Steam telepítése
belépés
|
nyelv
简体中文 (egyszerűsített kínai)
繁體中文 (hagyományos kínai)
日本語 (japán)
한국어 (koreai)
ไทย (thai)
Български (bolgár)
Čeština (cseh)
Dansk (dán)
Deutsch (német)
English (angol)
Español - España (spanyolországi spanyol)
Español - Latinoamérica (latin-amerikai spanyol)
Ελληνικά (görög)
Français (francia)
Italiano (olasz)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonéz)
Nederlands (holland)
Norsk (norvég)
Polski (lengyel)
Português (portugáliai portugál)
Português - Brasil (brazíliai portugál)
Română (román)
Русский (orosz)
Suomi (finn)
Svenska (svéd)
Türkçe (török)
Tiếng Việt (vietnámi)
Українська (ukrán)
Fordítási probléma jelentése
Hozzászólási szabályok és irányelvek
Hozzászólás jelentése
I hope you just not found out recently that Steam is using chrome/chromium as a render engine for....almost...8 years or so?
Probably it would have been better if they have stayed with the IE Engine....^^
Just like voting you need a way to be sure no one votes twice, to avoid the influx of noise into your sample data.
Otherwise you could end up with the same machine being surveyed mutliple times and biasing the statistics just because multiple users log into that computer Steam client.
Edit: Additional sources:
"The Pitfalls of Hashing for Privacy", Demir et al. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8023740 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01589210/document
"Hashing of personally identifiable information is not sufficient", Marx et al. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0d61/82754e6a4ae42f39367c998cf02530264ae5.pdf
Believe me, I understand one-way functions. Yes, you can't run them backwards, but you can run them forwards a bunch of times until you hit on the answer you're looking for. If the search space isn't very big, this sort of thing is a practical attack. And the search-space for MAC addresses isn't big enough to make it impractical.
The actual hash function itself isn't really relevant to the argument, as the exact properties of any particular hash function aren't relevant. Hash functions which are designed for use with passwords are deliberately extremely computationally intensive to make this sort of attack more difficult by making it take large amounts of time or memory to compute. This is to resist this sort of attack, when people try to recover cleartext passwords from leaked databases of hashed passwords.
There are tools to do this sort of thing, like hashcat[hashcat.net]. I'm sure they'll be very interested to learn that what they're doing is impossible!
Anyway, the actual hash algorithm is almost certainly SHA1, a common standardised general-purpose hashing algorithm not designed to withstand these sorts of attacks. The hash value is 160 bits long, and SHA1 is the only common one with that length. And they already use it in Steam, so, it's right there to hand.
The only thing I'm really missing is exactly what they're hashing (e.g.: just the raw bytes, text with uppercase hex, lowercase hex...). But that's no secret from either Valve themselves, or anyone who wants to spend some time reverse-engineering the Steam client. With time and a bit of tooling I could probably figure it out.
You're right, I don't work for Valve. Did contribute a little bit of code to an open-source project of Valve's on Github, though.
I dont see ads in browsers because i use steam.
Current browsers all use more than one process, for "features". Not to tell you, LOOOK HERE IS SOMETHING TO WORRY!
Look up what rainbow tables are.
Anyway, why the discussion about hashes? Throwing around useless half-knowledge? The oint aiusepsi wanted to make is that the data can be de-anonymized. Which it can anyway as Steam is aware which account it is.
... again: which is true for most surveys if you have a closed group or they're given out specifically for you. (Personally I like the "completely anonymous" surveys companies to internally where each employee has a unique link to participate in.)
In any case that doesn't exclude the discussed fact that given enough metadata almost any info can of course be de-anonymized, but not every source who gets that piece of info is doing it with that purpose.
There's a lot of misdirection in regards privacy worries (no wonder why as it's a complex issue becoming more and more complex each day) that often focus on the wrong targets.
There's a lot of teaching to do in regards this subject and threads like these are the proof that privacy is still a hard piece to chew for the largest part of the population.
Because serial number & mac hash are used to violates basic privacy by associating accounts and everything I do to my PC.
Its not about my damn mac address, its about tracking and fingerprinting by using info that the steam client absolutely shouldnt gather in the first place and has 0 reason to.
I mean if banks, papyal, credit cards (organizations that are designed from the core to track, spy and violate your privacy) use all sorts of fingerprinting and linking together in browser, by behaviour, by device IDs, apps, etc. NO SURPRISE....
But if Steam attempts to do that with the client?!?! Not only unexplainable but very shady aswell, like who knows what they will make out of this info.
A game launcher has absolutely no reason to do that and should collect as little info as possible, ideally not even IP addresses but for that there are atleast some more or less legitimate reasons.
And to your question: yes I do, have my all my browsers set up to block or spoof/randomize all known fingerprints (canvas, audio, webgl, many js functions) and on many sites i do much more to fully anonymize myself.
Back to your question, "Why is steam client checking/saving your disk serial & mac hash?". Guess what, it doesn't matter, because Steam and Valve are 100% American owned. Nothing to worry about. Now if epic was doing that, I would be seriously concerned because of their close ties to the Tencent/Chinese government.
It's been explained why fingerprinting a survey can be necessary and how it doesn't mean the survey data to be relatable to the account itself. At the end of the day is the user choice to follow the survey or not. It won't even scan your computer unless you tell it to.
And you might be surprised that america is not the country that is seen as state of the art for privacy.