StarForce has been checked. No root-kits found

[Catfish]

Hello,
Gizzmoe, you do not really think that logging in as administrator with all appropriate rights does the ring 0 thing ? SF does that at the most basic system level i can imagine, and no Firewall or virus protection will even inform you about this ("Spybot" and "Hijack this" probably will if configured properly).

Most recent Windows XP security updates did not inform me about this. There is no use spreading panic but it is allowed to call a spade a spade. If some software makes my system vulnerable i do not say "i don't care, there are other programs that also may harm my PC" - what kind of argument is that ?

I am almost sure that the SF company will not use backdoors to spy on my or some company's PC, but it is physically possible for everyone who knows about this. Hackers, ok. Would you call your own government "hackers" if they spied on your PC for security reasons ? I don't think so. I guess SF is not a problem because a game like SH3 or other software using SF copy "protection" is not installed on most company's LANs. At least not where i am responsible for net security lol.

And what really pi**es me off: I know i have to unistall SF when i want to use my burner, this almost has become a rite in a way, but no post here will make me love or buy any software in the future if it fools around with my private property and my PC's capabilities in that way. My private opinion, ok.

Greetings,
Catfish

[Gizzmoe]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Hello,
Gizzmoe, you do not really think that logging in as administrator with all appropriate rights does the ring 0 thing ?

No, but admin rights gives a virus/trojan/malware the opportunity to install a system driver and then later attack the hardware. For some hardware attacks you don´t even need a special driver, like overclocking the GPU (if the card supports it) or flashing an optical drive. Some boards even allow the BIOS to be flashed under Windows.

My point is simply that this whole thing isn´t black/white, there are many shades of gray. It´s not like "SF installed=everything can happen" and "SF not installed=nothing can happen". Once you start a program that was made to harm your system or was made to spy on you and that your anti-virus/anti-spyware software doesn´t know yet and you are logged in with admin rights you are basically ********d, no matter if SF is installed or not.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by catfish

If some software makes my system vulnerable i do not say "i don't care, there are other programs that also may harm my PC" - what kind of argument is that ?

Then you have a problem my friend, because software exploits exist in all software. Even Wordpad can be a potential gateway into your computer. Rants like the one here will not make companies rethink their policies, nor will it grow them a conciounse.

All software is exploitable, the only factor that makes this not such a public outrage is that some exploits are less known on a wider base then others. So if that is your attitude towards software you have quite a few companies to continue giveing an argument to including, "All the ones who wrote and published the software on your computer, your OS and all of the companies who designed your hardware because FirmWare is also exploitable." Hence the need for patches every week.

[Soulcommander]

Rants here will not make a company change there policies is true.
But we use this Media type to generate awareness.
And Ubisoft is now aware of this thread.

Please act professional will you?

SC

[ThirteenthHouR]

Originally Posted by Gizzmoe

I never really cared about the Ring 0 situation. The vast majority of gamers log in with admin rights, that alone makes their systems 100% attackable, also on a hardware level. Even in a company environment there sometimes are many Windows installations that don´t use restricted user rights. A virus writer who plans to kill a huge amount of 2000/XP-based PC´s doesn´t need the help of SF and I guess you know that, right?

Yes I fully agree that a lot of people do run with full admin, however they also tend to run with Anti-virus, Firewalls and Anti spyware apps. (Before you jump on me I know some peeps don't have the technical realisation of the dangers to their system if they don't run some sort of protection, that is why XP SP2's firewall defaults to the on position when SP2 is installed and it will keep nagging you if its turned off and you do not go in an set it to a firewall that you will monitor yourself. If you do that without any form of firewall then basically you would not care even if starforce allowed 100,000,000 systems to be killed. So basically your argument is fundementally flawed in its example.

I will say in reply, yes any one with malicious intent can gain access , but why give them a helping hand?

I am really trying to understand your uncooperative attitude?

Do you have vested interest in DRM's?

If not why are you on the defensive?

I ask this because at any time have I forced anything upon you, like "You must boycott starforce"?

In fact I have not!

False information was being posted and by the request of another member I came hear to post the facts. So that those who want to have their systems secure can at least be aware of a security issue.

Your afforementioned response is as much as saying, "Gamers are too stupid so why bother". Personally I think they will be quite offended by such an insinuation.

People are naive if they think that the things you´ve described can´t happen just because SF is no longer on their system. The real danger to a PC are those people who open every suspicious email attachment, who don´t install security updates, who allow all standard XP services to run and so on...

Excuse me did anybody at anytime say, removing Starforce will secure your system 100% in fact did anyone even pose that question in the first place?

Well in fact no they did not, btw how long have you been a clairvoyant? I am just asking as you seem to know what everybody is thinking without actually asking them...

As Mustang has already pointed out, you are spreading panic! You should really try to put things into perspective. Again, once you use admin rights your system is, generally speaking, wide open. Even with restricted user rights and without SF a piece of malware can do very nasty things. There’s no such thing as a risk-free PC.

Spreading panic is only normally referred in such sistuations if such comments are made without processes of correcting the situation being put firmly in place.

Read this thread again.

DMA step down: Howto on correcting this problem is posted.

(Code 41) error: Howto on correcting this problem is posted.

Ring 0: A howto remove Starforce is posted. Due to Copyright Protection laws we cannot legally post a Starforce patch even if we had one. So until SF get off their backsides this is the only cure for that issue.


Now if you had cared to research the information relating to myself you would that I am a Software developer, an online journalist and that I own and run a number of tech support sites. As an example http://www.n-gage-help.com if you look in the forums their, you will see that recently we have added pro and anti Starforce sections. This is so that both sides have equal footing on the arguments that they may want to present. (Which is considerably more responsible than the falsified news report on CDfreaks that this thread refers to)

I have a reputation of being fair and honest in my responses. I would not endorse anything such as a boycott without fully researching possible fixes for the scenario's that have presented themselves.

There is more to this SF situation than is being declared but I will not go public upon that until I have the full documented evidence to support it.

The only thing I can legally state at the moment is look up Carnivore (and I do not mean meat eaters) you can draw your own conclusions from what you find.

Getting back to what can be declared. If SF had come forward and said even off the record, “we are having problems, give us a few weeks to sort this�. Then those of us who understand how the system works would have taken a step back, or as in my case I would have volunteered the technical data to help resolve these problems.

Instead they ignore the issues, release bogus sales spiel in new reports and create a joke of a challenge. In which if you do understand the processes. It’s nothing more than very bad Hacker style PR 'stacked in their favour'.

Let me ask you something, do you not know who Starforce really are?

Do you not remember their black hat days in the 1980's?

Don't get me wrong most of us where black hats in them days, all I am saying is nobody trusted them as far as they could throw them when they where black hats. So it would be crazy to trust them as White hats.

Anyway I have no argument with you, I don’t totally understand your negative stance on peeps trying to help fellow gamers out of ridiculous situation that they never should have been put in, but that negative stance is your choice and in no way am I going to force my opinions upon you.

Again if you choose to run SF with all the risks involved then that is also your choice.

All we are doing is supplying the information so that others who may not know about SF. also have that choice.

As the Games companies and Starforce Technologies never gave them a choice as to if SF is installed on their systems or not.

Please don’t try quoting the EULA, as EULA’s cannot cover security issues, even if they are unintentional, if SF had been above board about this then yes they could have used the EULA as a defence. However that defence went out the window when they resorted to bad pressing and flaming peeps who tried to help other with the SF issues.

You may notice that despite me being extremely high profile. SF has not yet dared to issue such comments about me.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by Soulcommander

Rants here will not make a company change there policies is true.
But we use this Media type to generate awareness.
And Ubisoft is now aware of this thread.

Please act professional will you?

SC

I'm fairly certain Ubi knew about this thread since the start considering many SH3 Developer are Avid Sub-Gamers and this place is the authority on Sub Games.

As for acting professional. I fail to see what kind of skill it takes to boycott and petition something. Awareness, is that what you think justifies spamming every forum on the net? If you want to educate people say your piece and then move on, stop saying about how valiantly you try to reach the people. Stay on TOPIC. You want people to know about your problems, that's fine. But you don't have to go everywhere thinking you are some freedom fighter with a just Cause and tell everyone this is right or that is not as if you were some authority on what is right or not to begin with.

And next time ask the owners of a board before you try and wage some kind of media war with a coorperate office which is of no relation on someone else's forums.

[ThirteenthHouR]

Really all I can say is come on guys lighten up a bit, there is no point to these arguments, nobody seems to be disagreeing with the fact that SF is a nasty bit of software, of which even the creators do not seem to be quite sure of its real purpose (if you read their sales spiel)

Is a boycott the right way to go?

Well nobody really knows until we try it!

So responding to pessimistic "Why bother posts" is really not worth our time. If persons making such posts really had anything productive to say then they would have said it.

As I said before its their choice to be that way, others with more common sense approach to their computer security will not pay any attention to their flamebait.


I will rise to one part and only one part: because of how serious that acusation is.

Spamming?

I suggest you find out the actual definition of that before you start making a serious acusation of illegal activity. We did not start this thread, nor did we post any of the falsified information that was being presented as fact.

Personally I am an IT/Games developer. With over 25 years professional experience in the field. I have not nor do I ever intend to spam other webmasters sites.


I suggest you read the FAQ.

What are Subsim.com's editorial policies?
The Radio Room forum is not the place for flaming, spewing, or otherwise mouthing off. We do not allow posts where people are called idiots, morons, etc. We respect your freedom of speech, we ask that you respect our rules. You are welcome to express your opinion about games and other subjects. We do not want SUBSIM Review and the Radio Room forums to degenerate into a collection of *This game sux!!!!* and other immature rants. Like something or dislike something about a game, express your thoughts in reasoned and responsible terms. There are any number of forums which allow unbridled idiocy to reign, we want the Radio Room to be a civil, mature forum for discussions about naval and subsims, tactics, mods, playing tips, troubleshooting, and submarine topics in general. As such, we retain the right to edit and/or delete posts we find offensive. We also have the right to ban users who contribute to poisoning the well. Just as a radio talk host has the right to decide who he airs and a newspaper editor decides whose letters he prints and whose he throws away, the moderators in the Radio Room forums have final say on rants and spews they decide should be cut.

We supplied factual information in relation to a misleading post that could have harmed fellow gamers systems, the flames that followed against us are not actually permitted here.

[Mustang]

Spam isn't illegal, where in the world did legality come from?

I wasn't awhere anything said here was costituted as a flame.

As for your credentials, you have made them quite clear. Which is my point. Everyone here just keeps saying the same bloody thing. You complain about Ring-"0" Gizzmoe says he wants proof its a PRESENT THREAT and SC is trying to make yet another Topic into a big hot topic for his ANTI-SF campaign. And I'm just repeating myself which I really don't like and if you read this topic you would see I posted in here about much the same thing you yourself have said.

So all we have here is a topic that goes nowhere with the Anti-SF the Pro-SF and the Neutral-SF in yet another long and drawn out topic

My complaint here is that this topic was idle and in the few days from when I first posted, I learned from many of the members here that they don't appreciate topics of this sort. So I will say based on what I was told by the subSim patrons here and again suggest you ask /THEM/ before bringing the war against SF over here.

Your right, you did not start this topic and it was based on falsified info but enough about this "We're just protecting others" nonsense, you know a word to the wise, "The Path to Destruction is often paved with good intentions." you damage your position more then reinforce it, you spread your topics too far for them to serve any real purpose.

[Gizzmoe]

Excuse me did anybody at anytime say, removing Starforce will secure your system 100% in fact did anyone even pose that question in the first place?

Well in fact no they did not, btw how long have you been a clairvoyant? I am just asking as you seem to know what everybody is thinking without actually asking them...

Quite a few people here and elsewhere on the Internet don´t know very much about computers. This can result in informations being misunderstood or misinterpreted, that´s normal. Generally people are somewhat worried about SF, but many have decided not to remove it, because it hasn´t affected them or they simply want to play the games and they don´t know how to play the games without SF. One could also say that they are not "worried enough" yet, so they don´t remove SF.

Any additional negative information about SF is usually being presented by people with an agenda. This has resulted in sometimes very one-sided informations. The use of fear tactics - intentionally or not - was and still is quite common. Also sometimes rumors are being presented as facts, because they "want to believe".

What I´m trying to do here is to put things into perspective, nothing more, nothing less. I only (need to) do this if someone posts informations in a way that could lead to unhelpful paranoia/panic.

PS: You said you are a software developer, an online journalist and that you own and run a number of tech support sites. I´m not impressed. In your post you tried to portrait me as a bad boy, said that I have an "uncooperative attitude", tried to imply that I´ve basically said "Gamers are too stupid so why bother", imply that I have a "negative stance on peeps trying to help fellow gamers out of ridiculous situation" and so on. You shouldn´t have said all this, it was very unprofessional and it´s simply not true.

There is more to this SF situation than is being declared but I will not go public upon that until I have the full documented evidence to support it.

The only thing I can legally state at the moment is look up Carnivore (and I do not mean meat eaters) you can draw your own conclusions from what you find.

I know what Carnivore is, but it´s hard for me to draw a conclusion in relation to SF. If I would be paranoid I would say that if you find what I think you could find it would be one of the biggest scandals in the history of IT and that you put yourself in danger just for trying to find evidence. But as I´m not paranoid I just say "Let us wait and see".

[jumpy]

Damn! so much rhetoric lol
All I know for sure it that having removed SF my DVD-RW no longer spinns up endlessly when I boot my machine. It never did it before SF, it did it during SF, and now SF is gone from my system it doesn't do it anymore.
Suggestions like 'why don't you format your system and test your stuff because how can you categorically say SF is causing the issues' is just not practical or fair for most home users. Indeed I don't see why I should have to play at 'beta-tester' for a product that I had to pay good monety for - therein lies the root of the problem for most users and the split between those who know SF is responsible and those who think SF has nothing to do with these problems, and those people like me who noticed something amiss with their system and didn't want to gamble on the chance that everything would turn out just fine if they leave things to get on by themselves.

I'm not going to comment on weather I think SF problems are somehow 'deliberate' or in some way intentional on the part of the developers, how would I know anyway? I'm just little old me who noticed that my PC was experiencing some of the symptoms of the 'troubles' associated with SF- information about which I saw right here on Subsim.com.

Impartiality and benefit of the doubt is all very well and good Gizzmoe, but I'm sure you can understand how this can rankle those who are fairly sure SF did something fairly serious to their system, particularity when SF is so reticent on giving those who might have trouble a voice with which to explore the problems and solutions raised. I'm reasonably sure SF was not behaving itself on my machine, wheather this is a reasult of some system conflict or shoddy programing, I really don't care, suffice to say I was not willing to trust to luck that everything would turn out ok. Does this mean I have an agenda too?

I think possibly the fact that there is so little official response to the 'troubles' with SF is part of the problem here. Regardless of the truth of the matter, stating that people who are having trouble and complaining about SF are 'beginner level hackers' was a recipie for disaster from the very outset.

Fortunately for me and many others, there are places like subsim.com where average users can get together and share information (technically correct and informed or other otherwise makes no difference to me). Hopefully this dissemination will improve the SF situation one way or another. As the saying goes 'there's no smoke without fire'.
Without any official response to the questions raised with SF the rest of us are doomed to repeat the same old points of view and experience without any real progress one way or another. Until such a response is forthcoming, I can't see any other outcome other than what we have already; Believers, non-believers and agnostics hehe and all that those terms imply.

[Gizzmoe]

Originally Posted by jumpy

Impartiality and benefit of the doubt is all very well and good Gizzmoe, but I'm sure you can understand how this can rankle those who are fairly sure SF did something fairly serious to their system

Yes, I can understand that. By the way, benefit of doubt, yes, but I´m not impartial. The sooner SF in its current form goes away the better.

[ThirteenthHouR]

Rather than get caught up in whats going on here.

Agenda: if an agenda means to give people the benefit of choice, then yes I have an agenda.

Yes I support a Boycott, but only because there is no other option out there for the average gamer to legally voice their opinion in a manner that will even be remotely listened to by the corporations.

Anybody that believes that by reducing profit that you won't get the attention of corporations, is sadly mistaken.

Like do you think the anti-piracy software is just there to protect the average programmers rights?

It's their to protect companies profits, heck I am not going to complain about that because if there was no money in it then we would not get decent big budget software.

What I am more concerned with is that the problems SF presents not only harms the consumers trust in a product, it can potentially do serious damage to the very industry that we rely upon for our games and apps if it was allowed to continue in the current format.

So we come to The problem we have with either the boycott or informing peeps so they have choice, is that we are also damaging that consumer trust and I accept that its very fine line we tread between active opposition and more radical elements that join for the sake of screwing up the system.


Setting aside the boycott and SF security issues:

Realistically everybody loves their games. However how many of you would be happy with the fact that if you upgrade your system that the games will cease to function because of these DRM's. Not because the game itself in non compatible.

SATA is now the de-facto standard on new systems and the clash between SF and SATA is well documented.


On another note, yes spam is illegal....

[Soulcommander]

13thour...Let me make a suggestion bro.

Lets not post on this thread any longer. Let these that support Starforce talk amongst themselves.

John Channing for your information was contacted by me long before I posted. And he was contacted about this thread as well.

As far as Ubisoft they were NOT aware of this thread. I contacted them about it and also CDfreaks post and the Starforce article.
They knew nothing about it, and are now getting the information to the proper authorities. I guess you have no idea who I am.


My intentions are to help people and inform...They always have been.

And I am surprised that Gizzmoe who has spent hours on the phone with me has not come on here to defend my intentions.

As far as this thread is concerned the poster should have done his homework before he posted. The link provided to cdfreaks is not completly accurate and I beleive they hijacked information from previous posts and such and added to them what they felt would give them some credibility.

Again I suggest that this thread just die or the title of it be changed...It is not helping anyone and for anyone to find the truth about the link provided by Drebble they would have to reach far down into the pages to see my post.


SO again.............I post this:

The LINK has info in it that is a LIE. Mark never talked to any Magazine......I urge all of you to write a letter and express your concern over this deception.
management@cdfreaks.com


I just got a response from Mark and he said this:

No magazine. I don't know where they got that.




Original Email:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Larry
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 2:21 PM
To: Mark Russinovich
Subject: Starforce


Hello again Mark...
I read this article http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/12970 And Was wondering what Magazine contacted you? I thought it was probably I that was first to contact you. Can you name the magazine please?

Thank you,
Larry

[Soulcommander]

13thour...Let me make a suggestion bro.

Lets not post on this thread any longer. Let these that support Starforce talk amongst themselves.

John Channing for your information was contacted by me long before I posted. And he was contacted about this thread as well.

As far as Ubisoft they were NOT aware of this thread. I contacted them about it and also CDfreaks post and the Starforce article.
They knew nothing about it, and are now getting the information to the proper authorities. I guess you have no idea who I am.


My intentions are to help people and inform...They always have been.

And I am surprised that Gizzmoe who has spent hours on the phone with me has not come on here to defend my intentions.

As far as this thread is concerned the poster should have done his homework before he posted. The link provided to cdfreaks is not completly accurate and I beleive they hijacked information from previous posts and such and added to them what they felt would give them some credibility.

Again I suggest that this thread just die or the title of it be changed...It is not helping anyone and for anyone to find the truth about the link provided by Drebble they would have to reach far down into the pages to see my post.


SO again.............I post this:

The LINK has info in it that is a LIE. Mark never talked to any Magazine......I urge all of you to write a letter and express your concern over this deception.
management@cdfreaks.com


I just got a response from Mark and he said this:

No magazine. I don't know where they got that.




Original Email:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Larry
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 2:21 PM
To: Mark Russinovich
Subject: Starforce


Hello again Mark...
I read this article http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/12970 And Was wondering what Magazine contacted you? I thought it was probably I that was first to contact you. Can you name the magazine please?

Thank you,
Larry

[Gizzmoe]

Originally Posted by Soulcommander

And I am surprised that Gizzmoe who has spent hours on the phone with me has not come on here to defend my intentions.

Defend your intentions? What are you talking about? What did you expect me to do?