Talk:PunkBuster

message: I was just reading wikipedia's article on spyware, along with the wiktionary definations of it, and punkbuster seems to have a lot of similarities to spyware. I think something should be added about this, if I do add something about this and site sources, don't remove it.
--Dryir Lent 02:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spyware

message: What's with the bug/problem of the access rights? Since 2005-03, PB requires (for some games at least) to run the games as admin.
This opens the door wide to all kinds of attacks on the players computer, as well as making it impossible to maintain a safe computer setup. 
The older workaround was giving these rights to the player:
* Debug Programs
* Load and unload device drivers
* Manage auditing and security log
* Modify Firmware environment values
* Profile Single Process 
but this workaround doesnt work anymore.
Shouldn't this shortcoming / problem be mentioned here?
::You can just start the game with the correct rights, no need to login as admin. If you don't trust the game, don't play it. Everything else can be found on the PB website. wikipedia is no support-website. --84.58.148.46 17:43, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Problem with access rights

message: This article is in dire need of sources.  --Sydius 14:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: I see this article links to the MSX website under the guise of providing "evidence" that PB is flawed. Isn't this simply giving wannabe cheaters what they want? I notice, for example, an article on armed robbery doesn't link to a website that gives tips on being successful. Why should an article on (anti)cheating be different? Granted, it's stupid easy to find hacks, but I don't believe Wikipedia should hand them out on a silver platter. At the risk of starting an edit war, I am removing reference to MSX.
Other reasons to remove *this specific reference* include its bias towards MSX and its programmers, as well as the fact that no anti-cheat system is 100% accurate, thus focusing on PB's difficult with stopping MSX is pointless, and criticism should be directed at all PB's other flaws (not that hard to find;)).
24.68.65.244 04:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don`t agree, at the end it`s just information. many games have sections when they discuss the problems on it, like in graphics, physics engine, accurancy of the information etc. also wikipedia is not censored from bad stuff, and as with porn, the info should stay there--ometzit<col> 05:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking to hacks? 

message: :However, some companies have produced cheat kits for wannabe players to be used against PunkBuster
This should probably be rephrased. Debolaz 02:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wannabe players 

message: As Evenbalance's PB software is controversial and unpopular with people who hack games I think this article should be approval locked G0ggy 10:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's be clear, it's unpopular with people who don't hack games too. Personally, I think giving a random internet admin the ability to screenshot your computer and get MD5 hashes of your files is very invasive. Their privacy policy is a joke. Why isn't there a controversies section? PR Whitewash? 86.188.68.55 (talk) 23:24, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversial software 

message: Something about PB's effectiveness should probably be added. America's Army, for example, uses PB, but it's hacked to hell and back. Jtrainor 02:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: With all due respect, your experience does not qualify as a reliable source in the Wikipedian sense. A "reliable source" would be an article in a gaming journal, for example. I personally don't doubt your account at all, it is just that everything that is written on Wikipedia has to be verifiable and us lowly wikiuser don't cut it. --Sus scrofa (talk) 23:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Effectiveness section

message: ...should be given some coverage.  Yes, the admins and players who intentionally and voluntarily avoid the use of punkbuster because they deem it more evil than cheaters.
Not everyone who is anti-punkbuster is pro-cheat.  PB - especially now with its always-running processes - is along the lines of something like Norton Anti Virus as far as being nuisance-ware.  Most performance-oriented gamers want nothing to do with programs like this hogging cpu cycles, accessing disk drives, sending screenshots, etc. while our favorite game is running.
:I'm anti-punkbuster, and anti-hacker. But at the end of the day, I'll take hackers over punkbuster for these reasons... 1. Punkbuster often disrupts the ability of legitimate players to play a game they pay for. 2. Live admin will always do a better job at preventing cheating than any software of this sort. 3. You can ban hackers. It's hard to prevent damage by fault automated software. 67.193.104.129 (talk) 15:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: How could an anti-cheat system work without accessing processes and memory?  The only thing I can think of is for the server to keep track of all game state information and push it to users continuously, which is impossible given bandwidth limitations.  Besides, punkbuster's footprint is pretty minimal.  Most gaming rigs have excess memory and CPU cycles when playing;  the GPU is the bottleneck, which is unaffected by pb.  It's not perfect, but it does its job: preventing cheating, which is surely the greater evil.  And I know  that WP's not a forum, I'm just saying. --Hemisemidemiquaver 01:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: the anti-punkbuster movement

message: The paragraph about netcoders suggests that they obtained control of the punkbuster server and added the 'rifle aim prediction' violation. This is false. The 'rifle aim prediction' thing was already there. All netcoders did is spread the phrase around to cause the mass banning.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.37.101.225 (talk) 15:05, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: NETCODERS

message: Wine! Sadly PunkBuster doesn't work with Wine! That should be mentioned... --88.192.122.234 (talk) 16:02, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incompatibilities 

message: I guess inclusion of the Counter-Strike related hacks that PB had so much hassle from.. which caused PB to stop work on CS. 
Proof: PunkBuster at web archive
PB started in 2000 solely for Counter-Strike / Half-Life. It wasn't until Spring 2002 when they announced they stopped support for HL/CS and they went on to support Quake 3, etc.
Quote from their news:
:Monday 2.18.2002 [1:00PM]
:We will soon begin phasing out support for the old PunkBuster for Half-Life (and Counter-Strike) to better focus on our current efforts. Since we suspended development back in August of last year, several new Anti-Cheat tools have sprung up for Half-Life in an effort to deal with cheating and some of them conflict with PunkBuster and cause false violations. Additionally, the old Tag Registry will soon be replaced with a premium Name Registry service where not only Clans and Guilds can register tags for their members, but individual players will also be able register their playing names. This subscription service will be for players and groups who desire to have an "Online Identity" verification system in place. There will be built-in universal support for multiple Clans / Guilds who use the same tag. More information on this topic will be released soon. 
Also, in 2001/02 PB developed the PBC client primary video memory snapshots..
Andwan0 (talk) 02:57, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Counter-Strike beta & 1.x 

message: Due to the law-breaking practices Punkbuster has used to wrongfully ban "cheaters" with faulty spyware - aka itself - there will be an upcoming lawsuit started by *thousands* of people who have wrongfully been banned, never told why - essentially wasting money. Worse yet, their ILLEGAL "Hardware bans" have made it so you cannot play on any OTHER rightfully owned game - and most are pb protected servers, meaning you lost the "right" to play online because of a faulty, illegal, crappy piece of software that was also wrong.
Damages are in the millions, as gamers often lost seven to eleven pb protected game "rights" because of a wrongful Hardware ID ban.
Join the fun - ask around, get your share of money back.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.147.69.138 (talk) 23:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Class Action Lawsuit 

message: Why is there no mention of the fact that PB in these games causes heavy lag, more server crashes (although it's improved since the last maintenance update), kicks people randomly and detects almost nothing? Take this as an example: . Click the Crysis Wars hack link on the right-hand side. NONE of this is detected by PB, and there are many more examples of this. Plus, there have been almost no updates, and the ones players were given were all maintenance rather than detection updates. 87.194.249.80 (talk) 10:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Everything on Wikipedia must be based on reliable sources. Blogs don't cut it I'm afraid.--Sus scrofa (talk) 12:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

text: There is obviously a lot of discontent with PunkBuster out there. I find it puzzling that none of this seems to register among gaming journalists, who would count as reliable sources in Wikipedia's sense.--Sus scrofa (talk) 10:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm wary of suggesting it, but if documented issues and widespread criticisms are being ignored by 'reliable sources' then they're hardly reliable, which may be grounds for WP:IAR in order to 'assume' an encyclopaedically unreliable source is in fact reliable. Let's not forget that the entire dispute is chiefly founded on gamers' opinions after all, and therefore popular gaming forums are de facto reliable sources. --Topperfalkon (talk) 12:21, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Performance in Crysis/Crysis Wars

message: Because right now, the article is nothing but an ad for evenbalance inc. It contains no critism, negative points are deleted constantly while weaselwords and false remarks remain in the article. Fix this article or delete it, the wikipedia shouldn't be missued as an advertising tool. 218.241.90.10 (talk) 15:03, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Critics seem to have a hard time coming up with reliable sources for their claims. If there are weasel words tag them with .--Sus scrofa (talk) 15:46, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: How about these facts?
When you launch a game, such as BF:BC2, Punkbuster will run.
While it's running, Punkbuster can:
Take a screenshot of whatever you are doing.
Look through any files on your computer.
Look through any running programs.
Look through ANYTHING on your computer at all. 
When you exit the game, punkbuster doesn't stop running.
EVEN IF you ctrl+alt+del and kill the process, it will come back in a few minutes because of the service it created for itself. 24.154.119.139 (talk) 21:24, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rework article 

message: Honestly with such a lack of information about Even Balance's business side, it may as well be merged into PunkBuster as it's the only product they make. Really the two are synonymous with each other. » SkyyTrain (talk) 07:22, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from Even Balance into PunkBuster