How to block Unity spyware from user side?

[Bakadoon]

As you probably know, Unity recently come with rather frightening statements.
According to Unity managers, they are able to detect any installation of unity-based software and tie it to a specific user, so they will charge game developers only once per game installation per user per device. More than that, they able to tell if such installation was obtained through purchace, gamepass, humble bundle, recieved for free or even pirated. On top of that unity is able to tell user location, as they have different prices depending on it. This all they know fom "their private data models".
That would sound crazy if it was not unity top manager and developers tell that and if it was not that Unity was recently acquired by infamous malvare developer ironSource (one that install 10 new browsers and a crypto miner to your PC every time you try to install torrent client, apparently it i legal).

Naturally I will prefer to not be under such a surveillance (even if they have everything in their EULA, I don't care, EULAs are all bs), so any ideas how could I block it without losing access to unity games?
First Idea that comes to my mind is to block unity in hosts file, so I run wireshark and look for DNS requests, two particulary sus addresses emediatelly were found, so I block them

0.0.0.0 operate-sdk-telemetry.unity3d.com
0.0.0.0 cdp.cloud.unity3d.com

However such a naive approach surely will not stop seasoned malvare distibutors such as ironSource. They simply can change spyware domain name and hosts file does not understand things like *.unity3d.com. That of course can be solved by installing proper DNS server. But they could simply use another domain or even hard code IPs.

So any idea on how to avoid spying?
Is there any way to restrict all unity games and all proceses spawned by them to only connect to allowed hosts, suth as steam license checkers and online servers?

[Pheex]

Unity doesn't get data directly from user machines but rather from a guesstimate model using sales and people playing.

If they had spyware detecting people's installs they wouldn't use a data model but a factually perfect record of the number of installs.

Part of the whole controversy is that Unity is charging devs on a 'trust me bro' businessmodel for number of installs.

[Eagle_of_Fire]

I strongly suspect that even if you ever managed to 100% block whatever could be sent to Unity server, they would still use Steam data to cover you back to their servers.

Steam knows what you play at all time, it is a DRM. Steam also identify your computer(s) when you create your account and if you ever change your PC you'll notice that they bother you to verify if that new hardware configuration is actually yours and that the noticed change is legit.

That's all the info Unity need to identify a person and flag it to an install, in their eyes.

[Bakadoon]

Postat inițial de Pheex:

Unity doesn't get data directly from user machines but rather from a guesstimate model using sales and people playing.

If they had spyware detecting people's installs they wouldn't use a data model but a factually perfect record of the number of installs.

Part of the whole controversy is that Unity is charging devs on a 'trust me bro' businessmodel for number of installs.

Well, they certainly get something, as after launch of unity based game some data was transfered to those 2 domains.
I understand controversy is about devs may require to pay more, than they earn, but my concern is about end user privacy.

[Elucidator]

There could be other reasons for those connections to appear:

Unity is trying to become a framework much closer to an MMO RPG. What i am guessing is that the Unity Engine is tracking the user, measuring what they're doing for sales reasons and the Engine may later if not already contain ads.

Also considering that statement; the costs (and as such risks) for the Free version are enormous, discouraging developers from selling stuff and encouraging them to Subscribe for Premium.
(basically it costs at least 20% per sold unit, but can go up to 40, 80 or even 100 or above if a user has enough PCs to install it on.)
Since its a fee based on gross revenue, it means vat hasn't been deducted and steam's fee also hasn't been deducted yet as well, etc.
Unity Pro or above are basically the only options. At least the engine seems to be pushing towards that.

Unity indeed became closer akin to malware, but.considering their CEO, I shouldn't be surprised lol.
That man is highly likely a sociopath of the highest malicious tier; "for profit" is everything, so no matter what the cost or sacrifice. "Who cares about gamers?" that kind of statements. Anyone with morals is according to him .. well, this article can show I guess..
https://stealthoptional.com/news/unitys-ceo-devs-pay-per-install-charge-fps-gamers-per-bullet/
https://gamerant.com/unity-ceo-company-shares-sold-installation-fee-announcement/

Anyway, the Unity engine also integrated AI tools which likely leech from Unity Developers, rather than aid them.
I think the AI integration maybe tracking how the engine users program and how they use Unity wholely, so that game development becomes easier, to collect data on the developers themselves (for ad reasons), etc. I also think unity is doing this mainly so that they can sell that data.
Unity also seems to be pushing their ad campaign program (notice their new fee cost deduction statement). I think the unity engine maybe looking around online to see if it can display ads or not.

I think all of these things maybe a possible reason why data is send to Unity, I can't say if these packets at least contain the "data about your PC as a unique string".

which reminds me....

What about offline systems? xD

[Eagle_of_Fire]

Like Pheex already mentioned, this whole "trust me bro" attitude make zero sense to begin with. I don't even feel like it is necessary to dig too much into this.

Many people believe what they are trying to pull here isn't even legal to begin with. It is by no mean surprising that they are back pedalling so hard. I can't see, legally speaking, how they could force anybody to pay retroactively for stuff the end user (devs in this case) didn't even agree with in the first place because they've been already been caught shadow changing their ToS in preparation to this stunt.

The whole thing look like a bad version of "talk about it in good, talk about it in bad, as long as you talk about it". Personally I think they've just destroyed a huge portion of their goodwill they spent over a decade building up and it might hurt them tenfold more than whatever they thought they could pull with this stunt.

[PunCrathod]

You guys operating based on old info. The latest version of the pricing updates page https://unity.com/pricing-updates#unity-runtime-fee says "Who is charged the Unity Runtime Fee?

The Unity Runtime Fee will be charged to the entity that distributes the runtime."

So it is not the developers who are supposed to pay. It's Apple, Amazon, Google, Epic, Valve etc who are supposed to pay the fee.

The little fish tossed mud on their boat for trying to use hooks that were too brutal so now they decided to try those hooks on the fish that are big enough to swallow their boat whole.

[Chompman]

Postat inițial de PunCrathod:

You guys operating based on old info. The latest version of the pricing updates page https://unity.com/pricing-updates#unity-runtime-fee says "Who is charged the Unity Runtime Fee?

The Unity Runtime Fee will be charged to the entity that distributes the runtime."

So it is not the developers who are supposed to pay. It's Apple, Amazon, Google, Epic, Valve etc who are supposed to pay the fee.

The little fish tossed mud on their boat for trying to use hooks that were too brutal so now they decided to try those hooks on the fish that are big enough to swallow their boat whole.

They can say anything they want but that does not mean companies will have to pay that if there is no agreement between companies like that.

Going after companies many times your size like that will not end well for your company even if they could somehow enforce a made up rule like this.

[PunCrathod]

Postat inițial de Chompman:

Postat inițial de PunCrathod:

You guys operating based on old info. The latest version of the pricing updates page https://unity.com/pricing-updates#unity-runtime-fee says "Who is charged the Unity Runtime Fee?

The Unity Runtime Fee will be charged to the entity that distributes the runtime."

So it is not the developers who are supposed to pay. It's Apple, Amazon, Google, Epic, Valve etc who are supposed to pay the fee.

The little fish tossed mud on their boat for trying to use hooks that were too brutal so now they decided to try those hooks on the fish that are big enough to swallow their boat whole.

They can say anything they want but that does not mean companies will have to pay that if there is no agreement between companies like that.

Going after companies many times your size like that will not end well for your company even if they could somehow enforce a made up rule like this.

That was my point. They have gone completely insane with this price change project of theirs.

[Yzal]

Postat inițial de Pheex:

Unity doesn't get data directly from user machines but rather from a guesstimate model using sales and people playing.

Unity to game devs: "this is how much you owe me, trust me bro"

[RSebire]

game devs went woke
now they can also go broke

as buying a game doesn't mean you "own" it
i have zero sympathy for them

[Qbert ⭐]

Postat inițial de Arnold Schwarzschild:

Postat inițial de Pheex:

Unity doesn't get data directly from user machines but rather from a guesstimate model using sales and people playing.

If they had spyware detecting people's installs they wouldn't use a data model but a factually perfect record of the number of installs.

Part of the whole controversy is that Unity is charging devs on a 'trust me bro' businessmodel for number of installs.

Well, they certainly get something, as after launch of unity based game some data was transfered to those 2 domains.
I understand controversy is about devs may require to pay more, than they earn, but my concern is about end user privacy.

Probably has to do something with this:

How is Unity collecting the number of installs?

We leverage our own proprietary data model and will provide estimates of the number of times the runtime is distributed for a given project – this estimate will cover an invoice for all platforms.

Taken from: https://unity.com/pricing-updates#unity-runtime-fee

[Eagle_of_Fire]

Postat inițial de PunCrathod:

You guys operating based on old info. The latest version of the pricing updates page https://unity.com/pricing-updates#unity-runtime-fee says "Who is charged the Unity Runtime Fee?

The Unity Runtime Fee will be charged to the entity that distributes the runtime."

So it is not the developers who are supposed to pay. It's Apple, Amazon, Google, Epic, Valve etc who are supposed to pay the fee.

The little fish tossed mud on their boat for trying to use hooks that were too brutal so now they decided to try those hooks on the fish that are big enough to swallow their boat whole.

That's not really so much as "old info" than Unity backpedalling so hard they pretty much attain cruising speed. Going backward.

But seriously, nobody cares who really end up getting charged in the long run. We all know that the new "tax" is simply going to get shovelled down toward the last person in the chain. The gamers. People like you and me, who are going to be forced to pay 5-10$ more just because of stupidity like what they are trying to pull.

[Doomerang]

Postat inițial de RSebire:

game devs went woke
now they can also go broke

as buying a game doesn't mean you "own" it
i have zero sympathy for them

Dude; saying every single dev in existence is woke is crazy. This is not a woke issue

[PunCrathod]

Postat inițial de Eagle_of_Fire:

Postat inițial de PunCrathod:

You guys operating based on old info. The latest version of the pricing updates page https://unity.com/pricing-updates#unity-runtime-fee says "Who is charged the Unity Runtime Fee?

The Unity Runtime Fee will be charged to the entity that distributes the runtime."

So it is not the developers who are supposed to pay. It's Apple, Amazon, Google, Epic, Valve etc who are supposed to pay the fee.

The little fish tossed mud on their boat for trying to use hooks that were too brutal so now they decided to try those hooks on the fish that are big enough to swallow their boat whole.

That's not really so much as "old info" than Unity backpedalling so hard they pretty much attain cruising speed. Going backward.

But seriously, nobody cares who really end up getting charged in the long run. We all know that the new "tax" is simply going to get shovelled down toward the last person in the chain. The gamers. People like you and me, who are going to be forced to pay 5-10$ more just because of stupidity like what they are trying to pull.

The difference is that small indie devs and us gamers cant afford to fight this thing in court. The giant distributors however can sue them to oblivion for even trying to charge them these fees. I mean there is no way someone like valve is going to give unity money just because they send a bill. There has never been an agreement between the distributors and unity so it is an easy win and both the indie devs and gamers are going to praise them for putting unity in its place.

[unjustifier]

Postat inițial de PunCrathod:

Postat inițial de Eagle_of_Fire:

That's not really so much as "old info" than Unity backpedalling so hard they pretty much attain cruising speed. Going backward.

But seriously, nobody cares who really end up getting charged in the long run. We all know that the new "tax" is simply going to get shovelled down toward the last person in the chain. The gamers. People like you and me, who are going to be forced to pay 5-10$ more just because of stupidity like what they are trying to pull.

The difference is that small indie devs and us gamers cant afford to fight this thing in court. The giant distributors however can sue them to oblivion for even trying to charge them these fees. I mean there is no way someone like valve is going to give unity money just because they send a bill. There has never been an agreement between the distributors and unity so it is an easy win and both the indie devs and gamers are going to praise them for putting unity in its place.

That's on top of the subset of gamers who see this predatory ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ for exactly what it is, and outright abandons Unity software regardless of source. We already have enough money-grubbing ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ extorting us by ripping games apart into pieces to resell them, selling grossly overpriced 'cosmetics', and the big favorite of the former EA CEO: lootboxes. I will NOT tolerate this level of greed and malevolence towards gamers and developers both, and I will punish each and every developer who doesn't get the memo and continues partnering with Unity and thus extending it's life; by excising myself from their potential market permanently.

The Unity Game Engine is pure poison regardless of any further decisions made by their executive idiots, in my eyes. There is NO going back.