Do you use two factor authentication?

no. I should also add, that I only play on a new desktop, which I use for poker and nothing else, so the chances of having a trojan on there or something should be relatively low. I'll also add that people can post clickable hyper-links in the chat, no idea if that could be a potential source or not as I know little about computers.

Everyone should, especially high stakes players. With the nature of bitcoin, it's your only line of defense against a stolen password. Though if he had a bunch of player's passwords he could just empty their accounts rather than play against them.

If the player in question managed to get a trojan on a bunch of player's machines, and could see their hole cards, he would probably follow them around even to games he does not understand. And his play would look horrendous, though in hindsight justified because he could see your cards.

The normal reason for not revealing the results of investigations is because the sites have a duty of confidentiality with regard to their customers.

If SWC is anonymous and its users can't be identified, then I can't see any reason why they shouldn't give the results of investigations of cheating, and details of what they have done to ensure that similar methods can't be used to cheat again. Indeed, that would make their players feel a little safer against being cheated.

Very disturbing, what usernames were involved?

I have not seen KuntyKunter since the end of May

I was forced to change names because of monkeys like the OP who cry foul after getting owned. I am not a cheat.

Why did SWC tell you they had to ban you?

I've never said a word to the site about any players, Nor made any public comment about the situation until the player has been missing for a month, neither did any person i associate with, so that reason is impossible

Furthe, if that was the reason shouldn't the email form the site say we did a full investigation and found no evidence of cheating, etc. rather than state we can't go into details why you don't see him anymore but we're aware of the situation and can't comment on the investigation (why is there an investigation of just a bunch of morons complaining about being owned) etc...

Lastly, if they did allow you to change your screen name and keep your established rakeback it seems unfair you would be able to keep your rake while continuing to play people with established reads while they have none.

So in the somewhat unlink chance that you are right, the email response is the prime reason that lead to this post. However the fact that they would make you change your name for cheating accusations a month prior to myself or anyone u know mentioning it, seems unlikely.

I did not mean they banned me, sorry for the confusion. I meant I was "forced" to create a new account because people in chat were accusing me of being a cheat. As a result the action I was able to get was impacted negatively.

Read my previous post. I was not banned but chose to create a new account, which to my knowledge is permitted at SWC. I play 2-7 for fun, perhaps my odd playing style was due to my lack of knowledge of the game back then. I'll happily play you again

Sorry for calling you a monkey btw, but SOOOO many people had accused me of being a cheat at not only 2-7 but PLO as well. Gets annoying.

If this is the case, don't you find it very odd that their email would state we are aware of the situstion (there is no situation), we can't comment, but we'll say the reason is not becuase he was challenged in the chat, which I take to mean as people calling you a Cheater in chat is expressly not the reason we don't see you there anymore. If true those are pretty different and conflicting accounts.

Could you post that entire email, please?

I do agree that is odd. As I dont know what the email said, I can not comment on everything, but perhaps they meant "we are aware of the situation" as in so much that they had received complaints from other players and are investigating. I think you are reading it as "we are aware something is odd." FWIW I was not contacted by seals about any allegations made against me. The timing of my KK s/n not playing is not related to any complaints sent to SWC or any investigation, it is merely a coincidence. Perhaps I should go back to that account?

the "security problem" was definitely the feds raiding microns home (imo)



obv i can't say how likely the scenarios are, but i've once read that especially the smaller rooms tend to not sign their update packages and hackers could add malware (even it's not easy to corrupt such files) w/o anybody noticing it.

i've also read about a (very old) case, where a poker rng could be predicted, b/c the provider used pseudo random numbers (not sure if any one uses them nowadays). if you could narrow all possible decks down to a few thousand and then filter this result b/c you have been dealt a 5 card hand, you prolly know the whole deck.



the mentioned 'RNG hack' itt is imo a different thing. as i understood, the hacker knew the result b/c it was sent and he decrypted/influenced it. i don't think, that swc would send all the card info to each player at the table

One of the old seals developers posted details of the security problem on another message board, probably not linkable here, under the name hdev_swc. If you google that name you can find the thread, and then look for post #985. Note that the incident described happened on the old Poker Mavens version of Seals.

thx, very interesting

Please go back and play on it. That will at least establish that SWC support is lying to all of us.

How would that establish anything? We have neither the actual support email, which a friend of OP claimed to have received, nor confirmation that it is genuine. In fact, no where does OP actually report that support said the player was banned. Whoever thought that was reading between the lines a bit.

Sounds like someone like the NGBC or FBI attempted to copy the site data.

From reading the thread it sounds like they shut down because of the raid & the hardware fault, because they couldn't know if their system was still secure or not. This is of course the old Poker Mavens system, not what they run now.

i have a copy of the emails but will let jon_locke or macaubound decide if they want to post it.

security problem on Mavens was that someone had access to the server and was comprimised during micons ordeal with agents , I believe that is what the dev said on another forum. Guy that op said cheated him doesn't sound credible at all. Didn't he call down 2 hands with a pair? Playing high stakes and being a novice, doesn't make much sense.

Makes perfect sense if he could see OPs cards.

I played Kunty a bunch heads up. I'm pretty sure I'm up on him and have no idea why people think he was cheating.

Because SWC said so?

Cite?