6 ms·

I reverse engineered Paradox's binary format for their save files. Part of this process is extracting a table of 16 bit ids to text representations. I asked Par

I reverse engineered Paradox's binary format for their save files. Part of this process is extracting a table of 16 bit ids to text representations. I asked Paradox if I could open source this table, but they replied that I was already breaking the ToS. The solution I've come up with is to open source the logic but commit the table as a gpg encrypted payload (for which only I have the key). So you could say that Paradox is sensitive when it comes to people poking around or pushing boundaries.

jcranmer 6y ago
I've definitely seen discussions of the binary format on the forums in the past. I wrote my own script for figuring out what the table for the 16-bit IDs was, but I've never committed the result anywhere.
meibo 6y ago
ToS are irrelevant and you should have published it anyways, under a name different from the one you use on the forums and in-game. Open knowledge is important, especially in video game scenes where elitism is a real issue, stopping people from getting into great hobbies that I'm sure many only got into due to that one person that didn't give in to elitism and bothered to listen and to answer questions.
- Ygg2 6y ago
  > ToS are irrelevant That's some bad advice. ToS are irrelevant only if you don't expect retaliation from ToS owner, or the costs are trivial. > Open knowledge is important, especially in video game scenes where elitism is a real issue Open knowledge? This is reverse engineering someone's cash cow. Kinda like claiming Win 10 code is open knowledge. Video game scenes? Elitist? It's just a silly option in some medieval sim. There are other games that allow these kinds of things. Massive chalice for example. By that stretch, why not complain Hearts of Iron don't allow you to create a third Furry side in WW2? Or if you really want to be part of video game scene make your own. But I doubt you'd open source it. It takes monumental effort. Did you see indie games? It's veritable farmers market of small games.
  - SCHiM 6y ago
    The code runs on your machine. You do not own the game, the idea behind the game or the logic, but you do own the copy of the game on your machine. You can read and change your copy, regardless of what the ToS says. The owner of the game can retaliate, this is not law after all.
    - Ygg2 6y ago
      Sure, but if you do it alone, on your computer and not tell anyone, no one from Paradox is going to harass you about it. Moment you start open sourcing someone's game behind their back, is when they get defensive.
    - afiori 5y ago
      I believe this might be forbidden by the DMCA
      - dllthomas 5y ago
        IIUC, changes that circumvent encryption intended to control access to copyrighted materials would be forbidden by the DMCA; other changes would not. I suppose we could say the game itself envisions the rules by which we're intended to access its content, but if there's no encryption being circumvented I think the DMCA still doesn't apply. That said, I'm now curious how it defines encryption.
  - meibo 5y ago
    > Or if you really want to be part of video game scene make your own. But I doubt you'd open source it. It takes monumental effort. I have minted a few very active video game scenes with a good culture, open codebases and devs that are happy to help and introduced many people to reverse engineering that wouldn't otherwise have gotten into it, and it's really not as hard as you make it seem. Good resources are easy to write when you're passionate. You just don't have to be so bitter all the time :) > Kinda like claiming Win 10 code is open knowledge. It arguably is and you can plop any Windows binary into Ghidra or IDA and learn from it. There's a huge amount of books and free information on NT internals on the internet. It's the same with games, just that you might be more invested in your favorite game than in NT internals.
- anoncake 5y ago
  > ToS are irrelevant and you should have published it anyways, under a name different from the one you use on the forums and in-game. Not right after you were refused permission though, that's too obvious.
jzebedee 6y ago
"Ask for forgiveness, not permission"
- sandworm101 6y ago
  Dont ask. Do. Exploration is a right, not a sin to be forgiven.
  - dmichulke 6y ago
    I'll try that line with my wife but I have that feeling that she won't like it
    - saagarjha 6y ago
      The obvious caveat is that with people consent comes into the picture.
      - stfnpopop 6y ago
        So we are back where we started, no?
        Ambroos 6y ago
        Code is not people.
        ponow 6y ago
        But the time and effort put into writing that code was a significant part of their lives, and that code was only shared with those who agreed with their rules.
        gambiting 6y ago
        >>and that code was only shared with those who agreed with their rules. This is the point of contention though. In EU courts have ruled over and over and over again that you cannot be bound by terms set AFTER the purchase of any software. As a result, EULAs are pretty much worthless, because they are presentented post-purchase. If you went to a store and bought a copy of this game then that's it, you haven't agreed to anything, and you own a copy of it and you can do almost whatever you wish with it. You cannot make further copies and sell those because that's governed by copyright law, but modifying the binaries to do what you want them to do? Absolutely fine. It's like with cars - obviously someone put a huge amount of work into making them, they contain a huge amount of software in them, yet the idea that the manufacturer tells you what you can or cannot do with it after purchase is ridiculous(and yes, I know some companies like Tesla are already trying).

jcranmer 6y ago

I've definitely seen discussions of the binary format on the forums in the past. I wrote my own script for figuring out what the table for the 16-bit IDs was, but I've never committed the result anywhere.

meibo 6y ago

ToS are irrelevant and you should have published it anyways, under a name different from the one you use on the forums and in-game. Open knowledge is important, especially in video game scenes where elitism is a real issue, stopping people from getting into great hobbies that I'm sure many only got into due to that one person that didn't give in to elitism and bothered to listen and to answer questions.

Ygg2 6y ago
> ToS are irrelevant That's some bad advice. ToS are irrelevant only if you don't expect retaliation from ToS owner, or the costs are trivial. > Open knowledge is important, especially in video game scenes where elitism is a real issue Open knowledge? This is reverse engineering someone's cash cow. Kinda like claiming Win 10 code is open knowledge. Video game scenes? Elitist? It's just a silly option in some medieval sim. There are other games that allow these kinds of things. Massive chalice for example. By that stretch, why not complain Hearts of Iron don't allow you to create a third Furry side in WW2? Or if you really want to be part of video game scene make your own. But I doubt you'd open source it. It takes monumental effort. Did you see indie games? It's veritable farmers market of small games.
- SCHiM 6y ago
  The code runs on your machine. You do not own the game, the idea behind the game or the logic, but you do own the copy of the game on your machine. You can read and change your copy, regardless of what the ToS says. The owner of the game can retaliate, this is not law after all.
  - Ygg2 6y ago
    Sure, but if you do it alone, on your computer and not tell anyone, no one from Paradox is going to harass you about it. Moment you start open sourcing someone's game behind their back, is when they get defensive.
  - afiori 5y ago
    I believe this might be forbidden by the DMCA
    - dllthomas 5y ago
      IIUC, changes that circumvent encryption intended to control access to copyrighted materials would be forbidden by the DMCA; other changes would not. I suppose we could say the game itself envisions the rules by which we're intended to access its content, but if there's no encryption being circumvented I think the DMCA still doesn't apply. That said, I'm now curious how it defines encryption.
- meibo 5y ago
  > Or if you really want to be part of video game scene make your own. But I doubt you'd open source it. It takes monumental effort. I have minted a few very active video game scenes with a good culture, open codebases and devs that are happy to help and introduced many people to reverse engineering that wouldn't otherwise have gotten into it, and it's really not as hard as you make it seem. Good resources are easy to write when you're passionate. You just don't have to be so bitter all the time :) > Kinda like claiming Win 10 code is open knowledge. It arguably is and you can plop any Windows binary into Ghidra or IDA and learn from it. There's a huge amount of books and free information on NT internals on the internet. It's the same with games, just that you might be more invested in your favorite game than in NT internals.
anoncake 5y ago
> ToS are irrelevant and you should have published it anyways, under a name different from the one you use on the forums and in-game. Not right after you were refused permission though, that's too obvious.

jzebedee 6y ago

"Ask for forgiveness, not permission"

sandworm101 6y ago
Dont ask. Do. Exploration is a right, not a sin to be forgiven.
- dmichulke 6y ago
  I'll try that line with my wife but I have that feeling that she won't like it
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    The obvious caveat is that with people consent comes into the picture.
    - stfnpopop 6y ago
      So we are back where we started, no?
      - Ambroos 6y ago
        Code is not people.
        ponow 6y ago
        But the time and effort put into writing that code was a significant part of their lives, and that code was only shared with those who agreed with their rules.
        gambiting 6y ago
        >>and that code was only shared with those who agreed with their rules. This is the point of contention though. In EU courts have ruled over and over and over again that you cannot be bound by terms set AFTER the purchase of any software. As a result, EULAs are pretty much worthless, because they are presentented post-purchase. If you went to a store and bought a copy of this game then that's it, you haven't agreed to anything, and you own a copy of it and you can do almost whatever you wish with it. You cannot make further copies and sell those because that's governed by copyright law, but modifying the binaries to do what you want them to do? Absolutely fine. It's like with cars - obviously someone put a huge amount of work into making them, they contain a huge amount of software in them, yet the idea that the manufacturer tells you what you can or cannot do with it after purchase is ridiculous(and yes, I know some companies like Tesla are already trying).