Heroes of newerth : http://www.heroesofnewerth.com/
Btw it is dangerous to trust game, so much overflow exploit is outhere.
Dont worry, CIS detects BO attacks.
Here is My list:
Game Name: Publisher website: Maker Website:
Battlefield 2 http://battlefield.ea.com/battlefield/bf2/
http://www.dice.se/
Battlefield 2142 http://battlefield.ea.com/battlefield/bf2142/Default.aspx?lang=us
http://www.dice.se/
Battlefield Heroes http://www.battlefieldheroes.com/en/frontpage/landingPage
http://www.dice.se/
Crysis Warhead http://crysiswarhead.ea.com/Default.aspx##
http://www.crytek.com/
Crysis http://games.ea.com/crysis/home.jsp
http://www.crytek.com/
Crysis Wars Cant find site… http://www.crytek.com/
Star Trek Online http://startrekonline.com/
http://www.crypticstudios.com/
Champions Online http://www.champions-online.com
http://www.crypticstudios.com/
Eve Online http://play.eveonline.com
http://www.ccpgames.com
Dust 514 http://www.dust514.org/
http://www.ccpgames.com
World of Darkness http://www.white-wolf.com/worldofdarkness/
http://www.ccpgames.com
World of Warcraft http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/index.xml
http://us.blizzard.com
Sid Mirer’s Games. 2K Games | Official 2K Website - 2K
http://www.firaxis.com/games/ ← More then 1 Game
All C&C games http://www.ea.com/
http://www.commandandconquer.com/ <-More then 1 Game
Thanks…
Nothing can be trusted… But the people that install (buy) games for their computers will install them and run them anyhow, don’t you think?? ??? Who download/buys “world of warcraft”, the antivirus says nothing and then just decide not to try(trust) it, despite the files being the official ones?? That person would probably not be getting the file(s) in the first place, don’t you think? Ofc a hacker that knows of a weakness in that particular software might theoretically try to trick a person into downloading a 700 MB game file. I know a person who tried this approatch on me… (the software he was trying to convince me to get was a beta VPN software.) But seriously, a person that get tricked by the hacker into getting a game for his computer is probably already determined to ignore CIS warnings and let it install/run anyhow. Don’t you think? 
Also would whitelisting games really be any diffrent from whitelisting softwares from M$ or google? History has shown they isn’t fully safe either.
A white-list for games is a good idea I think, it can save a lot of frustration for people. And as long as comodo is offering not to use the whitelist I couldn’t worry less.
A games that i would like to see white-listed is Starcraft.
These are all great games and it’s easy to understand why someone would WANT them to be easy to use.
However, that does not mean they are safe, that their publishers can be trusted.
Shouldn’t a whitelisted app be one where there is evidence it is trustworthy? That there is low risk? NOT just one there is evidence people WANT to be safe to use?
What standard is applied to apps to be whitelisted?
Comodo should have a game mode and let people make their own call on whether to trust a game. If they create a whitelist and officially put the seal of trust on a game or any other software they should do so with caution, it is then their credibility at stake. “My security software let it run with all privileges…”
While it is true other apps are vectors for malware, like a browser or email or chat client, are game publishers are as alert to upgrade and fix security threats as other software vendors? Make games meet the same standard as other software, whatever that is.
Issues include can your realtime AV or BB intervene and protect the user?
If possible, I suggest a game mode with behaviour blocking, and limited privileges, not whitelisted free run on my system. If I make that decision it’s one thing, but Comodo should declare software “safe” with a whitelisting only with extreme caution.
all whitelisted apps go thru stringent tests and analysis before they make it to our safelist.
The fact is that most game vendors take security at least as seriously as other software makers and maybe more so. They have to guard against their games being hacked and cheats being used in multiplayer games that would give players unfair advantages. In the games that have monthly subscription fees, they also have to protect against accounts being hacked and personal information stolen. Many games have ways to detect if the files have been altered by cheaters or malicious hackers. I would say that overall, the games provided by the major vendors in the field are probably safer than many other things that are in common usage. Many people turn off their AV protection when playing games to enhance performance and never get infected by anything. You are only connecting to a set amount of servers and in some cases no connections at all are made. There are some multiplayer games that allow the players to set up their own servers and of course you would have to be more careful in that instance but those servers are still checked for hackers and cheaters.
I really would have to say that in all my years of computer gaming I don’t recall a patch being issued for any game that was put out for security reasons. They’re always bug fixes or game expansion updates. I say that the major game vendors do meet or exceed the standards of other software suppliers. You don’t want to whitelist games that are downloaded from gaming sites like Yahoo or Gamehouse since those sites get infected from time to time but the major games that are sold in retail outlets on disks are certainly safe.
QFT. :-TU
And (even I’m not proud) I’ve played a couple of games picked from private trackers before officialy launch date and no security problems at all.
Here is My list:
Game Name: Publisher website: Maker Website:
Operation Flashpoint Dragon Rising http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/103/1033288p1.html
http://www.codemasters.com
ArmA - Armed Assault http://www.armedassault.com/
http://www.atari.com/
ArmA II - Operation Arrowhead http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/110/1103345p1.html
http://www.bohemiainteractive.com/
Call of Duty http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/456/456776p1.html
http://www.activision.com/
Call of Duty 2 http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/661/661230p1.html
http://www.activision.com/
Call of Duty - United Offensive http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/547/547879p1.html
http://www.activision.com/
Call of Duty - Modern Warfare http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/796/796076p1.html
http://www.activision.com/
Call of Duty - Modern Warfare 2 http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/104/1043744p1.html
http://www.activision.com/
Silent Hunter III http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/596/596816p1.html
http://www.ubi.com
Silent Hunter 4 Wolves of the Pacific http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/777/777536p1.html
http://www.ubi.com
Silent Hunter 5 Battle of The Atlantic http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/108/1080505p1.html
http://www.ubi.com
Sniper: Ghost Warrior http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/110/1104580p1.html
http://www.city-interactive.com/
Steam Gaming Platform with a store with 100000 games
Blizzard Entertainment Games
DICE Corporation
Infinity Ward
Treyarch
Mythic Entertainment
http://www.mythicentertainment.com/
+1
Battlefield 2 received its final patch v1.50 last year, I think. So the game executables shouldn’t change any more. This game also uses PunkBuster anti-cheat protection and although the game was released 5 years ago, it’s still very much alive.
You could add Ever Balance, Inc. signature (the PunkBuster publisher) to the Trusted Software Vendor List if they pass your strict requirements.
Melih,
This thread raises the interesting issue of what the standard for inclusion in a whitelist should be.
Where an app is to be given extraordinary privileges, the standard should be high.
The trouble with gaming apps is that even minimal warnings interrupt or even crash the game. Also gamers are intent on the gaming, and even if a warning can and does appear, it is much easier to ignore it. In any case, unlike a spreadsheet or other app normal precautions are impractical.
Every use of the internet brings danger. Comodo is building a security model to prevent security threats from taking up residence, so any whitelist that bypasses that model is an inherent contradiction, but one that may still be a reasonable compromise.
A gaming mode, perhaps some kind of sandbox or virtual machine, with elevated privileges but limited to relatively harmless activity (by definition most of the mechanics of the virtual reality in the game environment by definintion occurs under the radar of the user) seems at first glance to me to be the way to go. However, the idea ought still be there that the user is notified he is taking a risk, and it should involve a user choice to do so. To give any app whitelisted “installer” status to make wholesale changes in the system files and registry seems extremely hazardous.
The idea behind Comodo’s security model has resulted in great debate about excessive warnings. I agree usability is a valid issue. But security apps will fail if whitelists defeat the purposes and are governed to much by usability concerns. Gaming apps are way out there on the spectrum in demanding user trust of the app without including design features to allow users to limit their risk.
Whitelisting games the same way as other apps is dangerous and inappropriate. Allowing users to suspend reality in the gaming arena is the whole idea of a game, but driving bumper cars at the amusement park and driving on the freeway need different rules, and as I understand whitelisting, it allows changes under the hood that will potentially go with the user back into the real world.
Don’t worry mate , they wouldn’t made such a decision unless they had a really good anticipation about it.
I don’t play games , but I wouldn’t mind if my little brother used my computer to do so , I may not be available all the times to check his game and go through every single alert that will be generated by comodo ! that’s why there must be a balance and one way to achieve it is using white listing , currently if I were a gamer i wouldn’t install any hips application because simply i wanna play not to click allow on those " for that situation" annoying alerts !.
Moreover , games are not zombies or something , they are just programs designed to entertain people , so why would we annoy those people who wanna have fun with their games with our alerts which they will " allow " anyway !
Also, melih already clarified that those games will go under testing, so it’s not like picking up some goods in a supermarket and put them in a basket ,
to sum up , I wouldn’t worry about it , I trust comodo and I wanna see every1 using it not only those who enjoy seeing alerts when they wanna " play " ! and comodo is even more capable of handling it and they will handle it efficiently as usual
knk2006
Football Manager 2010
It is argued above that:
“there must be a balance and one way to achieve it is using white listing , currently if I were a gamer i wouldn’t install any hips application because simply i wanna play not to click allow on those " for that situation” annoying alerts !.
Moreover , games are not zombies or something , they are just programs designed to entertain people , so why would we annoy those people who wanna have fun with their games with our alerts which they will " allow " anyway !
to sum up , I wouldn’t worry about it , I trust comodo and I wanna see every1 using it not only those who enjoy seeing alerts when they wanna " play " ! and comodo is even more capable of handling it and they will handle it efficiently as usual "
OK.
I support a “games mode” where people can choose to give their machines over to unknown behavior by a game, but would prefer an alternative that there be some kind of behavior blocking or limitation of privileges during the execution of the game. Ideally a game would operate in some kind of virtual machine with limited ability to do anything outside defined file space.
Whitelisting or installer mode is far riskier. Comodo would by default put the seal of approval on a game to have unlimited privilege during execution. No amount of testing can find all the vulnerabilities in an app. Whitelisting of any app, even well known, well maintained and updated apps is a security vulnerability, but perhaps one that is justified. I am not at all sure games are like those other apps. Games tend to take over the machine and demand unfettered access to resources.
I am not sure whether Comodo has published its standards for whitelisting an application, but some level of review and restriction and, as I understand it, some warnings are possible. Games seem to require a much greater degree of freedom, and are therefore potentially more dangerous.
I agree warnings may be ignored, but then it is the user who is responsible, and Comodo has not by default made the decision for the user or put its seal of approval on taking the risk, whatever it is.
-
You can’t have any kinds of alerts being generated while you’re playing a full screen game. They cause freezes, lockups, or disconnection issues in online games. Even updates to the AV should be suspended while in full screen mode since they can cause major performance problems and even some of the same things that alerts will.
-
You can’t have games running in a virtualized environment because a lot of them do automatic saves of your progress which are written as files to the hard drive. If you’re in a sandbox, the saves will not persist after leaving the game or may not even occur at all. Some even have built in updaters and patchers that would not do their job properly if virtualized.
The only solution if Comodo continues with their use of HIPS and automatic sandboxing is for games and game vendors to be whitelisted and have no obstacles to operating as intended. As I have said before, I have never heard of anybody being infected by a retail game and have never seen a patch issued for security reasons. They are far safer than our web browsers, email programs, messengers, and social interaction websites. When was the last time you saw an article about a security breach in a game issued by one of the major publishers? I have never seen one.
Sims 3…
if sandboxed, cause the game to be closed while loading.
also: Anno 1404… etc…
Lineage 2:
God… I miss this game… !ot!
yup, virtualizing a game it’s like virtualizing the whole system in other words it’s an overkill and even trying to do that will lead nothing but system’s crash and errors ! they are accessing the resources they need and that’s it.Games are sophisticated programs, restricting them from accessing anything they would need will result in up normal behavior . so again white listing is a good approach for security and stability.
I’d like to see most (all preferably) Steam games whitelisted.
Also, Steam’s overlay causes problems if it you try launching a non-whitelisted game through Steam. This means you have to both restart Steam and the non-whitelisted game itself just to get it working properly.