting)
In the PS1's case (and probably newer consoles), anti-piracy technology made new games not work on chipped consoles. Oh, unless they were burned.
Maybe these companies should give up on anti-piracy. It seems that most people are decent enough to pay for something that's worth the price of admission. I can't imagine that all of these measures have made enough money from would-be pirates to justify money lost from would-be consumers turned off by DRM, etc. Not to mention the money they had to spend to set up all that shit. I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that they'd make more money and have a better brand image from simply chilling out and trying to sell worthy products.
Re:Yet another game (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Yet another game (Score:5, Informative)
BTW, the graphics are very impressive and the atmosphere too, but from the first few levels it seemed good but not all that revolutionary as I kept hearing it was...
As others mention and the FA clearly says, it's not a rootkit, just a regular service. This is a case where I wouldn't mind someone being sued for libel - they really deserve it.
Re:Yet another game (Score:5, Insightful)
Somewhat off-topic, but if this isn't a sign of the times I don't know what is. You shelled out $50-60 of hard-earned money to buy a game immediately after it's released and what's your reward? You sit and wait for hours while the moron publisher's servers get overloaded with "activation" requests. And here in this comment, instead of showing irritation or annoyance, you just accept this as normal (not saying you weren't pissed then of course
Funny, I remember when you would buy a game and could take it home and play it right away. Of course technology has progressed since then - now companies can alienate honest customers while adding a few hours to the time it takes to crack the copy protection. Steam is one of the worst things to happen to computer gaming in a long time.
If that's not progress, I don't know what is.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yet another game (Score:5, Interesting)
I was really ready to get angry (I had pre-loaded days before and it had the gall to make me wait another 2 hours since download speeds were awful - but that isn't activation related, AFAIK), but it's hard to make much of an issue of a 30 seconds delay.
Also, I live in Brazil. Sometimes games would take months, sometimes years and on occasion, they would never be available here in a legal form. Buying from the USA is of course possible, but even then it would something like US$20+80% customs taxes. And sometimes it would be translated (poorly) - argh! Prices are about the same as the US, sometimes a bit higher, sometimes a bit lower.
So I consider being able to download major releases (instead of just indie games) and play at the same time as anyone else major progress.
Steam could improve their download client a lot, though. I get 460K/s routinely on Getright with multiple connections, but sub-100K/s is the norm on Steam.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
When BioShock couldn't activate I used TCPView and nmap to figure out why it couldn't activate (because the "failed to contact key server" game instantly). Turns
Re:Yet another game (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yet another game (Score:5, Interesting)
In my opinion, Steam is far worse than any regular DRM, because instead of simply installing software that checks and validates your game, you're allowing a company access via network to your game where they can outright regulate whatever you do with it.
I never installed Steam for that reason. It freaks me out. I don't want anyone on my machine other than myself, and I don't feel companies have a right to regulation on that level.
Even though this Bioshock thing turns out not to be a true Rootkit, it's a game I was going to buy, but now that I see they install this additional mess, I will be passing it up.
I will be happy if a piracy group supplies with me a DRM free version. But I truly LIKE to give my money to teams that deserve it, and I feel the inclusion of secureROM in this game may be robbing a very deserving team of it's sales.
In the end, if the publisher feels they need to install anything that is not necessary to the game itself, they will not get my money.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Clears that problem right up
Re: (Score:2)
It's a ridiculously good game (I have the Xbox version), so this kind of news saddens me. I hate seeing masterpiece level games brought down by details like this (albeit pretty major, horrible details).
In any case, if you have a Xbox 360 or have thought about getting one, this game is well worth it (imho, though there are plenty of supporting reviews out there).
Re: (Score:2)
It was the commercial for BioShock. I was actually drawn in by it... that hasn't happened in a long time.
I was actually considering buying this game through Steam after looking at the Wikipedia article earlier today. I'm not rootkitting my Windows machine to play a game though.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Good for you. Since that's the reason that you do it, and your ethics keep you from ever downloading something that you didn't purchase first that must be how everyone does it, and no one downloads a game as an alte
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Demos and protection (Score:5, Informative)
(That doesn't mean that I endorse Sony's approach here -- far from it)
HTH, HAND
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Demos and protection (Score:5, Informative)
Once you get to the point where you can modify the exe, the hard part of the crack is over. Whatever the protection checks, whether it's some data on the CD or a registry key or some more complex signature of your machine, it's just a branch instruction somewhere and can be NOPed out. Finding the branch is easy too, since you can just run the game with and without whatever it checks for, and see where the execution paths diverge.
The (marginally) effective part of a copy protection scheme like SecuROM is use of encryption, compression, and self-modifying code, which make it hard to examine or modify the exe. If you have an unprotected demo exe and a protected retail exe, you can't even compare them until after breaking the protection.
Sure there's the extreme case where the demo and the final version are exactly the same code and differ only in data files, then dropping the whole demo exe into the retail installation would crack it. But as the sibling posters explained, that's rare.
It does not (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
At the time of writing, there's only one comment from the author that mentions "search engines". So I assume your are refering to this paragraph:
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Regardless I'm a lot less inclined to trust the company over a rootkit detection kit to be frank. I would definitely not put it past them to install a rootkit then try to pass it off as 'just a registry folder and some keys'.
Boy am I glad I was too lazy to install the demo back when I downloaded it. I really hate these 'Don't mind us, we'll be
Would be nice (Score:2)
Re:Would be nice (Score:5, Funny)
Fdisk, Format, Re-Install, Do-Dah
Not QUITE a rootkit (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Not QUITE a rootkit (Score:4, Insightful)
This is pure FUD. The twat who wrote it even admits it in the comments:
Re: (Score:2)
If I was a betting man, I'd bet even money that the blogger himself submitted the story to make a few bucks.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
if (compare(&securom,&duck,LOCOMOTION)
|| compare(&securom,&duck,DIALOGUE)) then {
}
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It's not a rootkit... (Score:5, Informative)
As for why it's in the demo, modern copy protection is embedded throughout games. It's too difficult to remove the protection just for a demo that contains so much of the full game engine.
Shame on /. for linking to this (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay, I was getting myself good and riled up over this piece of news. I was even ready to return the game first thing tomorrow despite it being a lot of fun. Then I did the unthinkable - I RTFA.
Seems this is a big load of nothing. SecureROM installs a service to let those running without admin privileges run the SecureROM stuff. This is kinda bitterweet - yes, SecureROM is bad etc but running as a restricted user is good. This is assuming you trust SecureROM's website which says (from TFA):
I don't see the issue here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't care if it's a rootkit or not, this quote is absolutely obnoxious. I have a return quote.
"this (car boot) is a standard interface commonly used by several other parking proprietors as well, there is no impediment to the vehicle at all. This module h
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, I agree with these draconian systems. So far the game hasn't been cracked (or atleast a crack posted on the torrent sites) in the all important week of relea
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Shame on /. for linking to this (Score:5, Informative)
References:
http://consumerist.com/consumer/punishing--the-on
http://forum.sysinternals.com/forum_posts.asp?TID
Re:Shame on /. for linking to this (Score:5, Insightful)
True, I'm surprised no one has really mentioned it here, but my biggest issue is that Bioshock refuses to start if it detects Process Explorer running. And since Process Explorer starts its own device driver (or whatever it is) upon first start which isn't later unloaded, I have to reboot Windows every time I want to play Bioshock.
That is a showstopper right there for me. I'm never buying any game Securom protected game again. This was the first and last time I did that mistake.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Just because you don't have access to the SecuROM source code doesn't mean it necessarily contains any exploitable bugs. It just means you can't be sure. It might very well be as safe as p
Not a real rootkit (Score:3, Informative)
From the comments:
"Using "rootkit" brings the traffic. It's all about the SEO, and is why this article is on top in Google."
Although I believe this is nastyware.. It surely does not meet the definition or rootkit [wikipedia.org].
Awesome game (Score:2)
This is still an awesome game and definitely worth the purchase. This news only makes me glad that I got it for the Xbox 360 rather than PC. If you have a Xbox 360 and don't have this game yet - shame on you.
SEO bait (Score:4, Insightful)
Inaccurate. (Score:3, Insightful)
I *really* wish we could force (through consumer pressure rather than legislation if possible) publishers to acknowledge copy protection on the OUTSIDE of boxes (or other appropriate pre-purchase manner).
It's hard to boycott something that you don't hear about until AFTER purchase. (Especially since it's very difficult to return an opened game.)
I type too slowly?! (Score:2)
I guess I lose at teh interwebs.
Not a rootkit (Score:5, Informative)
Thus it is a poor way to keep stupid users from trashing their DRM, not a rootkit.
The reason it shows up in "Rootkit Revealer" is because true rootkits use the embedded null tactic to keep users from deleting keys registering malware dll's, startup settings, etc. That way, the user has no way to deregister the malware or stop its launch.
However, the Rootkit Revealer does not simply point out rootkits. It's not that simple. RR points out suspicious methods and/or hidden files, and requires the user to analyze whether those methods and files indicate an actual piece of malware.
Clearly, a key that simply warns you not to delete other keys is not malware.
It is annoying, however, and the only way to get rid of a key with embedded nulls is with DelRegNull. I didn't like that one bit.
My key was added with the install of Neverwinter Nights 2, however, which also uses SecuROM. This key has been around for a while, folks. Someone is crying "rootkit," when really all it is is a sloppy hack to keep users from eliminating their SecuROM keys.
What's really annoying about this method is that the malformed key is not removed when you uninstall the software that requires it. SecuROM also drops a few malformed files in the directory %userprofile%\Application Data\SecuROM\UserData. They won't delete either, because they are key files which the folks at Sony have deemed MUST NEVER be deleted. Great. The only way I could manage to clean out those was by mounting the partition with NTFS-3g and issuing an rm *.*. Otherwise, another hack keeps Windows from moving the key files, probably because if you could copy them, you could run a game on any machine with the keys.
This is definitely more arrogance, and completely annoying, but certainly not a rootkit. I would love to hear what the suits at Sony have to say about their crapware. I expect nothing less than a true SecuROM removal kit, since it doesn't get removed on uninstall.
--
Toro
Re:Not a rootkit (Score:4, Interesting)
Note that cmdlineext.dll (and other versions cmdlineext02.dll, cmdlineext03.dll) can be a bit tricky to remove. Since it's registered as a shell extension, and Explorer is invoked during startup, the file will always be in use unless you unregister it:
regsvr32
After rebooting, you can then (hopefully) delete the file. Note, however, that the file will be recreated and re-registered the next time you run a SecuROM game, so you have to take some extreme measures if you want to ensure that the file can't come back. I've tried creating a zero-length file and setting the permissions to Deny for all users, as well as setting the file read-only, and that seems to do it for at least some versions of SecuROM.
This functionality is at least as nefarious as the more commonly reported portion of SecuROM, which is indeed a service in the current version and can be stopped like other services.
Anyway, as for the larger question, I didn't buy Civ IV because of SecuROM, and I'm not buying BioShock because of it, either. If 2K decides to capitulate on this issue at some point, I'll reconsider. In any case, it'll give Irrational time to work on a patch for some other issues that have come up.
UAService7 not on my system thank god (Score:4, Informative)
By the way, there's an easier way to delete the files under appdata.
Type "at
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Type "at /next 9:02pm c:\windows\system32\cmd.exe /interactive" after looking at the clock and seeing it's 9:01am. Wait until 9:02 and you'll get a dos prompt running as the machine account. Go delete your files.
Cool, but the correct syntax is:
If running as SYSTEM will delete these files, it is a lot easier than mounting with NTFS-3g. I couldn't test this method because the files are already gone. Thanks for the tip!
--
Toro
Semantics seem a tad irrelevant here (Score:2)
PC gaming (Score:5, Insightful)
I got sick and tired of copy protection fucking up my machine, or refusing to run a valid copy because it didn't like my disk. (Medieval Total War and Diablo II being two games in particular that simply would not run on my hardware without a CD crack.)
Having to upgrade hardware every couple years was annoying, but it's all this crap heaped on me, who is trying to pay real money for games that pushed it over the edge. I'm sure I'm not alone. And yes, I know that Console games are protected too...but for console games, it's transparent to the user.
Note that I also paid for "Galactic Civilizations II", which was not protected, and the expansion will be the only PC game I purchase this year.
Re:PC gaming (Score:4, Insightful)
Gal Civ II rocks--it's an awesome game.
Another Beer Coaster (Score:3, Funny)
Did we not learn the first time? Why can these multi billion dollar corporations not come up with anything better than the broken and bloated software the average consumer must choke down?
I bought Bioshock today. I've played it for a full 3 hours. And that is all the more that it will be played.
Welcome to the beer coaster pile, Bioshock, I forsee many coffee rings and soda drops in your future
Punish your customers (Score:5, Insightful)
I used to buy a fair few more PC games. After some of the nastier games the bigger vendors started playing, I stopped buying larger commercial games and moved on to games made by smaller indies (okay, there were some other reasons to, but that's a discussion for another day). They are far less likely to install crap on your system or make you jump through hoops post-purchase.
Until recently. I purchased a game from a larger indie and then found out I had to "activate" it (after they got my money, of course). They "promise" it'll all be okay, they've got money aside in case they go out of business (which they'll never touch, of course, promise promise). But it's okay because "Windows does it too". I'd name-and-shame them but they did make an effort to make it right when I kicked up. And honestly, I don't want this fight. So let's just say it was a good indie game.
So I'll be buying less and less games over time, I guess.
So where are we now? Here I am, along with other paying customers, doing the right thing- and I get shafted as a result. I can get a better copy with less restrictions by going to the local warez-are-us. That copy won't stop working ten years later when the developer shuts down. It won't phone home and refuse to run. It won't refuse to run without a net connection sending God-knows-what to their activation server.
As a software developer I can completely understand the reason to protect your software from being casually distributed, but dammit- CD driver replacements, rootkits, web trojans, privilege elevation servers, surprise "activation". Why are you subjecting your legitimate customers to this nonsense, when the people ripping you off are just going to get it from someone who has already stripped this stuff out? Don't you realise the logical conclusion of making your product considerably worse that the warez version? Of making every software install a risk of hosing the system?
More bad news (Score:3, Informative)
No DRM for me. (Score:3, Interesting)
I looked to see if Steam had a version that wasn't infected, but it was too.
I'll pass on this game. There are others.
That's like begging to be cracked (Score:3, Interesting)
I just wonder how many people will still take the, for the functionality unnecessary, burden of actually licensing the software, though.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I get tired of people using phrases they don't understand. "Slippery slope" is another misused phrase that actually refers to a logical fallacy. People regularly commit a "slippery slope" fallacy by using the phrase "slippery slope" the way they use it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Considering that the meaning of "begs the question" that you say is wrong may very well be the more common understanding, I'd say they understand it perfectly well. Common understanding of words and phrases are what define a language.
Honestly, I think people keep using the phrase "begs the question" in their summaries for the express purpose of annoying people like you.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The word "begs" has a definition of "to make a humble or urgent plea." If one is to make a humble or urgent plea for a question, they are begging a question - no matter what other definition people try to claim "begging the question" has.
If I were to claim "goi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Most of them are beyond help anyway. I'd also say that those are examples where one would be justified in correcting improper use. I see no problem using begs the question to mean raises the question, it's perfectly acceptable English. Use circular logic or reasoning to refer to the logical fallacy, because these days no one is going to know
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Vote with your dollar and don't buy this shit!
Re:This is why fucking capitialism needs to be (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The problem with communism is if you end up with political types not unlike G.W. Bush running it. Would you want the Ministry of Video Games to be managed by Bush cronies? Wouldn't that be just terrible
If so, Tetris would be outlawed as a Weapon of Mass Distraction.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Erm. Wait...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:True Story... (Score:5, Informative)
No, it just installs a tool that's specifically intended to subvert an OS security mechanism (non-Admin user accounts). That's not a root kit, but it has a lot of the same security issues.
Re:True Story... (Score:5, Informative)
Given the internets and what they are -- with their tubes and all -- I want to sort of talk about the concerns people have. We take the concerns people have very seriously. There's been some concern like, "What happens if it's three years from now, or ten years from now, when I want to play this game. And, you know, Irrational Games has been hit by a meteor?" We will unset the online activation at some point in the future -- we're not talking about when. If people have concern about that they shouldn't be worried about that. This activation is for the early period of the game when it's really hot and there are people really trying to find ways to play the game without buying it. Of course, there are a lot of people who are legitimately trying to play it. We're not trying to be Draconian, we're trying to find a balance.
Well, perhaps I will buy the game.. After I see this activation thing being disabled...
Re:I know it really isn't a rootkit, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Troll my ass (Score:3, Insightful)
Read the Moderator Guidelines.