You might be kidding Again(SOS Founder acc flew 140KM/40MIN defying the terrain but you did nothing)

LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
edited April 3 in General

SO=Super Obvious Spoofing

Disclaimer: as there was nobody complaining about the title of post at

and it turns out to be unexpectedly effective because it was the first time we saw Niantic employee responding to such reporting post, I'll simply follow this pattern and ignore any negative comment of anyone about the title. But I promise that I will not just do simple clone of this title in the future, as this post will be used as one of the references in my upcoming post which analyzes the current situation of spoofing reporting procedure and the effectiveness of Niantic Support from a warm-hearted, anti-cheating player's perspective.


This week I've been told that it's more than 1 month since my RES allies (10+ C.O.R.E. players) reported a super obvious spoofer but kept getting only standard answers from Lambert closing the ticket. But its account still alive. Fields and links are not removed according to its profile. No fast track escalation was done. Nobody contacted them for this case. I filed a report this week but got no response hitherto and if I got one I suppose it would be standard anwser, too. The profile of this founder spoofer is still accessible:



Yes, we know that sometimes it can take a few hours for the account to show as "Agent no longer in system". But for this account? More than 1 month has passed, thank you.


Here follows the original content used by many players when filing the complaint, very concise and straightforward:


Agent qweABC travelled from portal <土地庙> https://intel.ingress.com/intel?ll=28.697993,114.794266 (at 2021-02-26 03:09 AM UTC+8, which is actually impossible already because that scenic area has closed at that time) to portal <石牛寨> https://intel.ingress.com/intel?ll=28.913396,113.98382 (at 2021-02-26 03:47 AM UTC+8), completing the trip in 38 minutes. This trip (140KM) should take 2 hours and 25 minutes by car, that is, 107 minutes faster than possible.

--EOF--


Direct link to Google Maps routes suggestion between the two coordinates:


This area prohibits helicopters generally (you may see that it's direct blocked by a MOUNTAIN). Before and after this impossible movement this spoofing account did quite a bunch of linking and fielding as well and kept flying to other cities especially urban areas which is not possible to be done by helicopters either. The screenshot of logs and Google Maps have been fully covered in the largest community in China fighting with spoofers:

https://bjres.net/2021/02/27/cheater-qweabc/

and thus you may really believe that many players have filed reports collectively so it's not due to insufficient amount of reporting.

I would like to get an answer about why multiple complaints of this spoofing behavior e.g. #12518769 #12527850 (responses in both Chinese Mandarin and English which proves that they are filed by different players) have been closed without any actions even when they are reported by C.O.R.E. members and might clarify me the situation if I am wrong.







Post edited by LuoboTiX on
Tagged:

Comments

  • Since @NianticKK didn't actually explain why the other spoofer was banned, you're unlikely to get an answer as to why your spoofer wasn't, but they're well aware that saying "We reviewed the case and took any necessary actions" without banning them, would just get you all riled up again, so what's the point?

    If you're not going to accept "No", why would they respond with "No"?

    If you're already angry, why would they poke you in a way they know will make you angrier?

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 3

    I am not angry at all. I'm simply raising the attention of someone who could act and ban cheaters like what @A3ex successfully did in his/her post, that's all.

    How could you suppose that standard or even automatic reply sent by Lambert is always equivalent to "this case was really carefully reviewed"? If you sent Lorem Ipsum nonsense or something close to nonsense when filing spoofing report you would also receive that standard reply.

    I don't agree with the assumption that this case was manually reviewed because such super obvious spoofing should got a ban as long as they did review the case. No ban = No review.

    Also, I don't think XM Ambassador is recruited to defend Niantic all the time. I suppose XM Ambassadors are aimed at facilitating communication between we players and Niantic. So be it.

  • edited April 3

    XM Ambassadors provide feedback to Niantic, but we're not paid or compensated in anyway. I'll call out Niantic on failures whenever I see it as appropriate, but if you're "not angry at all", your tone and the dozens of other angry comments across various threads sure don't convey that to a reader. Also, you're forgetting the exact same exchanges from before I was an XMA.

    The reply from Niantic wasn't because of an angry title. It wasn't because of some key phrase in a post. It was a reminder to the player that their ticket had been reviewed, and just because it didn't immediately say "Agent not in System" doesn't mean that Niantic hadn't taken action.

    The above case, as you've pointed out, is completely different, because the account you're accusing has not been banned.

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 4

    Yeah, whatever. What readers see is before the post of @A3ex on the forum, the spoofer he/she reported was not banned.

    When the post went alive...Immediate ban, what a surprise! What a coincidence! Such things happen on the forum every week but every time people like you could find an excuse for it mainly because they didn't indeed wait long enough. We don't know whether you are right. Thus this time I waited for more than 1 month. See what excuses can be used.

    You may insist on the assumption that Niantic Support always reviews every report and deliver proper solutions as you like. I don't buy it. How many readers would buy it?

    You may continue to invite a lot of so called XM Ambassadors to click Disagree on every post of mine doubting the effectiveness of Niantic Support upon reviewing reports as you like. Or it's not you doing so but just their spontaneous collective behaviors. I don't care about it. How many readers once encountered unreasonable collective stalking Disagree attack?

    You may sound reasonable in previous posts. But for this undeniable case (super obvious spoofer+1 month no ban) you are still defending Niantic. I don't believe in you from an objective stance. How many readers would trust someone who seemingly 100% try to justify Niantic's every decision and action (or no actions)?

    Every reporter with experience knows that when previous Fast Track reporting via Telegram bot was working, such SOS case would 100% got an escalation and result in a permanent ban. Every reporter would doubt when people jump in to simply justify the fact that it was not banned under current circumstance and reporters only receive automatic standard reply with obviously no fast track escalation.

    It's funny that you decided to criticize on my tone, which means in essence you are not helping to take spoofer down (in the first priority) because it looks like you are simply looking for some sort of faults to start criticizing. In this case you are among those trying to take problem finders down (in the first priority).

    Post edited by LuoboTiX on
  • Every reporter with experience knows that when previous Fast Track reporting via Telegram bot was working, such SOS case would 100% got an escalation and result in a permanent ban. 

    This is definitely not true...

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 4

    Simple Logic, correct me if I'm wrong:

    1. Disastrous: If Niantic says/implies that they already reviewed the case and thought that this account was not spoofing.
    2. Incredible: If Niantic says/implies that they thought this account is indeed spoofing but decided to not ban it as they do previously for every obvious spoofing account through fast track reporting (permanent ban skipping 3-strikes)
    3. Expected: If Niantic says/implies that they didn't really review the case previously according to the report, and after my post this account would be banned secretly.
    4. Impressive: If Niantic says/implies that they didn't really review the case previously according to the report, and after my post this account would also not be reviewed.
    5. Utopia: Niantic bans my account and deletes my posts because I raised a dilemma question that they could not anwser easily, spent 1,000+ USD purely with Niantic and 10,000 USD+ for Ingress XMA activities, and act proactively in anti-cheating which may to some extent hinder Ingress revenue because anyway there is a minority of spoofers would make financial contributions via in-game purchase
    6. Appreciated: Whether admits the ineffectiveness of Niantic Support or not, DO manually review every reports of mine, or carefully review every posts of mine on the forum. Establish a channel for me so that I could take to NIA OPS. Me/Mine=A lot of active anti-cheating reporters


    Post edited by LuoboTiX on
  • It's becoming absurd, so no, I'm not going to correct you. You are 100% absolutely correct, and Niantic is completely wrong...

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 4

    Mind telling a story where, with the help of previous Fast Track Reporting, a spoofer was indeed reported, escalated by Trusted Reporters, identified and confirmed by Niantic (NIA OPS) as spoofer but got no permanent ban (Agent no longer in the system) as a solution (even if not a final solution).

    Previous fast track reporting can, as far as I know, only escalate those Super Obvious Spoofing case. You may deny this but we many reporters have our own experience. If you say that if a case has been escalated but banning is not a solution then feel free to let us know, because that means you are implying that Niantic don't always ban spoofers when they identify and confirm (=100% sure) spoofers. This would be a real absurd thing.

  • Mind telling a story where, with the help of previous Fast Track Reporting, a spoofer was indeed reported, escalated by Trusted Reporters, identified and confirmed by Niantic (NIA OPS) as spoofer but got no permanent ban (Agent no longer in the system) as a solution (even if not a final solution).

    Niantic has never "confirmed" that someone was a spoofer. Whether they did something or didn't do something, their response is that they have taken the appropriate actions, whether reported to a TR or reported directly. And many times when reporting to TR's, what seems like an obvious spoofer was not banned. If you don't believe that's true... you're not paying attention.

    You're so focused on "your case" that you only pay attention to the posts and stories that confirm your own bias.

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 4


    Oh, you are avoiding the questions by playing wording game, which means you probably have no stories proving your theories implying Niantic don't always ban spoofers when they confirm the spoofers.

    On the contrary, I have many for mine (when a spoofer was indeed reported, escalated by Trusted Reporters, identified and confirmed by Niantic (NIA OPS) as spoofer it 100% got permanent ban). For example (all relevant to old Fast Track Reporting):

    ENL player @Takenana in Shanghai was reported via Fast Track Reporting for Super Obvious Spoofing, escalated by Trusted Reporters to NIA OPS as #RTR_2020_3086, which resulted in its permanent ban (Agent No longer in system)

    ENL player @YaoYaoSSK in Shanghai receives the same punishment via #RTR_2020_3096

    ENL player @7188730 which is actually a sub-account of @time19 in Shanghai does the same via #RTR_2020_1202

    Try to defend Niantic somewhere else, or in front of those who are not familiar with spoofing reporting, when they are just not reviewing the reports mentioned in my post and what I'm doing is forcing Niantic to ban those who they promised and used to decide to ban.

    As an anti-spoofing vigilante I am not a simply-talking guy that can be fooled easily. I sent double-dight spoofers to the blackhole and I will send more. Sh0w me your story with reference number if you have completely different opinion.

    Post edited by LuoboTiX on
  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 4

    Won't reply to further comments as long as they are not constructive and simply criticizing me of something in the corner so that the attention could be distracted from why even SOS got no perm ban within more than 1 month. Such behavior is far from professional.

    Hardcore players should have realized what I'm trying to achieve by making this post and all those comments:

    With the change of Fast Track Program we now don't have a channel where we could elaborate the details of the reporting and request for an escalation of review by ourselves, the channel which is very important for the reporting process and directly determines in many cases whether a spoofer would be banned or not because without escalation your reports are very likely NOT REVIEWED AT ALL. Thus, I stand out and urge that we make our own channel via the Ingress forum and this post would be used in the future to justify our actions, by refuting all possible excuses that are widely used to prevent us from doing so, so that some good player won't be hindered from writing such reporting post.

    So that WE DON'T NEED TO BE FAMILIAR WITH A VANGUARD TO (HELP) BAN Super Obvious SPOOFERS. In the future, I would also like banning spoofers not so obvious but with solid evidence to be made easier. If Niantic don't want to deal with spoofers, I don't mind taking the risks of sacrificing my account to force Niantic to deal with spoofers by telling to the public the truth, the current extreme bad situation we are facing during the reporting process, the situation where even SOS got no perm ban within more than 1 month.

  • edited April 4

    Oh, you are avoiding the questions by playing wording game

    Actually I'm being precise, because you keep changing what I (and you) are saying each time your claim is refuted. I'm not the one playing word games, I'm defining my statements specifically, instead of constantly expanding the meaning beyond what I intend.

    No-one ever claimed Niantic said "Yes that's a spoofer" then didn't ban them.

    Also, accusing people of being a spoofer on the forums is technically harassment, so I won't post stories of people who I think were spoofers, but Niantic didn't ban.

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭

    Then I suppose you agree with the fact that Branch 2 is not the case. Let's proceed with the remainning possiblities i.e. 1 and 3-6.

    And most of the Branches imply that Niantic didn't really review the case even when they received multiple reports collectively.

  • edited April 4

    Sure, but that's your belief which is not evidence of truth. You're basically saying that every time Niantic replies without banning someone, they're lying for profit.

    I disagree.

    #1 is the actual situation. Niantic reviews all cases. If they find anything, they ban someone. If they don't find anything, they don't ban them. Their level of "finding" may not be as strong as we wish but that doesn't mean they didn't look.

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 4

    If #1 is the actual situation then Niantic/NIA OPS is wrong and an extraodinary failure occurred. In this case my post would help and force them to review again because I've proved with solid evidence that it's a SOS case and if Niantic didn't find anything strange when everyone can smell a sense of impossibility in terms of human beings from the action logs then the quality of process of reviewing a anti-spoofing ticket should be deeply questioned.

    Which means my post is very, very valuable, rather than "angry man writing pointless posts" as you implied. Yes you said "angry" and you asked "what's the point". I'm not playing wording game.


  • Which means my post is very, very valuable, rather than "angry man writing pointless posts" as you implied. Yes you said "angry" and you asked "what's the point". I'm not playing wording game.

    If you think your case has merit, send it again to Support, or send different additional info to Support. By your own argument, Niantic doesn't listen to any of these posts, except for one case where they already had banned the account, it just hadn't shown up yet, and the poster was jumping the gun.

    So, by your logic, posting here doesn't work because the only time they comment, is when they already did something.

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 4

    I put it here in advance because I know there must be someone repeating following excuses. Shame on those who knew but chose to hide the truth and complain about people's writing reporting posts on the forum, which actually or intentionally helps spoofers because spoofers feel it, know it and exploit it.

    I'm not saying everyone who has objection with me are helping spoofers on purpose. However, spoofers and their allies are definitely resorting to political correctness to make you good players upset during the fight with them via reporting. They are frightened by the possibility of reporters uniting on the forum with distinct, concise posts sending them to high-level manual review by NIA OPS because they were not banned simply due to the fact that your standard reports were not reviewed to some extent, instead of the assumption that NIA OPS really didn't find problems in those suspicious accounts.

    For those who say "Stay tuned". Watch those posts complaining about their reports resulting in nothing after weeks while their cases are applicable for a fast track review according to the criteria AFTER THE CHANGE OF FAST TRACK PROCESS:

    For those who say "Writing posts on the forum does not change anything. You should stick to the Support channel". Watch those posts showing the fact that their (new) reports instantly being reviewed and spoofers got banned AFTER THE POSTS ON THE FORUM:


    Reporters, you know what to do and which theory you should rely on, even if you could not express your endorse in public because of those "Disagree attack fans". But still remember, I'm talking about SOS case, not generally spoofing case that is hard to prove.

    Post edited by LuoboTiX on
  • Again, you're trading "belief" for "truth".

    The first case, a Vanguard helped resubmit the ticket:

    The second case, the spoofer never got banned anyway.

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 5

    Again, you are telling the half truth to make people think it's fault of reporters not Niantic Support that their reports were not reviewed (as they expected) and simultaneously the spoofers were not banned. A Vanguard in that post said that the original reports were probably lack of concision and he/she has given further guidance about how to write a report that he/she thinks are readable for Niantic Support:

    Although it's already ridiculous that reporters need to be very, very professional when writing a SOS report to get spoofers banned when the relevant action logs are obviously not possible for human beings to generate which means if anti-spoofing mechanism really works then Niantic should have detected that SOS automatically and it would be redundant for reporters to file tickets again....SOS case can 100% be detected automatically if Niantic really wants to ban them because as long as Niantic traces the logs in conjunction with Google Maps Navigation Suggestion API (time needed to travel between two spots) then SOS would have no way to hide.

    ...we still appreciate the guidance because IT SEEMINGLY WORKS for @Ilya95 and what we want is to ban spoofers instead of shouting that "hey Niantic Support you were just not reading my reports". And IT SEEMS THE REASON that when @Ilya95 filed the report again, the report was read this time due to the fact that it's made more concise and readable, if "Niantic just ignores your reports" is not the matter of fact.

    That being said, I suggested my allies to completely follows the idea presented by warm-hearted and inspiring Vanguard as I quoted because anyway if we want to write something then why not write it good? Everyone can see that the format of report we wrote for this SOS is 100% the same as the "recommended format" and if Niantic Supports reads and act for previous cases I referred to then Niantic Support should as well read and act for our case.

    BUT IT WAS NOT REVIEWED/THE SPOOFER NOT BANNED AGAIN. This time no excuses like "it's because you didn't write reports well" can be used. Let's see how many remainning excuses could still be made by Niantic defenders in fooling we genuine anti-cheating players.

    And there are MORE spoofing cases which are not SOS and thus cannot be described in a short, concise paragraph but can be proved as long as Niantic Support really reads our long report and appreciate our ant-cheating work and work more closely with vigilante reporters. As obviously Niantic Support does not work well when reading the long report (if "Niantic just ignores your reports" is not the matter of fact) which cannot be denied by you or @Azhreia and we now don't have a channel where we could talk with Trusted Reporters and let them know why the reports should be escalated to NIA OPS, writing a post on the Ingress forum becomes the best and only way to have it escalated by ourselves, isn't it?

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 5

    I repeat one conclusion among many from my observation here because I think this is the root of problem for SOS case:

    If anti-spoofing mechanism really works then Niantic should have detected that SOS automatically and it would be redundant for reporters to file tickets again....SOS case can 100% be detected automatically if Niantic really wants to ban them because as long as Niantic traces the logs in conjunction with Google Maps Navigation Suggestion API (time needed to travel between two spots) then SOS would have no way to hide.

    Even I myself am able to write such algorithm. It's just calling Google Maps API, getting an ETA suggestion and compare with the logs to see if the suspicious exceeded the maxium possible speed to a great extent. If so, just ban it instantly with some optimization for corner cases including unexpected GPS shift (easy to tell it from spoofers) to avoid banning good, normal players. In rare cases that some players rent helicopters or even jet and got banned by mistake, they 100% have the invoice to make an appeal and good players won't be affected for a long time.

    You know what? I think and I see that Niantic is not doing so. Perhaps it's because if you want to call Google Maps API heavily YOU HAVE TO PAY A LOT because it's not free of charge for commercial use.

    But it's free of charge when a single Niantic Support employee checks the Google Maps by himself/herself for a specific case because it's not bulk usage then. Still, WHY DID NIANTIC SUPPORT NOT DO THAT? Merely a querying with Google Maps would result in a ban of that spoofer because Google Maps would say that it's 5 times faster than possible.

    Has Niantic Support become that lazy not to do even a simple manual review/check which is free of addtional charge for 3rd party Google Maps services when we reporters have made everything concise, readable and ready for them? I don't think so. I still believe in Niantic Support, that's why I'm writing this post to remind them something they missed instead of intentionally ignored.

    Because if so, anti-spoofing would be a completely a joke.

    Post edited by LuoboTiX on
  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 5

    I don't think software engineer or interns of Niantic or employees recruited by Niantic Support need me to teach them how to query with Google Maps Navigation in their program or manually to get an ETA by driving when reviewing my post but in case they really need:

    First you enter https://www.google.com/maps/dir/

    Then append the starting point and an additional slash:

    https://www.google.com/maps/dir/28.697993,114.794266/

    Then append the ending point and all set. Let's go and catch SOS!

    https://www.google.com/maps/dir/28.697993,114.794266/28.913396,113.98382

    Come on. What are they waiting for? What else do they need to review my case and ban the spoofer as they promised? Beer? Snacks? Daft Punk Background Music?

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭

    I put it here in advance because I know there must be someone saying so:

    Perhaps that SOS account has been permanently banned but it's just not showing "Agent no longer in the system"

    No. No because it's been more than 1 month since the report and spoofing actions.

    No because as long as I know, starting from Prime, all spoofers banned permanently will have, without exception, an "Agent no longer in the system" as an "dishonor" warning others not to imitate them.

    No because I don't accept Schrodinger state as a result because it's not a result and many of us won't accept as well. For privacy reasons Niantic don't tell what they think and what they've done to spoofers. But, we have our eyes and we know exactly how Niantic promises when punishing spoofers. If we see that they are "no longer in the system" after our reports then we know they are identified as spoofers and banned by Niantic Support, either temporarily or permanently. If we don't see so, then we won't agree with the idea that they received due punishment when even temporary ban is far from enough.

  • LuoboTiXLuoboTiX ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 5

    Yes of course I send it again when I wrote this post because I know I will be told to do so. #12917307 +1 record of Niantic Support's not reviewing and banning SOS case. "Appropriate actions"? Then I take appripriate actions from my perspective, that is writing this post to let everyone on the forum to see what's happening.

    I don't mind wasting time on repeated uselss reports, as long as many Niantic stakeholders don't mind being pointed out and players' being widely acknowledged that Niantic is very likely not helping ban spoofers, at least in this case; plus Niantic is probably not caring about user complaints on the forum and posts like this are also meaningless, like you said.

    Yes. Not even banning SOS account, not to mention those careful and well prepared spoofers. Very funny. If Niantic keeps ignoring me and reporters with strong evidence helping to build a better gaming environment like me, this game were to retain only spoofers as the only players. Good luck when it's been so.

    Post edited by LuoboTiX on
This discussion has been closed.