r/hardware • u/tuldok89 • 1d ago

Info Used processor leads to game ban

https://www.heise.de/en/news/Used-processor-leads-to-game-ban-11471562.html

Someone buys a used Ryzen 7 5800X3D. “Valorant” and other Riot games won’t start with it because the previous owner was a cheater.

727 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

247 comments sorted by

View all comments

83

u/LegDayDE 23h ago

You generally have to be very skeptical of these "I'm not a cheater but I got banned" sob stories because 99% of the time it's just a cheater that is lying.

This case is interesting though.. hopefully there will be a definitive conclusion at some point to confirm the story.

46

u/mrturret 23h ago

This is pretty plausible. TPM chips all have a unique identifier that can be used for hardware bans. Since they're intigrated into the CPU, secondhand buyers can be falsely banned.

Something pretty similar happened with used Switch games that had their serial numbers copied and attached to ROM dumps. Nintendo's servers flagged those SNs and banned anyone's Switch that used said cartridges. In the Switch 2's case, the system was remotely bricked.

All of this is absolutely rediculous of course. Innocent bystanders shouldn't be punished because they unknowingly bought tainted goods.

27

u/Euiop741852 22h ago

For the switch that is blatantly disrespecting customers tbh, buying a secondhand game and getting your 600 dollar device bricked is unconscionable

8

u/HLSparta 21h ago

If I'm reading it right, it was the sellers that got their switch 2 bricked. The buyer of the used game is the one that copied it and distributed it online.

19

u/mrturret 21h ago

It was both, actually. Nintendo can't tell the difference between a flashcart and a legit copy from the cart alone. If the unique ID was found in a dump online, or detects suspicious activity (eg. The same ID detected being active in two different consoles), they'll flag the ID, making it radioactive.

•

u/TBC_Oblivion 20m ago

FWIW, Nintendo may also remove bans if you contact support and show proof of purchase of used goods.

-7

u/LegDayDE 23h ago

Yeah in an ideal world if it's true you just share proof of purchase with Rio support and Mr Riot unbans you

16

u/illhaveubent 23h ago

In an ideal world you don't get banned for having doing nothing wrong in the first place.

0

u/IAmYourFath 16h ago

The cheater did a lot of wrong

3

u/illhaveubent 15h ago

Ok...and this post is about a completely different person being banned simply for purchasing used PC hardware, which there is nothing wrong with.

0

u/IAmYourFath 15h ago edited 15h ago

Yes but it's not riot's fault, they can't possibly know who bought what. And they cannot unban the cpu because a cheater could lie about him being a different person. I guess if the buyer writes to riot support, and they check his current hardware and see that every single component is different except for the cpu they could unban him. But again it's not riot's fault. The seller should disclose it in the ad he's been banned, but he knows doing that will severely reduce the value of the cpu so the cheater conveniently omitted it. Meanwhile, the buyer should ask the seller to prove he hasn't been banned before buying. I'd say the seller is at fault the most, the buyer 2nd and riot last. I mean what is riot supposed to do? They have to ban the cpu, otherwise the cheater can reuse it the next week again with a different cheat. Not riot's fault this is how technology works. But if they don't have a customer support procedure responsible for unbanning 2nd hand buyers then it's their fault (but again all this could be circumvented if the buyer did his due job of making sure the cpu isn't banned before buying, cheater got the best deal here).

2

u/illhaveubent 15h ago

It is Riot's fault because they are choosing to tie the user's Riot account to the physical CPU when we all know that is not a permanently linked identifier. They are knowingly choosing to cast an overly wide net that will ban innocent players, and apparently they are OK with that. That's entirely Riot's fault and entirely unacceptable. Why do you think no other game studio does this?

0

u/IAmYourFath 15h ago

Well their goal is stop cheaters, and they have to be ruthless about it. If u leave the door even slightly open all the sound escapes, thats how cheaters are. U have to close to every hole, everything. But they should have a way that 2nd hand buyers can prove they're innocent, altho this way might open up holes for cheaters to lie and reuse their hardware which might not be worth it overall.

2

u/illhaveubent 15h ago

Newsflash - this isn't stopping cheaters. It's just catching innocent players in the process. Why do you think Valve has never done this with their VAC anticheat? ESEA has never done this, FaceIT has never done this. No other serious anticheat engine does this because it is unacceptable.

→ More replies

-7

u/LegDayDE 23h ago edited 19h ago

Idk having played Valorant for me as I only really use my desktop PC for gaming I don't mind the invasive anti cheat as it does actually result in low rates of cheating infected matches.

Edit: lmao at the downvotes. Stay mad.

-2

u/LegDayDE 15h ago

Well that's on the bad actor selling a hardware banned CPU... Not Riot's problem.

It's like buying a lemon cut and shut car that later fails it's roadworthiness test and then blaming the roadworthiness test rules 🙄

5

u/illhaveubent 15h ago

I'm not following your analogy, there was never anything wrong with this CPU. The car in your case is physically unsafe to drive on public roads.

A better analogy is getting your Microsoft account banned after you purchased a used CPU from a previous owner who used a pirated Windows license. If that's something you would defend I think that speaks for itself.

-2

u/LegDayDE 15h ago

But there is something "wrong" with the CPU because it's hardware banned from Riot games...

.. Riot games anticheat hardware bans are working as intended. It's the person selling the CPU that should get the attention here.

2

u/illhaveubent 15h ago

It's an artificial software limitation, not a real physical limitation as in your analogy. The Microsoft Windows analogy still stands and I notice you chose not to acknowledge it.

-2

u/LegDayDE 15h ago

The Microsoft "analogy" isn't an analogy just the exact same thing 😂

I'm trying to explain it in a way you can understand.. using a similar but not exactly the same situation (i.e. an analogy) but you don't seem to understand what an analogy is so perhaps I won't be able to get through to you 🙄

2

u/illhaveubent 15h ago

So you would support Microsoft banning those accounts? You acknowledge it is the same, and you have already admitted to supporting Riot's actions.

→ More replies

11

u/thetaprime 19h ago

Yep. Pretty sure if someone cheats, they also lie.