5 ms·
the original binary doesn't need to be modified in any way It's easy for Ubisoft to also force the binary to be cracked: have the client request the server sig
by jskinner 17y ago
the original binary doesn't need to be modified in any way
It's easy for Ubisoft to also force the binary to be cracked: have the client request the server sign a random token with its private key, and verify it with a public key embedded into the client. This way a third party server could only be written if the client was also cracked to either change the key or remove the check.
- tumult 17y agoTrue. It's a loss for them either way -- if Ubisoft goes out of their way to add this feature, the effort required by the crackers is proportionally smaller. I tend to think most of the draconian copyrape is actually internal political maneuvering at these large publishers. Ways for one department to counter another's with figures "look! After implementing xxx DRM scheme in order to prevent loss from copyright infringers in market yyy, total predicted sales volume was not met by zzz! In addition, piracy rates remained at or above zzz1! This proves that our console-focused sales track etc etc" Kind of like how the digital distribution from EA for Crysis actually did not work at all, probably on purpose, for various reasons pertaining to retail and corporate in-fighting (my theory, anyway.)
- brown9-2 17y agoIsn't this the type of "check at startup" that the article mentions hackers can easily null out?
- pyre 17y agoMaybe game designers should take lessons from Skype in making it as hard as possible to disassemble/hack the binary.
- eru 17y agoDo you know why Skype is so keen on obfuscation?
- nitrogen 17y agoSomething tells me both game developers and crackers have been at this a lot longer than Skype... I remember playing cracked Atari games as a young kid, but back then I didn't know what "cracked" meant. In case anyone wonders, I found the games in a huge box of 360K floppies that came with the Atari system when I got it.