The touchscreen most likely is just an interface and not where the data for the software update comes from.

It doesn't seem implausible that a deckmate coder could put their own 'software update' onto a usb that is also a wifi router and control a table remotely if no-one knows there's something plugged in.

I think you guys are missing the point. I can attach a usb and alter the deck trackers code to cause certain events to always happen and then remove the usb. Keeping the usb plugged in isn’t necessary unless you want to constantly alter the code remotely which is not necessary to cheat.

Any software needs software updates. The fact is there will always be vulnerabilities for cheaters. The way this is designed does seem very susceptible for cheating though to be honest. The easiest way to tell if they’re incredibly vulnerable is to see if they’re ever used on the casino floor. If a casino is using it with their own money probably reasonably secure. If they’re using other products probably a reason (lack of security being the most likely).

My understanding that the deckmate 1 randomizes the cards and counts them but doesn't know which card is missing, if one is. It seems like the new deckmate is designed to order the deck cards identify the actual missing card, usually takes done by the dealer at the beginning/end of opening a table. These tasks appear to be completed by a process that "knows" or reads the cards. Combining a machine designed to randomize the deck with one that knows and orders the cards seems like a shitty idea. And making it penetrable by a USB plug seems even worse.

My bad... I guess I misunderstood the article, and IOActive's technique. In the video, they attached that little Raspberry Pi device to the USB. But indeed, the Wired article says:

So maybe a better fix would be to not allow it to connect to anything wirelessly? Just require all updates – software, firmware, deck libraries – to be installed through some physical connection. When it comes to monitoring usage numbers, a technician would have to come over and pull that info on certain intervals. This is already done with devices like copy machines, even ones that are constantly online. Just do the same for a casino shuffler. Slightly less convenient? Yes. Far more secure? Also yes.

Alternatively, could there be a happy medium in which the dealer pulls a deck from the device, then for good measure, gives it one more quick shuffle? Then even if someone HAD compromised the system and knows the order of the cards, that single step negates the info sent from the DM2 to a cheater's phone. Even a quick overhand shuffle would do the job. I know in my home games, I sort of absent-mindedly do this when people are posting their blinds, etc. Sure, this adds a little more time, but the combo of a shuffling machine and one human shuffle is still much, much faster than a human doing all seven riffle shuffles. So it's still a net gain.

Anyway, curious to see the response from Deckmate's manufacturers. Apparently, the engineering team is "already planning to fix them," so I look forward to seeing what measures are put in place.

Casinos should have material concern of an inside crew gaining control of the shuffler.

Imagine how quickly a blackjack/baccarat team could rake in 6 figures+ with a corrupted shuffler.

I see tech guys at my local casino working on shufflers quite often with nobody watching their work whatsoever. The control structures in place to prevent this kind of corruption are sorely lacking there.

This has already happened. And was posted about in one of the threads on 2+2. Give me a moment and I'll try to find which thread.


https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...tions+in+texas

Post #72 in that thread has Joey doing an interview that mentions many of the shuffler hacks a year before IOActive got involved.

Post #78 mentions a blackjack team beating a compromised shuffle machine.

And geez it is no surprise other sources get credit for a Wired story that broke a year earlier on 2+2 because the 2+2 Garrett thread and the Texas thread got derailed. And it is always the same small group of knuckleheads doing the derails.

My understanding is DM2 sorts the deck to a random order using the camera and reading each card’s suit and r@nk.

Sometime in the process I have heard when green button is pushed, a pseudo random number is generated. This random number represents a specific order for all 52 cards. As each card is scanned it is placed to the proper slot.

The advantage of this method is it works the same for sorting a deck or dealing duplicate bridge all shuffle the same way. What changes is only how the order needed is selected.

For a poker hand it is a pseudo random number. For suit rank ordering, it is always the same. Not sure how it is done for duplicate bridge other than all the machines will produce the same order of cards.

Several of you ****ers are a bunch of bickering bitches that make relaying relevant info almost impossible. That Texas incident wasn't the first time this had happened. That wasn't even the first 2+2 thread on a potential shuffle machine hack. And the other thread was a cluster **** of bickering like this one.

Just because it's 'psuedo' doesn't mean it's not effectively entirely random. Pseudo is only really a conceptual term here.

One duplicate bridge goal and method that was guessed at years ago was the machines would talk to each other, some machines have cellular capabilities. So to use an old computer phrase of "master and slave computer" the master shuffle machine on one table would shuffle a deck of cards and serve as the communication hub sending that exact sequence of cards to the slave shuffle machines on all the other tables.

For poker the problem becomes when a feature turns into an exploit. If your poker shuffle machine is not randomly shuffling, but instead acting as a slave machine receiving a cheater sequence from a master machine or other device like a cell phone. I think huge bad beat jackpots where the sequence is inputted into the shuffler is a future dream of cheaters, if not already possible. The tv show "I (almost) got away with it" shows idiots being too greedy. Postle and Garrett examples show going too far, but if you don't go too far a lot of money can be made silently.

I recently had a dealer, explicitly state that these shufflers do not have this capability blah blah.

I am almost certain that anyone with manager title and above knows exactly what these machines can do, any opportunity to squash the conversation even at the table (fwiw I brought it up) is going to be taken.

I still say the cut is what matters

So. None of what I wrote matters whether true or pseudo random. I am not even sure what you are trying to say or imply. Yes these pseudo random numbers effectively true randoms. Of course I never implied otherwise.

You realize that if the number of players is known, the deck can be stacked to still pick the winner regardless of the cut.

Thanks. The important fact for everyone to realize is that the sequence is being determined by software, not hardware. Consequently, it can be hacked. Whether that be from a second or third party accessing the device via a USB port or wirelessly, or from a game organizer having physical access to the machine after hours, it's a potential problem.

One solution to this potential problem is to require the dealer to give the deck an additional shuffle after coming out of the machine, before cutting. This is especially true in a private game that uses the Deckmate 2. But cardrooms may balk at this as it will take additional time and lower the number of hands per hour the dealers can deal. Personally, I won't play in a private game that uses that machine, unless additional precautions are taken.

Probably close to half the poker room managers in my city barely know the rules of poker, and a not insignificant number of them are just bad bad bad at their job. There's no way these clowns know the capabilities of the tech under the table

I wasn't trying to contradict you at all, just adding relevant information for those who might not have known it

The article states this hacking is a result of lax regulation / poor implementation:

The entire exploit can be prevented with software signing rather than the hash check. It's absurd, but not at all surprising.

This is a great example of why our government systems in the United States are completely disfunctional. If we assume regulators aren't taking bribes (they are), they're too incompetent to enforce what features guarantee software / hardware security. Even if they could make reasonable suggestions for implementations, tech moves so fast that they could be outdated before a product hits market.

If it were the casinos’ $ on the line they’d fix this asap. But it isn’t, it’s ours.

Yeah. The actual physical security of a casino is the real deterrent in this scenario. Most casinos I've been to have a small army of security and basically their own police stations. This adds more reasons to avoid private games and card houses.

Though given the proliferation of this new information, if Deckmate doesn't make changes casinos may become targets. Apparently most of the devices are offline, which means someone would literally have to install a fix on each system. I can't see that happening. Most systems being offline is reassuring as well because they won't be accessible from a distance.

It would be a very difficult exploit to pull off in a casino, but it seems plausible.

For example, let's say you can use the USB to upload and execute malicious code that instructs the DM to start cold decking your opponents...

How do you know when the shuffler would deal these hands (Scheduled task or CRON job?) and how could you guarantee that you are in the seat the actually gets dealt the winner with players sitting down, leaving, table gets short, etc?

Everything would have to line up just right for it be pulled off in the wild.

In the video, they show how it's possible to know all cards from the flop because of the camera feature. People look at their phones constantly during hands. It doesn't seem too tough to pull off if you get a seat by the shuffler. Because of the lax security implementation, a hacker can replace the software with literally anything so long as the correct hash is returned, so I imagine the network connection can be used.

Step 1: play live
Step 2: be apparently clumsy, drop something under the table
Step 3: insert usb
Step 4: it communicates with an app on your phone and tells you what everyone else has and what the board is going to read
Step 5: you are now a superuser. Maybe you could even have it rig the deck for you. Program it so that roughly once every 20 hands you cooler someone else. The only interaction you have with your phone is when you tell it what seat you are. Or you have headphones that have the app tell you all the info you need.

Obviously there's a lot more intermediary steps involving skilled coding and knowledge of their proprietary software but you wouldn't exactly need to be Mr Robot to pull off this heist

Yeah that's pretty serious and way worse than I had thought.

This is one of those times where 99% of the time, the machines will deal a fair game, but someone, somewhere will find the perfect opportunity to pull this off and turn it into their very own money printer... and the fact of the matter is.. they've likely been doing it for sometime now.

Years ago, a local cardroom ordered decks of cards where the card on the top of the deck was always convex and wouldn't lay flat on the table unless it was protected. For how ever long, people were essentially playing the Ace of Spades face up to people who were in the know. It was reported to the card room and at first report, they shrugged it off.

The only reason I bring this story up, is that you can not trust the cardrooms to fix obvious integrity issues. If your poker room has a commission, it's best to start there.

These machines probably all need to go.

Lol I heard about this story the day after it was published when a guy sat down at Rivers in Chicago and asked the dealer whether people had been there yet to “fix the shuffle machines”. The day after the article he thought deckmate or someone would immediately dispatch technicians across the country to plug the hole.