NuclearKangaroo said:
Geo Da Sponge said:
I can hardly blame him for really wanting to demonstrate this vulnerability, given the fact that a sizable amount of his income probably comes through Steam. If this problem had gone ignored and unfixed for longer, the results could have indirectly harmed him by damaging Steam's reputation, or potentially harm him in a far more direct way. Who knows?
Valve just seems more and more determined to bury their head in the sand and make communication impossible over
everything. It was kind of cute when they were just being coy about game development, but acting that way about everything doesn't help at all.
NuclearKangaroo said:
there are rules, he shouldnt have done that
is like robbing a bank and saying "see? you need to hire more security guards!"
Not really. It's more like breaking into a bank vault, not harming or alerting anyone in the process, and then leaving a detailed note explaining how they did it and how they could fix it inside the vault.
but still stealing money, he still took advantage of the exploit
But he didn't take anything... Nothing he did used the exploit against anyone, apart from using it to demonstrate that he could.
Listen, I don't like basing entire arguments off of metaphors, but in this case:
Bypassing bank security = Using the exploit
Leaving a note in the vault = Leaving a silly video to prove he'd done it
Stealing money = Using the exploit to give himself some advantage on Steam, or in anyway damaging Steam
Since he didn't actually do anything that damaged Steam beyond posting a silly little video (and you seem to be arguing that he didn't even have to do that for it to equate to stealing; just using the exploit was enough), that can't really be equated to stealing money, can it?
But to bring it back to the main point, this guy relies on Steam. It's used to sell the product he worked on, EuroTruck Simulator 2. He has security concerns with the system, and since he was being ignored previously, this seemed to be the only way he could get it acknowledged.
If the people who use your system and bring in the money for it have concerns over its security, the last thing you should be doing is punishing them for demonstrating the problem. It's like Valve has so much momentum with Steam they really don't care if the developers using it hate it, because they know that there's nowhere else to go.
Or, to torturously stretch the bank metaphor even
further, which is like breaking into the bank which you use, in order to specifically reach the deposit box which you own, in order to prove that it's not secure and therefore your stuff is at risk. But the bank bans you for a year for showing the gaping hole in their security, even after you pointed it out through the proper channels first.