ZeeJustin the next to get caught multi accounting Party MTTs

[Gelford]

What we are asking is, will this thread make the Digest ???

[jedinemesis]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

ZeeJustin
CHEATER

[/ QUOTE ]

I just saw zj's new handle...This is kinda cruel.

[/ QUOTE ]
For the record, I don't know who changed his title. I agree that it's wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]
You 2 must be democrats with the way you find facts objectionable and whatnot.

[/ QUOTE ]

As opposed to objecting to the fact that fossil fuels cause global warming?

[jaydub]

I don't even have a stars account but am guessing what N decribes is simply copying and renaming the stars client executable. The client probably checks the list of running processes and sees if it already exists. Full disclosure is definitely the way to go here as stars has little incentive to fix it without publicity.

J

[N 82 50 24]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't even have a stars account but am guessing what N decribes is simply copying and renaming the stars client executable. The client probably checks the list of running processes and sees if it already exists. Full disclosure is definitely the way to go here as stars has little incentive to fix it without publicity.

[/ QUOTE ]

The obvious goal is to find a way to get around the inability to run multiple instances concurrently. There are multiple ways to do it, all of which should be obvious to Stars. The issue is how to block these attempts... and I don't know how to do that or if it's even possible.

[SunOfBeach]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, since when can't we just adjust instead of changing sn. Surely he knows if people are going to start calling you light, you can't push [censored] all the time.

[/ QUOTE ]

But surely he also knows that he's better off changing accounts so that he can continue to push [censored] all the time. He just never thought they'd take his winnings from him for doing it.

[KaneKungFu123]

N 82,

Feel free to shut the [censored] up anytime now.

[jaydub]

N,

The key is to have the security on the server. Rule #1 is don't trust the client. It does not shock me that poker sites ignore this rule.

J

[Exitonly]

[ QUOTE ]
N 82,

Feel free to shut the [censored] up anytime now.

[/ QUOTE ]


[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[T-God]

N82's going to hit Carpal Tunnel from this thread alone.

[hecubus]

[ QUOTE ]
Are there any software geeks out there? Isn't there some kind of program that PokerStars could run which would search threw all the ip addresses of every registered player and it would highlight multiple accounts that are from the same IP address. Now there will be cases of roommates playing together etc...but I'm sure with a little INVESTIGATION...they could find similarities between cheater multi accounts online.

Any thoughts? Do I not know what the hell I'm talking about....its very possible

[/ QUOTE ]

This has been gone over many times before, but here it is again. Most companies, campuses, etc used what is called network address translation. For example, let's say that West Undershirt University (WU) uses it. To a gaming site, everybody playing from WU would be coming from the same routable ip address. Internally, they use non-routable IP addresses. When the outbound traffic from a student at WU reaches their firewall, their non-routable address gets translated to 1 shared routable IP address.

I hope this helps you see why blocking common IPs wont work for a gaming site, as everyone playing from WU would be coming from the same IP.