So, I won't be playing Saints Row now.. >.<
I got it bought for me as a present and it wanted me to download 9gb F£$KOFF VALVE. If you can't get a game RIGHT on RELEASE so it can be installed without downloading 9gb f-off.
Anti-piracy.. cool, fine.. Microsoft Activation, don't like it but hey its ok its only a couple of KB connection and its finished..
Monday 26 December 2011
Steam prime target for Virus Creators
There are a few basic things a virus must do to be successfull:
One method for limiting viral harm is limiting exposure. This can, in most instances, be done simply by only allowing connections to known secure IP addresses. This means that any virus incomming has also circumvented the security of a secure peer.
Sadly, this is made impossible by some product designs. Steam being the worst case. Internet load balancing should not be happening at the user client (in Steam client this is the case). Regional internet servers should be setup and DNS resolution should load balance within a small range of IP addresses for each area / network region. So, for example, Steam requested in Chicago should not be contacting an address in China (as an example found happening using Windows Update) for an update. It should be load balanced between up to 10 servers within a sensible range.
Steam just appears to try to load balance between 100's of servers. It could be possible they may have 100's of servers within my region, I am however exceedingly dubious of this (I don't think so).
Anyway, the point is, because steam connects to a massive range of IP addresses it is not easily possible to secure against viral attack, since either one must learn every single IP used by steam or just give up and allow Steam total free communications (inviting it as a great launch platform for any form of viral infection. Infect the process with the most permissions and or the most freedom).
The second evil of steam is it cannot run in a non elevated state.
I actually find myself HOPING someone targets Steam because they are behaving like Tyrants.
Oh, and yes.. Windows Update is nearly as bad (but at least I could conceivably mangage Windows Updates Manually).
- Replicate and
- Remain Hidden,
One method for limiting viral harm is limiting exposure. This can, in most instances, be done simply by only allowing connections to known secure IP addresses. This means that any virus incomming has also circumvented the security of a secure peer.
Sadly, this is made impossible by some product designs. Steam being the worst case. Internet load balancing should not be happening at the user client (in Steam client this is the case). Regional internet servers should be setup and DNS resolution should load balance within a small range of IP addresses for each area / network region. So, for example, Steam requested in Chicago should not be contacting an address in China (as an example found happening using Windows Update) for an update. It should be load balanced between up to 10 servers within a sensible range.
Steam just appears to try to load balance between 100's of servers. It could be possible they may have 100's of servers within my region, I am however exceedingly dubious of this (I don't think so).
Anyway, the point is, because steam connects to a massive range of IP addresses it is not easily possible to secure against viral attack, since either one must learn every single IP used by steam or just give up and allow Steam total free communications (inviting it as a great launch platform for any form of viral infection. Infect the process with the most permissions and or the most freedom).
The second evil of steam is it cannot run in a non elevated state.
I actually find myself HOPING someone targets Steam because they are behaving like Tyrants.
Oh, and yes.. Windows Update is nearly as bad (but at least I could conceivably mangage Windows Updates Manually).
Friday 2 December 2011
Modern Gaming Industry standard business practices styfles economy
It occured to me today that the way modern gaming products launch (in legal terms) is completely designed so that they might reap any revenue which comes from the game. This, at first glance, makes complete sense. They put in the effort, they should be receiving the appropriate reward.
Then, I thought on this. The manor in which they seek to "protect there investment" almost excludes any other business (unless that business is going to be paying them a healthy fee and secondly divulge entirely their enterprise up front in case they where having to be already going to do that).
So, in short, its quickly not viable for others to produce related items for profit.
I only really noticed this on realising how MineCraft has had the opposite effect with its approach. The relative openness of the developer and his company has lead to many, many spin-off "developments" which may or may not earn each person a seperate profit.
Basicly, to my mind here, the lesson is simple. Less restrictive practices and looser licencing lead to economic boom.
Then, I thought on this. The manor in which they seek to "protect there investment" almost excludes any other business (unless that business is going to be paying them a healthy fee and secondly divulge entirely their enterprise up front in case they where having to be already going to do that).
So, in short, its quickly not viable for others to produce related items for profit.
I only really noticed this on realising how MineCraft has had the opposite effect with its approach. The relative openness of the developer and his company has lead to many, many spin-off "developments" which may or may not earn each person a seperate profit.
Basicly, to my mind here, the lesson is simple. Less restrictive practices and looser licencing lead to economic boom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)