5 ms·

I wouldn't be surprised if this is the work of a DDOS. I mean Ubisoft probably worked hard to make sure this wouldn't happen so they wouldn't get even more neg

I wouldn't be surprised if this is the work of a DDOS. I mean Ubisoft probably worked hard to make sure this wouldn't happen so they wouldn't get even more negative publicity. The only reasonable explanation I can think of for such a terrible failure is that anti-DRM people are DDOSing the servers.

protomyth 17y ago
Server and networks go down. It happens, and sometimes, no matter how much local testing you do, they only fail when you are at a huge number of users at a peak time (Sunday game playing). They should have expected it to happen and program accordingly.
- NathanKP 17y ago
  That's what I meant, though. They would have expected large numbers of users. They knew how many copies of the game they sold, and should have planned their servers accordingly. Time will tell, though, whether it was a failure on their part or foul play.
ugh 17y ago
Could happen to anybody, really. Who knows, next time I want to play Mafia some DDoS from some anti DRM nutcases will stop me. No, wait …
uriel 17y ago
> The only reasonable explanation I can think of for such a terrible failure is that anti-DRM people are DDOSing the servers. Don't forget Hanlon's razor. It might be a DDoS, but given how stupid was the decision to implement such a DRM scheme in the first place, I would not be surprised if their incompetence also extended to a really lousy and unreliable implementation of the idea.
- prodigal_erik 17y ago
  This. Any DRM scheme that tries to take away users' control over their own open hardware is both despicable and doomed. How smart can you be before you decide you'd rather not have that on your résumé?
baddox 17y ago
Honestly, that is no excuse. Even if every black-hat hacker in the world had it out for a certain game, people who buy physical copies of the game should still be able to play it that day.
- ErrantX 17y ago
  I'm not sure Nathans theory is correct but... Botnets aren't particularly expensive to rent any more; you'd have to be pretty committed to taking ubisoft down but I reckon it's doable.
  - GrandMasterBirt 17y ago
    The point is, to prove a point a DDoS attack can be initiated against Ubi's authentication servers thus making the game unplayable for extended periods of time for legitimate customers only. Even if Ubi takes DDoS into account, the DDoS might slow the servers down just enough to keep kicking people out of their games.
- electromagnetic 17y ago
  Agreed, on initial release the DRM server would be getting hit major amounts due to the massive amounts of pre-orders. You don't pre-order unless you're planning to play it in that first week it's on sale.
- cookiecaper 17y ago
  And we all knew that with the publicity surrounding the new DRM, something like a DDoS at release shouldn't have been a surprise. Ubisoft really should be prepared for these attacks.
illumin8 17y ago
Even if it is a DDOS, the hackers are doing us a favor by reminding us how much DRM harms us as consumers. Let's hope Ubisoft does the right thing, owns up to their epic failure, and patches all DRM out of their games.
- eli 17y ago
  I don't think you'd feel that way if you were one of the people unable to play your fancy new game.
  - shpxnvz 17y ago
    Maybe, but it's hard to feel sorry for anyone who knowingly bought into the deal. I will, on very rare occasions, purchase DRM'd products, but when I do I know full well it's my own darn fault if I end up losing access to them.
    - Psyonic 17y ago
      Not everyone researches the DRM in their games before purchasing. Some people just buy the box at Best Buy. Seems unfair to expect everyone to know these things ahead of time... shouldn't you be able to just buy a box at Best Buy, and rightly expect to play what you paid for?
      - shpxnvz 17y ago
        Hence the "knowingly bought" qualifier. I sure agree that you ought to be able to expect your fair use when you drop your cash, but unfortunately the days are long since past when that's been the case for anything content related.
        Psyonic 17y ago
        Ya that is true, ff they know what they're getting themselves into, I don't feel bad for them. If I had to guess, though, I'd say that the majority probably don't.
elblanco 17y ago
If something you built into your software can get you negative publicity, maybe you shouldn't build it into your software?
fizx 17y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor
- RyanMcGreal 17y ago
  Ubisoft's DRM == malice.
Kadin 17y ago
So they intentionally introduced a gaping DDoS vulnerability into their software? That doesn't exactly make me feel warm and fuzzy. The buck stops with Ubisoft, regardless of whether it's a DDoS or not. There's no good software engineering reason for the failure of one of their servers -- or even all of their servers -- to imperil all of their users, yet they decided to design their product that way anyway. That means it's their fault when the inevitable occurs. (As it would have even without the DDoS, when they decide to shut the authentication servers down if not before.) My grandmother could have seen this coming, and my grandmother has been dead for a long time.
ArcticCelt 17y ago
From an article on Toms Hardware: >It seems that the game may be making repeated requests for authentication between levels before allowing the player to continue. >An early crack was also released for Assassin's Creed II (which hits Australia and Europe before North America's March 9 release), but those who have tried it say that they are unable to advance very far into the game without being sent back to the menu screen. Maybe they are victim of accidental DDOS created by their own DRM security strategy. Maybe the consequences of the "repeated requests for authentication between levels" for hacked versions is what is causing the DDOS. Then hilariously, people who legitimately bought the game but can't connect try to download the hacked version and it only cause more authentication request and make things worst.
nettdata 17y ago
I've done quite a few independent 3rd party tech reviews of a number of game hosting providers, and was (and am) quite shocked at the absolute crap that I saw. Sure, a few were well done and at a level of quality you would expect based on their popularity and sales numbers, but quite a few were shockingly pieces of crap. You're making the assumption that the hosting system they're using is the former, and not the latter. While I don't know anything about their specific situation, I wouldn't just assume that they actually have their shit together. It could very well be that the didn't design or implement a system good enough to handle the requirements of their DRM.
- nettdata 17y ago
  Oh, and I also have a possible theory as to why this is. Game developers are, for the most part, quite smart. When a game company, or any tech company, for that matter, runs into a problem that needs solving, they generally try and solve it in-house to start with. The normal traits that make a developer good at his job (problem solving skills, intelligence, confidence in his/her abilities, etc) sometimes are their own worst enemy, as they feel that they can solve that particular problem. Very rarely have I found smart developers that understand and recognize their limits to the point that they suggest bringing in outside, professional help, rather than tackling the problem themselves. This makes them look bad to management and their peers, and can damage their ego. And it may seem like a fun challenge as well. They honestly think that they can figure out a solution to just about any problem, even if that problem is way outside of their skill set or experience. Personally, my experience is in architecting large, scalable, fault tolerant systems, like online banking, offshore gambling, government stuff, and online global gaming systems. I've been brought into more than a few situations where this has been exactly the case. Sure, the in-house devs have come up with a solution, and they're doing everything that a smart person would do for the first pass at a solution, but they don't have the experience to know what will or won't work down the road. Their first iteration ran into the same problems that every other first iteration had, but their timeline, budgets, and marketing pressures don't afford them the luxury of improving it to where it should be. I have the luxury of the experience to come in with knowledge of the 20th iteration of a solution, and can apply them early on in the process. My current contract is just like that... I made design and implementation decisions early on that seemed to make no sense to the devs, even after I explained the reasoning, but now that we're 8 months down the road and they see those designs in action, they get it. And a lot of that also has to do with the devs lack of experience and understanding of what an operations team needs to run the system. Anyway, this has been some of my experience, and it wouldn't surprise me to find that it could quite possibly be the case here.

protomyth 17y ago

Server and networks go down. It happens, and sometimes, no matter how much local testing you do, they only fail when you are at a huge number of users at a peak time (Sunday game playing). They should have expected it to happen and program accordingly.

NathanKP 17y ago
That's what I meant, though. They would have expected large numbers of users. They knew how many copies of the game they sold, and should have planned their servers accordingly. Time will tell, though, whether it was a failure on their part or foul play.

ugh 17y ago

Could happen to anybody, really. Who knows, next time I want to play Mafia some DDoS from some anti DRM nutcases will stop me. No, wait …

uriel 17y ago

> The only reasonable explanation I can think of for such a terrible failure is that anti-DRM people are DDOSing the servers. Don't forget Hanlon's razor. It might be a DDoS, but given how stupid was the decision to implement such a DRM scheme in the first place, I would not be surprised if their incompetence also extended to a really lousy and unreliable implementation of the idea.

prodigal_erik 17y ago
This. Any DRM scheme that tries to take away users' control over their own open hardware is both despicable and doomed. How smart can you be before you decide you'd rather not have that on your résumé?

baddox 17y ago

Honestly, that is no excuse. Even if every black-hat hacker in the world had it out for a certain game, people who buy physical copies of the game should still be able to play it that day.

ErrantX 17y ago
I'm not sure Nathans theory is correct but... Botnets aren't particularly expensive to rent any more; you'd have to be pretty committed to taking ubisoft down but I reckon it's doable.
- GrandMasterBirt 17y ago
  The point is, to prove a point a DDoS attack can be initiated against Ubi's authentication servers thus making the game unplayable for extended periods of time for legitimate customers only. Even if Ubi takes DDoS into account, the DDoS might slow the servers down just enough to keep kicking people out of their games.
electromagnetic 17y ago
Agreed, on initial release the DRM server would be getting hit major amounts due to the massive amounts of pre-orders. You don't pre-order unless you're planning to play it in that first week it's on sale.
cookiecaper 17y ago
And we all knew that with the publicity surrounding the new DRM, something like a DDoS at release shouldn't have been a surprise. Ubisoft really should be prepared for these attacks.

illumin8 17y ago

Even if it is a DDOS, the hackers are doing us a favor by reminding us how much DRM harms us as consumers. Let's hope Ubisoft does the right thing, owns up to their epic failure, and patches all DRM out of their games.

eli 17y ago
I don't think you'd feel that way if you were one of the people unable to play your fancy new game.
- shpxnvz 17y ago
  Maybe, but it's hard to feel sorry for anyone who knowingly bought into the deal. I will, on very rare occasions, purchase DRM'd products, but when I do I know full well it's my own darn fault if I end up losing access to them.
  - Psyonic 17y ago
    Not everyone researches the DRM in their games before purchasing. Some people just buy the box at Best Buy. Seems unfair to expect everyone to know these things ahead of time... shouldn't you be able to just buy a box at Best Buy, and rightly expect to play what you paid for?
    - shpxnvz 17y ago
      Hence the "knowingly bought" qualifier. I sure agree that you ought to be able to expect your fair use when you drop your cash, but unfortunately the days are long since past when that's been the case for anything content related.
      - Psyonic 17y ago
        Ya that is true, ff they know what they're getting themselves into, I don't feel bad for them. If I had to guess, though, I'd say that the majority probably don't.

elblanco 17y ago

If something you built into your software can get you negative publicity, maybe you shouldn't build it into your software?

fizx 17y ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor

RyanMcGreal 17y ago
Ubisoft's DRM == malice.

Kadin 17y ago

So they intentionally introduced a gaping DDoS vulnerability into their software? That doesn't exactly make me feel warm and fuzzy. The buck stops with Ubisoft, regardless of whether it's a DDoS or not. There's no good software engineering reason for the failure of one of their servers -- or even all of their servers -- to imperil all of their users, yet they decided to design their product that way anyway. That means it's their fault when the inevitable occurs. (As it would have even without the DDoS, when they decide to shut the authentication servers down if not before.) My grandmother could have seen this coming, and my grandmother has been dead for a long time.

ArcticCelt 17y ago

From an article on Toms Hardware: >It seems that the game may be making repeated requests for authentication between levels before allowing the player to continue. >An early crack was also released for Assassin's Creed II (which hits Australia and Europe before North America's March 9 release), but those who have tried it say that they are unable to advance very far into the game without being sent back to the menu screen. Maybe they are victim of accidental DDOS created by their own DRM security strategy. Maybe the consequences of the "repeated requests for authentication between levels" for hacked versions is what is causing the DDOS. Then hilariously, people who legitimately bought the game but can't connect try to download the hacked version and it only cause more authentication request and make things worst.

nettdata 17y ago

I've done quite a few independent 3rd party tech reviews of a number of game hosting providers, and was (and am) quite shocked at the absolute crap that I saw. Sure, a few were well done and at a level of quality you would expect based on their popularity and sales numbers, but quite a few were shockingly pieces of crap. You're making the assumption that the hosting system they're using is the former, and not the latter. While I don't know anything about their specific situation, I wouldn't just assume that they actually have their shit together. It could very well be that the didn't design or implement a system good enough to handle the requirements of their DRM.

nettdata 17y ago
Oh, and I also have a possible theory as to why this is. Game developers are, for the most part, quite smart. When a game company, or any tech company, for that matter, runs into a problem that needs solving, they generally try and solve it in-house to start with. The normal traits that make a developer good at his job (problem solving skills, intelligence, confidence in his/her abilities, etc) sometimes are their own worst enemy, as they feel that they can solve that particular problem. Very rarely have I found smart developers that understand and recognize their limits to the point that they suggest bringing in outside, professional help, rather than tackling the problem themselves. This makes them look bad to management and their peers, and can damage their ego. And it may seem like a fun challenge as well. They honestly think that they can figure out a solution to just about any problem, even if that problem is way outside of their skill set or experience. Personally, my experience is in architecting large, scalable, fault tolerant systems, like online banking, offshore gambling, government stuff, and online global gaming systems. I've been brought into more than a few situations where this has been exactly the case. Sure, the in-house devs have come up with a solution, and they're doing everything that a smart person would do for the first pass at a solution, but they don't have the experience to know what will or won't work down the road. Their first iteration ran into the same problems that every other first iteration had, but their timeline, budgets, and marketing pressures don't afford them the luxury of improving it to where it should be. I have the luxury of the experience to come in with knowledge of the 20th iteration of a solution, and can apply them early on in the process. My current contract is just like that... I made design and implementation decisions early on that seemed to make no sense to the devs, even after I explained the reasoning, but now that we're 8 months down the road and they see those designs in action, they get it. And a lot of that also has to do with the devs lack of experience and understanding of what an operations team needs to run the system. Anyway, this has been some of my experience, and it wouldn't surprise me to find that it could quite possibly be the case here.