Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pokemon Go, Security, and Obsolescence

community.rapid7.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 109 posts

Re: Pokemon Go, Security, and Obsolescence

#51

Post by rickyc091 »

Drdrdrq wrote: post #36
legulere wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few botters don't hurt Pokémon go. But when it's easy to bot, lots of people will bot. It's easy to circumvent anti root, but it's impossible to use the same way for lots of devices without niantic being able to block it again. So it really makes sense for them to go this way IMO.

Not really. It doesn't matter if the phone is rooted or not, what matters is whether it is feeding false gps data or not. Bots will soon find a way around this (non-rooted) restriction anyway. That said, proper protection against cheating would involve using markers (other phones?) in vicinity, so it should be possible too.

Yes, bots will most likely always find a way, but I think it's more about thwarting the casual users. If you could gps hack by simply installing an app more people would do it. By making it extremely tedious, the causal user won't be as inclined to do it since the time it takes to figure it out won't be worth it.

I don't condone Niantic's behavior, but I understand it.

Re: Pokemon Go, Security, and Obsolescence

#52

Post by exDM69 »

makomk wrote: post #46
exDM69 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any ARM hardware people care to chime in? It's not really about the CPU architecture, but the peripherals of the devices. In the x86 world, the peripherals are governed by the "PC" standard, which these days is implemented by the chipset on your motherboard. They all have similar functionality, although you still do need some chipset-specific drivers in your kernel. In the ARM world, the landscape is different. The…

To be honest, x86 seems to be heading in the same direction these days. It generally has enough of an emulation of traditional PC architecture for boot purposes, but look at - for example - how CPU power saving on modern Intel chips requires the co-operation of stuff like the SATA links, or how traditional PC interfaces like PS/2 for keyboard/mouse and HD Audio are being replaced with more embedded-like interfaces su…

Sure, but it isn't as diverse so you can reasonably expect to boot a mainline kernel on a PC regardless of your motherboard vendor.

Re: Pokemon Go, Security, and Obsolescence

#53

Post by nfriedly »

I stopped playing Pokemon go when they put out the no-root update. I have never cheated, I even purchased some coins - I was a paying user. But they don't seem to want my money, and I'm not going to unroot my phone for a stupid game. I uninstalled it and ask for a refund. (They haven't granted it yet but I'm not giving up. I believe I'm in the right here and they owe me a refund since they've removed the functionality after I paid.)

Re: Pokemon Go, Security, and Obsolescence

#54

Post by daenney »

Taek wrote: post #40
Kiro wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? I play Pokémon Go and can't think of a single thing they've done that has spoiled the experience for me. Neither can my friends. We love the game as it is. Bear in mind we are casual players, like most are.

I left the game because: + Disabled footpad tracking made it less fun. + Some update made it sluggish on my 10-month-old phone. + They don't let you play with Root (I have a workaround, but it's a pain). + Gameplay is highly repetitive past lvl 20 I just feel constantly trampled on. I'll waste my time with someone who treats me like an adult.

> + Disabled footpad tracking made it less fun.

That made me quit too. It's basically a slot machine now. You can't hunt anymore, you just have to accidentally stumble across something.

> + Gameplay is highly repetitive past lvl 20

I would say gameplay is highly repetitive in general. You're basically just throwing Pokeballs around hoping something sticks. Sometimes a gym battle once you get to that point but most gyms around here are controlled by people with such ridiculous levels and Pokemon that it's barely possible.

Re: Pokemon Go, Security, and Obsolescence

#55

Post by nommm-nommm »

Fiahil wrote: post #49

After Niantic's move to "encrypt" API calls (which was broken a few days after, btw), I'm not surprised they would arbitrarily block some devices based on phony explanations. Bear in mind, bots have little to no effects on the game itself because you have little to no virtual interactions with other players. It's not like you were able to trade Pokémons you caught with someone else.

You battle against other players who are holding down gyms.

Re: Pokemon Go, Security, and Obsolescence

#56

Post by RDaneel0livaw »

lewisl9029 wrote: post #47
pwnna wrote: post #2

Now Niantic's decision to disallow root devices, imo, is pretty regretful, as serious botters will likely be able to get around that restriction regardless. This only serves to punish users who are stuck between having a root-enabled custom ROM or a stock ROM where critical root exploits may exist. One thing that I observed is that no one seems to be interested in producing a ROM that is both stable, has a variety of…

I honestly would be very happy with a ROM that copies stock Android entirely , without any added features or customizations, rather focusing solely on stability, security, supporting a wide range of devices, and tracking the official Android release schedule as closely as possible. Can someone point me to a ROM like this if one already exists?

I was going to point you to the Pure series of roms by Beanstown, but I don't understand your question... You don't want ANY custom stuff at all or features, then what's the point? Just install stock android...?

Re: Pokemon Go, Security, and Obsolescence

#57

Post by lucb1e »

swiley wrote: post #25
deanclatworthy wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Furthermore, you can buy GPS spoofing devices anwyay which you can just carry around with you in your pocket.

Man, you can probably crash some planes with those.

Only if you carry the plane in your pocket too or set a way too high output power while sitting inside one, if even then.

Re: Pokemon Go, Security, and Obsolescence

#58

Post by the8472 »

tedmiston wrote: post #5
pwnna wrote: post #2

Now Niantic's decision to disallow root devices, imo, is pretty regretful, as serious botters will likely be able to get around that restriction regardless. This only serves to punish users who are stuck between having a root-enabled custom ROM or a stock ROM where critical root exploits may exist. One thing that I observed is that no one seems to be interested in producing a ROM that is both stable, has a variety of…

They've gotta stop the GPS spoofers somehow. It's not like this was the first solution they jumped to to stop cheaters. Maybe this was the 80/20 solution over more advanced location anomaly detection methods against their database.

do you see PC multiplayer game devs block users that know the admin password?

Re: Pokemon Go, Security, and Obsolescence

#59

Post by lucb1e »

seszett wrote: post #31
foota wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, that's probably highly illegal if caught by the fcc.

The FCC only has business in the US though.

Almost every country has something like that. The Dutch Agentschap Telecom will hunt you down for transmitting a fake GPS signal too.

The thing is, nobody cares if you send a signal too weak to go beyond a meter of your pocket. That's why it's totally legal to send FM on registered frequencies as long as your output is under a certain amount. Same with WiFi even.

I heard about someone looking into GPS spoofing once in the context of catching drones, even nearby ones (e.g. fly near to it). It takes a lot of energy to do that and was basically not practical outside of military settings.

Re: Pokemon Go, Security, and Obsolescence

#60

Post by DanBC »

jsmeaton wrote: post #48
Ensorceled wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait. When did expecting delivery of the product or service you paid for become "classic entitlement"?

Maybe my comment was unnecessarily rude, but demanding a refund and calling a company a piece of shit because you got banned for cheating is absolutely entitlement. Just because you spend money on a service does not entitle you to have unlimited access against TOS.

What makes you think that person was cheating?
Post reply on HN