Banwave 10-11-2016 Discussion

[Demondog70]

Thank you Xarian.

And to add to that why would Blizz create a policy where there are so many variables? The way one country does it versus the next. As I said before and it remains the same today as it was many years ago. Blizz does not IP address ban. It may seem that way to the average person but it is not.

 

[Demondog70]

This wouldnt happen, and before i explain why, even static IPs aint "static". If you ask your ISP for a static IP, this IP is only yours for the duration you rent it, and then it is returned to the pool. If you move 3 months later, then this IP is returned to the pool, and innocent people would be hit by the result of an ip "ban"

Regarding allocation of IPs per subnet;

It makes very little sense for a consumer ISP to provide a subnet, for each household. Where i come from, you only have 1 public IP, your internal network is behind NAT. If i were to be the only one on this subnet, they would allocate 4 IPs to me, now most consumer IPs provided are class C addresses, which means that if an ISP ran by this policy, each household would have a subnet of 4 addresses, resulting in 64 networks per class C range.

You can see why this is very problematic, imagine a city of 1000 people, they would need 4000 subnets alone, imagine the routing congestion on the network in order to operate this, it would be insane.

In order to mitigate routing congestion on the protocol, you want to make sure all subnets are as big as they need to be in order to hold the user addresses required, so if a single street in this city has maybe 200 households, you would allocate 1 subnet to this street, with enough useable addresses(so over 200) to reduce routing congestion, and then use NAT.

Anyway, long story short, IP banning/flagging is unlikely.

Thanks Xarian. This was hashed out as I told him back in the Glider days. People throwed up theories of dorms at colleges where many kids play wow and how Blizz would pick out botters by IP address there. In the end there was no hard evidence ever given to support IP address banning as part of standard policy of Blizzard. Now that's not to say they may not consider doing it in isolated situations given the right atmosphere like the Chinese farmers but it would not be part of standard banning policies for sure.

 

[Demondog70]

Game Master Peniswrinkle here. Happy to help out with your ticket!

This penalty has been upheld with the evidence provided and will not be overturned. The account has been noted for our actions and any disputes that followed.

We apply the appropriate action to your game license specifically. The penalty is also specific to your account so it may not match up with other's reporting a penalty as it may not be pertaining to the same situation. There is an initial review done by the team who penalize the game license first. Then, when appeal like this is sent in, another GM takes a look. I always give the benefit of the doubt and I've checked everywhere I can, but there is no sign of compromise found. The main point to take away is that the LICENSE was penalized not the person playing it or that owns it. However account security falls back on the owner.

Despite the reasoning or explanation submitted, we rely on evidence that our systems can provide. The evidence we have is not in your favor I’m afraid. For security and privacy concerns we're not to disclose our findings. We only utilize solid, provable evidence in our investigation and actions. These are not applied based on reports, but only when confirmed. We are not obligated to provide anymore information than what was sent to you originally.

As a heads up we are not able to adjust, move, or make any changes of any sort to a game license that is in this current state. As far as providing more information, the most we will deliver to you has already been sent over in an email.

From here on out each response you get for repeat disputes may seem generic. That is because we've performed multiple investigations all leading to the same conclusion. The conclusion is that this account will stay closed with no option for overturn. While you may not play this license any longer, you may create a new one and play from there.

I hope this clears the air and gives you some insight. The tone of this letter is on the serious side but only to stay informative!

****This also tells me IP banning is BS.....The new account would get banned if the IP address is blacklisted or flagged....

 

[TheAxester]

honorbuddy's glory days are longgg over boys.

 

[Ultro]

After banveyw were instant bans? Can use the HB now?

 

[Demondog70]

New version up and new additions to Tripwire but still no guarantees as things can change.

 

[Demondog70]

TheAxester - We are not dead yet but we are taking on water now. We need holes patched and quickly to keep the ship afloat.

 

[TheAxester]

lol they didn't patch nothing.

 

[DrDoctor]

honorbuddy's glory days are longgg over boys.

Why so negative? i mean, its your choice to bot or not

 

[Zarm]

So who in this thread wants to now apologise to Bossland? for themselves posting trash and complaining.

 

[Xarian]

So who in this thread wants to now apologise to Bossland? for themselves posting trash and complaining.

What is there to apologise for?

 

[tiguana]

I have an account that was banned for 6 months from the last banwave - as I suspect many of you have too. I am betting that Bliz is going to do a double banwave as soon as all these accounts are released. I think its on Nov 18. Just thought I would throw that out there and say that I plan to wait for that banwave to be over before using HB again.

 

[Demondog70]

Actually they did make modifications to trip wire before reopening bot servers.

 

[tiguana]

Actually they did make modifications to trip wire before reopening bot servers.

But we still don't know what it was that actually caused the banwave. They mentioned something about passive methods... what does that even mean?

 

[sleepysam]

What a bad time to buy HB...

 

[frosticus]

i hear many of you arguing one side or the other on ip bans.

but i think some of you are arguing about different subjects

1. IP bans--banning every account on the same ip when one account is found guilty. using this method today would lead to many false positives leading to a ban because there would not be enough evidence based on a simple ip association. however, their clever use of the word 'concurrent' in the tos leads me to believe any wow account running the same time as HB during a detection window is being found guilty and being banned. which would appear to be an 'ip ban'

2. Blacklisting IP. While this may have been valid before, it is easily debunked as blizzard allows you to create other accounts on that ip. this is not to be confused with an IP ban.

3. Using IP as identifier. Using IP to find and link other accounts on the same computer in an active investigation. your IP is just an identifier along with account name, any pay information saved in bnet, bnet itself, guild, realm, auction trades, f2f trades, hwid, scanned processes. many of the identifiers wouldnt be enough evidence to ban on their own, but together they can easily be used to track accounts you may be running. all of these should be taken into account whenever attempting to ban accounts by association.

 

[Demondog70]

i hear many of you arguing one side or the other on ip bans.

but i think some of you are arguing about different subjects

1. IP bans--banning every account on the same ip when one account is found guilty. using this method today would lead to many false positives leading to a ban because there would not be enough evidence based on a simple ip association. however, their clever use of the word 'concurrent' in the tos leads me to believe any wow account running the same time as HB during a detection window is being found guilty and being banned. which would appear to be an 'ip ban'

2. Blacklisting IP. While this may have been valid before, it is easily debunked as blizzard allows you to create other accounts on that ip. this is not to be confused with an IP ban.

3. Using IP as identifier. Using IP to find and link other accounts on the same computer in an active investigation. your IP is just an identifier along with account name, any pay information saved in bnet, bnet itself, guild, realm, auction trades, f2f trades, hwid, scanned processes. many of the identifiers wouldnt be enough evidence to ban on their own, but together they can easily be used to track accounts you may be running. all of these should be taken into account whenever attempting to ban accounts by association.

Thanks for your input Frosticus.

As I mentioned initially, it was hashed out a millennium ago that IP banning was not being used but other bans may give the appearance of it. I do suspect that a lot goes into a ban such as pattern behaviour, obviously character movement and I am sure a host of other items many we are not even aware of. IP address alone would create far too many issues for Blizz because of the inconsistencies involved. It could be used as a tool however to find links between accounts but then other factors must be played out.

 

[pimpampum]

This wouldnt happen, and before i explain why, even static IPs aint "static". If you ask your ISP for a static IP, this IP is only yours for the duration you rent it, and then it is returned to the pool. If you move 3 months later, then this IP is returned to the pool, and innocent people would be hit by the result of an ip "ban"

Regarding allocation of IPs per subnet;

It makes very little sense for a consumer ISP to provide a subnet, for each household. Where i come from, you only have 1 public IP, your internal network is behind NAT. If i were to be the only one on this subnet, they would allocate 4 IPs to me, now most consumer IPs provided are class C addresses, which means that if an ISP ran by this policy, each household would have a subnet of 4 addresses, resulting in 64 networks per class C range.
...
Anyway, long story short, IP banning/flagging is unlikely.

Pardon me If I reduce the length of your post . Intent is just reducing the total size of my post with the quote.


You too, apparently, are confusing IP bans and IP flagging. Your first paragraph mention that, when a static IP is assigned to a different user, they would be hit by the IP ban. An IP Ban affects all accounts using or used in that specific IP at a specific time frame. As in , all account that used X ip during time between Y and Z. That Ip would be therefore be flagged ( IP flagging) and accounts using them would be investigated extremely fast.

See Public VPNs. Logic is exactly the same. Those are flagged IP's; log from them and your account be instalocked (not banned) for suspicious activity. Once that happen, they will reopen your account, but it botting life will be ridiculously short.

I made it purposely clear on the previous posts (but not clear enough, it seems), that IP flagging is probably not enough to autoban an account; manual investigation would ensue to make sure an account using a flagged IP is using bots.

About Subnet allocation: I'm not sure if your specific ISP uses them the same way that the ones I've used do; but I always considered that the method was internationally used.

Forget about your internal IP completely. 0 relevance, only used for local networks and Intranets. Forget about NAT. I don't even understand why you mention them, to be honest.

All that matters is your external IP; that's the one that anytime your computer connects to a server, is used to ID you.

You can change your Subnet withe ease and that won't mean in any way or form that the Subnet will be assigned only to you (which you said:S), but to a pool of possible users ( some ISP won't allow to change your Subnet directly, but you can contact them and they will).

Anyhow, these matters have long been discussed amongst people who bot for profit. Penalties and procedures are not the same for 1 or 2 account botters. And the ones who know the real facts ( the big botters ) won't even talk in here anymore, cause... fanboys left and right and also people trying to make statements they know nothing for. I'm not talking about you, but take a look at how several people took what you said (wrong) as fact and tried to use it to justify their wishes. Sad.

 

[pimpampum]

i hear many of you arguing one side or the other on ip bans.

but i think some of you are arguing about different subjects

1. IP bans--banning every account on the same ip when one account is found guilty. using this method today would lead to many false positives leading to a ban because there would not be enough evidence based on a simple ip association. however, their clever use of the word 'concurrent' in the tos leads me to believe any wow account running the same time as HB during a detection window is being found guilty and being banned. which would appear to be an 'ip ban'

2. Blacklisting IP. While this may have been valid before, it is easily debunked as blizzard allows you to create other accounts on that ip. this is not to be confused with an IP ban.

3. Using IP as identifier. Using IP to find and link other accounts on the same computer in an active investigation. your IP is just an identifier along with account name, any pay information saved in bnet, bnet itself, guild, realm, auction trades, f2f trades, hwid, scanned processes. many of the identifiers wouldnt be enough evidence to ban on their own, but together they can easily be used to track accounts you may be running. all of these should be taken into account whenever attempting to ban accounts by association.

This.

Btw If Demondog doesn't stop making Statements taken out of his ass my head is gonna explode. In each post he shows even more clearly he has not a clue about pretty much anything.

He just mentioned character movement in a straight up 3rd party program detection.This is getting hilarious.

 

[nerdragemoar]

Way later than I exspected, but I DODGED IT AGAIN! hahaha, man I love the feeling of dogding the hand of god. I figured it would of been pre legion. I guess I should of considered that the people who banwave your bot are busy when an expand is in process. After expand its getting bugs fixed and baning exploits. Makes since how it happend now. GG I survived the banocaust again. 12 110s and loving it.