unforum

[addlepated]

Brute force - definition?

[jamesi]

Re: Brute force - definition?

[addlepated]

Re: Brute force - definition?

[jamesi]

Congrats -- you've left me speechless.

[Wolf]

As a former PM, I can say this:

1) The PMs should never ever break the fourth wall and participate in their own game, even as a red herring or shill.
2) Dictionary scripts/hacks are a huge no-no. If they wanted you to hack them you'd know it by what they tell you.
3) Brute forcing sucks and costs bandwidth and cash. If you try it, be prepared to make a large cash donation to the folks running the game.
4) We can see you. You have an IP. We know what it is.
5) Whois info is almost never relevant. Get over it and leave it alone.

[vpisteve]

Whois info used to be relevant as a possible clue or piece of a puzzle, until the legal requirement came out that all info in whois registration must be accurate, not fictitious.

[Wolf]

Oh, it's still relevant as a possible clue, but it's not a clue. And just because the law requires it doesn't mean we won't still lie.

And Dan and Anson aren't related, either.

[vpisteve]

/me sobs uncontrollably.

[krystyn]

Not to mention that sometimes the bots missed stuff, or players would miss what the changes meant!

We sometimes did false updates to pages in Lockjaw, because it was so irritating to watch people sit back and wait for the bot to tell them when to play. Players stopped thinking about the game as much, and became very passive in respect to where the game was going.

I can say with confidence that there were several nuances and small puzzle elements completely missed by players, because they taught themselves to equate updates with plot advancement.

Sure, you're sitting in front of the New Boob Tube (your computer monitor), but you're short-changing yourself as a player if you let your brain turn to mush as quickly as your butt.

[sauceykat]

I see all of your points re: port scanning, scripts, etc. but what about the case in Acheron where the PM supposedly gave people the tools to scan ports, hack, etc.?

Just curious what the rules would be in that situation...

[Wolf]

[sauceykat]

[Digital Avatar]

The basic tenets of "netiquette" as defined by the collective Terms of Service and Acceptable Use Policies of various ISPs, as well as local, state and federal laws, should set the boundaries for ARGs.

In other words, to expand on what someone mentioned above... whois, dig, traceroute or other commonly accepted practices should be fair game... However, violating the terms of service or acceptable use policy of your intenet service provider is clearly unacceptable. This may include, but not be llimited to, hacking, scanning, joe-jobbing, spamming, DoS attacks, brute force scripts, etc.

The funny thing is... Some people seem to think this sort of activity elevates their status in the internet community. The truth is, those of us in the internet security community look at "script kiddies" as a most amateurish nuisance.

i.e. brute forcing, packet flooding, etc. doesn't impress anyone with real skills. ("5|<1LLz" for those of you who think "Swordfish" and "Hackers" contain realistic portrayals of hacking and IPv4 topology.)

[Abraxas]

The person who created the guide on Cloudmakers is against whois digging. I wondered if UF is generally inviting one to use whois information or not. From this little bit I read it seems to be ok. And in the short time I have been here it was sometimes necessary to use it for confirmation whether or not a site is in-game or not.

But there's the catch: I think originally you were never meant to know what is inside the game and what is outside of it. Because TINAG was the whole experience. Did things change and with it the use of whois or is it still the same? Should PMs just protect their information better and is it their fault if vital information is found that way?

[jamesi]

Personally, I've always found whois information to be 'fair game' as far as shared knowledge is concerned -- strictly in the Out-Of-Game realm, of course.