SammyKhalifa
Deity
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2003
- Messages
- 6,748
You know, I have never once had to disable my AV to play a game with CD-in-drive diskcheck.
Civilization 5 and Steam(works)
- Thread starter ori
- Start date
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
I think I've read somewhere that in the past it was a descendant of the Internet Explorer, but that shall have been changed. Not sure, though.
Whatever, I am pretty sure it won't take long and somebody will show up to "explain" you that it is the publisher who makes it insecure.
don't go there safedisk has similar issues - but there you can disable anti malware while offline - and have full functionality, including patching and mod installation...
Edit: x-post, meant as a reply to SammyKhalifa
Edit: x-post, meant as a reply to SammyKhalifa
tom2050
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2005
- Messages
- 5,516
What Valve is saying is the same as if some other company saying you need to disable all of your Anti-virus, anti-malware, turn off pop-up blocker, shut down your firewall, disable windows security systems, and all other misc security devices in order to enter your CD-Key to run the game.
It's just complete non-sense and is outrageous.
It's just complete non-sense and is outrageous.
I think I've read somewhere that in the past it was a descendant of the Internet Explorer, but that shall have been changed. Not sure, though.
Whatever, I am pretty sure it won't take long and somebody will show up to "explain" you that it is the publisher who makes it insecure.
Steam currently use Webkit engine.
Senethro
Overlord
You guys are just interpreting it in the way that best fits with your view that STeam is a bad thing and that most users lack the common sense to tell the difference between a specific tech support article and general advice.
It is entirely reasonable in articles relating to firewalls limiting Steam connectivity and Anti-Virus interfering with Steam to suggest these as stopgap solutions. In medicine, patients with blood clotting problems are given rat poison and those in extreme pain are given heroin. Neither heroin or rat poison should be administered to a healthy patient, yet that is what you guys are saying.
Since all you can do is contradict I don't see what good replying again on this subject will do.
It is entirely reasonable in articles relating to firewalls limiting Steam connectivity and Anti-Virus interfering with Steam to suggest these as stopgap solutions. In medicine, patients with blood clotting problems are given rat poison and those in extreme pain are given heroin. Neither heroin or rat poison should be administered to a healthy patient, yet that is what you guys are saying.
Since all you can do is contradict I don't see what good replying again on this subject will do.
mjs0
The 4th X
What Valve is saying is the same as if some other company saying you need to disable all of your Anti-virus, anti-malware, turn off pop-up blocker, shut down your firewall, disable windows security systems, and all other misc security devices in order to enter your CD-Key to run the game.
It's just complete non-sense and is outrageous.
To be fair it is very common when installing programs for them to recommend that you disable firewall and AV.
Examples:
Corporate Software: Some IBM Install Notes
Steam competitor's Support Forum: Impulse
Video Game: Advice from UbiSoft Customer Support
Video Game: Blizzard WOW support
Video Game: Stardock Knowledgebase
Of course all of these are wrong and should never be followed without careful planning and knowledge in some cases, and never ever in others, but it is not fair to single out Valve for this criticism without acknowledging the broader malaise.
I agree Steam's statement is amongst the most egregious but UbiSoft is exactly equivalent, and I was stunned to find a Blizzard rep saying that as their actual FAQs are pretty good.
Senethro, their statement is not a stop gap method - not even remotely. They state you can use the client without AV - its not a reasonable statement. Its not a matter of Steam = bad/good - its a matter of an absolutely unacceptable statement - there is no way it would even be ok as a stopgap method, any computer without protection that is online is a security risk, telling people its ok for a limited time is bad advice - they go further and state its ok, period. That is an utter failure of their Tech Support. There is no need to attempt to disparage every critical post - Steam is not perfect, and attempts to push away all criticism without engaging the arguments is no better than blanket condemnations.
I agree that its common - I stated multiple times that gaming related Tech FAQs are not terribly good imho and that such advice is not surprising to me, due to that. Its still horrible advice, "everyone is giving their customers horrible advice" is not a good explanation.
Just to reiterate what I have posted at least twice upthread already: This statement is bad, bad, bad advice. There is no way to deny that when looking at reasonable safety concerns regarding online programs. It is in line with other horrible advice by all sorts of gaming related FAQs - I suspect mostly because most of those are essentially postings of email support tickets with little if any editorial oversight. Still there is no excuse for such a Tech Support failure.
Senethro
Overlord
It would be nice if you could provide evidence that your interpretation is more correct than mine instead of just telling me I'm wrong while being a mod.
I never posted as a mod - If I post as a mod its clearly labeled.
And I did post why its a problem, but here again:
Any computer that is online without AV/firewall at any point is at a security risk. There are sufficient port scanners out there that you do not need to visit any site to become target of an attack. Not having protection while online is risky behavior.
Steam says its ok to use their client without AV/firewall. This is telling customers that its safe to be online without protection while running the Steam client. It may or may not be meant as a stopgap method - but they do not state it like that. Even as a stopgap method though it is advice that is putting the safety of their clients' computer at risk and as such bad advice - as a blanket statement, which this is phrased as its horrible advice.
Your argument so far is as far as I understand it mostly based on what you think is implied - but there is no such indication on that page for what you state is implied by it. Tech support posts by definition are aimed at an audience that is not generally computer proficient - telling such users that unsafe behavior is safe is bad Tech Supporting. I haven't seen any counterargument to this.
And I did post why its a problem, but here again:
Any computer that is online without AV/firewall at any point is at a security risk. There are sufficient port scanners out there that you do not need to visit any site to become target of an attack. Not having protection while online is risky behavior.
Steam says its ok to use their client without AV/firewall. This is telling customers that its safe to be online without protection while running the Steam client. It may or may not be meant as a stopgap method - but they do not state it like that. Even as a stopgap method though it is advice that is putting the safety of their clients' computer at risk and as such bad advice - as a blanket statement, which this is phrased as its horrible advice.
Your argument so far is as far as I understand it mostly based on what you think is implied - but there is no such indication on that page for what you state is implied by it. Tech support posts by definition are aimed at an audience that is not generally computer proficient - telling such users that unsafe behavior is safe is bad Tech Supporting. I haven't seen any counterargument to this.
mjs0
The 4th X
Ori,
I am in 100% agreement with you, this is appalling advice, but my post was not addressed at you as I believe your balance on this has been good.
The post I quoted compared what Steam said to other companies in a way that suggested no one else would be that dumb, rather than simply responding by stating that this was false I wanted to provide, not just of gaming companies but even IBM giving similar advice without the necessary qualification.
I just dislike the hyperbole on both sides and when I believe facts are being ignored something just makes me post them.
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
(Emphasis mine)
And now Steam's "support"wiki:
As far as I read it, it is about running Steam, not installing it.
This one leads me to the description of how to install a new InfoSphere Information Server. Not really something which is related to Joe Average-user, right?
This is, as you have pointed out, a posting in a forum.
Nevertheless, it is still about installing.
(Emphasis mine)
Another posting in a forum (by a user unknown to me)
Another forum.
Topic is the installation, and keywords are "you may need", " review ... rules", " ensure that nothing from Blizzard is being unintentional blocked".
After all of this: "Temporarily disabling your firewall when patching may alleviate the problem"
I will agree that in all quoted cases it has not been stated that switching off the firewall/AV/antispam programs is not recommended.
Yet, as far as I can see, in none of these cases it was suggested (let's not talk about "strongly recommended") to switch of firewall/AV/antispam programs for the sake of normal operation as Steam happily does.
mjs0
The 4th X
Personal Experience:
A few years back I made the mistake when reinstalling XP for my Dad of forgetting to unplug the machine from the internet (it was direct to a modem not through NAT) and when it came online without a firewall it took less than 10 minutes for a probe to find it and infect it.
I had to wipe the drive and start again.
steam you say? oh dear.
i'm a casual player and non-techy, and there is just no way i'll bother i've heard too many bad things about steam. i just want to put a disc in, and play offline, and go on sites like this to pick up patches as and when. permanent connections to 3rd parties, can't play offline, auto-patching, stuff running in the background on my pc, i'm too old to start having to learn a load of new stuff that's hassle just to play a game. you know what i'm a grown man and this game would take a large chunk of my life away - this is an excellent and easy reason not to let that happen.
the ironic thing is that the kind of people who play civ5 are gonna buy it anyway - they're not going to torrent it that's for the kids, and the kids don't play civ.
firaxis have misjudged their audience. first civrev, which was a dog, and now this. guys it's a strategy game for weirdos and old men - make it friendly to us and every one of us in the world will buy everything you publish until we die.
i'm a casual player and non-techy, and there is just no way i'll bother i've heard too many bad things about steam. i just want to put a disc in, and play offline, and go on sites like this to pick up patches as and when. permanent connections to 3rd parties, can't play offline, auto-patching, stuff running in the background on my pc, i'm too old to start having to learn a load of new stuff that's hassle just to play a game. you know what i'm a grown man and this game would take a large chunk of my life away - this is an excellent and easy reason not to let that happen.
the ironic thing is that the kind of people who play civ5 are gonna buy it anyway - they're not going to torrent it that's for the kids, and the kids don't play civ.
firaxis have misjudged their audience. first civrev, which was a dog, and now this. guys it's a strategy game for weirdos and old men - make it friendly to us and every one of us in the world will buy everything you publish until we die.
You clearly dont know much (anything) about Steam. Why dont you read wiki or something before making opinion?
with Steam you can play offline - thats why it has "Offline Mode"
With Steam even if you are in Online Mode, you dont have to be online all the time (unless you play multiplayer).
Most really ugly posts about Steam are either years old and no longer relevant or made up BS from ****** like Evrett37 who dont have problem posting things which are not true as facts.
Senethro
Overlord
Yes, this is true. Not disputing it, no need to repeat yourself.
No. You've decided this is what it says. You just don't get it.
Oh wait, maybe you do. Heres you throwing my own argument back at me. Except the page is called tech support and not THINGS EVERY STEAM USER SHOULD ALWAYS DO which supports my interpretation a little bit more.
Really? I thought tech support posts were for everyone since no matter how techy you are, you're not going to be able to fix all problems with someone elses software.
welp,
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
Do you mind to explain how to be not online while being in online mode?
Furthermore (a question which has just come up in the FAQ-thread), how do you make use of the mod-browser when not being online?
Easy answer: You don't.
Then how should this:
be interpreted?
They list nearly every popular antivirus software there, so it can't see another way to interpret it.
Then how should this:
be interpreted?
They list nearly every popular antivirus software there, so it can't see another way to interpret it.
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
"It is not Steam, it is the publisher."
Edit:
That's cute, isn't it?
I wonder why they have such issues with almost any AV software.
mjs0
The 4th X
Sigh, I don't know why I get myself into this.
The post I responded to was suggesting that turning off your firewall, A/V or anti-malware software during install was something no other company would do. I was attempting to respond to that. As I suspected, I found 1000s of examples and posted a few.
At the same time there is a tendency to over exaggerate any Steam fault and I wanted as always to provide a little balance. Suggesting turning your protection off at any time you are online is catastrophic, the level of difference is not as great as some were making out. Trying to minimize the fault of all these other companies in order to make Steam look significantly worse is not relevant and reveals an unpleasant agenda. They are all equally culpable.
If one person suggests it would help if you touch a live wire once and another suggests doing it ten times there is no difference, the advice is deadly both ways.
I ended the post acknowledging that the Steam statement was probably the worst, although tied with the UbiSoft which if you read it thoroughly you will find was a process developed jointly with the participation of UbiSoft Customer Support and suggested not running firewall while playing their game.
Since that wasn't good enough here is what they say on their tech support page about Firewalls, AVs, and Malware.
Similar threads
- Poll
