ModStatistics 1.0.3 - Anonymous mod usage statistics - Now for public distribution!

[enneract]

The request would be reasonable. Its the method that isn't.

Uh, so the fact that when you run it, there is a popup that says 'Press Ok to confirm doing this, or untick this box and press OK to cancel' isn't a 'request'?

Sheesh, some people.

[Ippo]

Uh, so the fact that when you run it, there is a popup that says 'Press Ok to confirm doing this, or untick this box and press OK to cancel' isn't a 'request'?

Sheesh, some people.

Actually in 1.0.3 that popup only asks you if you want to auto-update, but it doesn't let you opt-out. And it relly should, so we could get this over with.

[enneract]

Translation, from what I can see:

OS and OS version

Mac or Windows

Whether or not you use Steam

Time you start the game

Time you finish the game

Game crashes

If the game was installed with Steam

What version of the game you're using (Build ID, major revisions, minor revisions, if you're using a beta version or not, if you're using 64 bit or not)

System information, including number and speed of CPUs, GPU(graphics card) memory, GPU manufacturer, system RAM

Yeah, not OK with that unless you ask me to opt-in.

Almost, not quite right.

'Platform' (Windows, Linux, Apple)

If KSP specifically is installed via Steam

The period of time it takes the game to load

If the game successfully finished loading

Version of the statistics mod

Game version

Basic system information

[ecat]

Very unlikely, since Squad doesn't endorse or distribute this mod in any way.

Endorse or distribute but the mod has been developed and discussed in clear view on their official forums. Looking at some of the cases taken to court these days I'm sure a sufficiently determined or motivated person could push the issue, this may result in nothing more than some bad publicity but that's enough to have the game banned from schools. It is not a risk worth taking.

I am not advocating that the mod be burned with fire, all that needs to happen is for it to be made opt-in or for the opt-out option to be obvious and simple.

[enneract]

Actually in 1.0.3 that popup only asks you if you want to auto-update, but it doesn't let you opt-out. And it relly should, so we could get this over with.

Ah, well, honestly, I didn't notice that. IDGAF about metrics, so *shrug*.

Yes, that prompt definitely should be an opportunity to opt-out, but freaking out like this about some of the most benign metrics I've ever seen is totally ridiculous even without an easy opt-out.

[Kamuchi]

Uh, so the fact that when you run it, there is a popup that says 'Press Ok to confirm doing this, or untick this box and press OK to cancel' isn't a 'request'?

Sheesh, some people.

No, there is no information what is actually collected, you can`t click "decline" for it to remove itself and who is collecting the data and more is done with it.

If that popup ingame would be explaining alot more and tell who created it, it would really leave alot less of a disgusting taste behind.

Only after wondering and figuring what the heck it was and how it "infested" my KSP suddently, I learned that it was from Majiir, but to be honest, can`t get that taste washed away regarding the mod.

[enneract]

Only in the sense that, yes, they are entitled to not having their data sent all over the place without being asked to. The brat part is only with the author since he can't come up with a good reason for not making it opt-in: he somehow (and 100% incorrectly) feels that he is entitled to that data.

You are not entitled to use any particular mod, full stop. If you don't like that a mod author wants to collect metrics to aid his development process, don't use his mod and move on, full stop. You don't get to call him names and act like a spoiled child because he isn't bowing to your whim.

Oh, and it's not really optional if you have to jump through hoops to get rid of it.

You clearly don't know what the word 'optional' means.

The data is sent to a third party, not the mod author.

The mod author is Majiir. He is the one collecting the metrics.

So when I download the mod from a random link, install it, and start up KSP, it will say “oh hey, this mod you downloaded for purpose X will also provide ‘service’ Y, meaning it will send data to (unrelated) party Y unless you jump through the following hoops…� No. No such information is given.

Maybe you shouldn't download mods from random links. Maybe you should read the post accompanied with such a mod? Maybe you should read the README included with mod? Your failure to do any of these BASIC steps is not the responsibility of the mod author.

[AdmiralTigerclaw]

*FAKE DRAMATIC GASP*

It ferrets out information about your operating system, whether you're using steam, and how powerful your computer is!

Clearly this fiendishness knows no bounds!

Pardon me if I seem unenthused about people's ill-found paranoia. But that data is more or less standard information one would need in order to create a base model for the 'average system' mods are going to be running on.

Here's a list of ways that info can be used:

OS: Tells the modders which OS is used the most, so they can prioritize which version of KSP to optimize for the most.

Computer Stats (CPU, GPU, GPU mem, vendors, etc...): Tells the modder what the average resources of the players are so they know if they have to find better ways to optimize the code for CPU cycles or memory footprint.

Steam Install: Whether or not the modders need to optimize for people using steam-based installation more than for the generic Squad store.

Not exactly your bank information, social security number, or driver's license. Heck, not even your phone number.

[Robhol]

It doesn't matter what the information is. The only person who can decide what information should be collected from their computer is the user themselves. It doesn't matter how innocuous you think it is - if the user wouldn't be comfortable with you (or anyone else) collecting it, you shouldn't collect it. And the only way to know if they'd be comfortable is to inform the user and ask their permission, which ModStatistics does not do.

[Tippis]

You are not entitled to use any particular mod, full stop.

That was never the question.

The question is whether the mod author  any mod author  is entitled to user data without asking for it. The answer is, they're not. Trying to claim that there can't be an opt-in because they'd miss out on data is treating it as if they are entitled to that data and that the nasty ebil users would keep it away from him if given the choice…

The mod author is Majiir. He is the one collecting the metrics.

…and is a third party to all the mods that includes this. If this was an entirely separate and discrete mod, the distinction would be easy and it would be entirely optional to install it. Since it is actively being promoted as a component in other mods, neither of those hold true any more and you are now sending data to an unrelated third party without having given permission to do so to either of them. Hell, you aren't even sure that the second party gets the data in question even if you were ok with it.

Maybe you shouldn't download mods from random links.

Maybe it should be opt-in so that it doesn't matter and the user is always aware of all the components of a mod and what they do, rather than (incorrectly) assume that the mod author is entitled to the data.

[Majiir]

Answers to some recent questions and statements:

Does this have any impact on game performance?

No. The plugin does very little, and certainly doesn't make flight more sluggish or anything of the sort. Network activity is non-blocking.

Is an Internet connection required?

No. If an Internet connection is unavailable, the plugin will simply try again later.

Can we see some statistics?

There have been 6,546 ModStatistics users on 0.24 so far. 3,580 of them have tried 64-bit KSP! Simple queries like that are easy to write, but making them efficient enough to put on the webpage takes substantially more time and forethought. I currently have less time than I'd like to work on the site. That said, there are two things I'd like to do:

1. I've written a script which will scrub the raw data and prepare it for public release, and it just needs a little more work before it's ready to produce dumps.
   
2. I'd like to hear from modders and other interested parties about what kinds of stats you'd like to see. This will help me plan the site and start with queries that will be most useful to the public.

Just delete it from every mod!

It's more reliable and more permanent to change the configuration file. If you change the settings file, you can go ahead and delete all the DLLs without harm, but leave the settings file. This way, if you accidentally install another mod containing the plugin, it will stay disabled and not even run once.

Won't it slow things down to have all those plugins?

Not really, no. Maybe if you had thousands or millions of them. Only one plugin will run, and it takes barely any time at all for the game to load all the plugins in GameData. Furthermore, I have requested features in the base game that will make it easier for ModStatistics to automatically clean itself up and remove duplicate DLLs.

Why do you make us "jump through hoops" to disable it?

This is not intentional. I would like to add a prominent button in the main menu screen (and maybe the settings screen too, just to be safe) that allows you to control everything the plugin does. It will also draw extra attention to itself on first run. The reason it doesn't have this currently is that I was planning to use the new App Launcher feature in KSP, but it doesn't support the main menu scene. If that support isn't added very soon, I will simply add my own button. This new UI will also make it more clear what ModStatistics does.

Why don't you do that RIGHT NOW?

My real-life situation is a bit busy at the moment, and I'm already spending more time than I should working on KSP mods. I will get it done when I can.

Maybe if you ask nicely, people will have a warm fuzzy feeling?

This is a good idea. I will consider this when I write the new UI. It could explain to users why this information is so helpful to modders.

Why does it clone itself?

This was done for technical reasons related to the only-run-once mechanism. In short, it protects against errors and other data integrity issues when users are frequently installing and removing mods.

Correcting a few points of fact:

• Data is not sent to a third party. It goes to a dedicated server which I personally administer. (The domain name is stats.majiir.net, which I thought was a pretty good giveaway!)
  
• The plugin does NOT report OS version, CPU speed or GPU model. (I thought OS version in particular was too risky.) The only system information reported is OS type (Windows, Mac or Linux), number of CPU cores, amount of system memory, amount of GPU memory and the GPU vendor (Nvidia, ATI, etc).
  
• In the current version (1.0.3), the first-start popup does not ask for reporting preference.

Regarding the infringing "disabler" plugin:

I do think users should have the choice to disable ModStatistics. This is why I spent time to make sure the settings file would include instructions for disabling the mod, and it's why I encourage modders to notify users how to disable it. I understand that these measures may have been insufficient, and I will work to correct those. At the end of the day, I want the mod to be easy to use, and that includes making it easy to turn off, permanently.

I think the disabler plugin is harmful in this regard. It's no easier to use than the original mod; it doesn't provide any information or UI to the user; and it disables the mod in a way that's unreliable and unpermanent. Furthermore, this kind of hostile mod interaction is not a good sign; it's much better for modders to communicate rather than wage a modding war. If the author of the disabler plugin (or anyone else) would like to improve ModStatistics, feel free to shoot me a message.

[EDIT] A few more notes:

I spoke at length with members of Squad and the forum team about the recent attention ModStatistics has seen. We exchanged thoughts, and we agree on some steps that should be taken. They seemed a little bummed out that the community has been dumping some frustration on them, so I hope you'll keep your thoughts civil and in this thread. They are well aware of everything and have been keeping me informed with their thoughts.

Edited July 19, 2014 by Majiir

[forfeit]

Regarding the infringing "disabler" plugin:

I do think users should have the choice to disable ModStatistics. This is why I spent time to make sure the settings file would include instructions for disabling the mod, and it's why I encourage modders to notify users how to disable it. I understand that these measures may have been insufficient, and I will work to correct those. At the end of the day, I want the mod to be easy to use, and that includes making it easy to turn off, permanently.

I think the disabler plugin is harmful in this regard. It's no easier to use than the original mod; it doesn't provide any information or UI to the user; and it disables the mod in a way that's unreliable and unpermanent. Furthermore, this kind of hostile mod interaction is not a good sign; it's much better for modders to communicate rather than wage a modding war. If the author of the disabler plugin (or anyone else) would like to improve ModStatistics, feel free to shoot me a message.

[EDIT] A few more notes:

I spoke at length with members of Squad and the forum team about the recent attention ModStatistics has seen. We exchanged thoughts, and we agree on some steps that should be taken. They seemed a little bummed out that the community has been dumping some frustration on them, so I hope you'll keep your thoughts civil and in this thread. They are well aware of everything and have been keeping me informed with their thoughts.

"Harmful" "infringing" and "wage a modding war" are some strong statements if you want to have a civil discussion. Some have argued that your mod is harmful, as it damages the modder/player relationship. I've seen many requests to get away from the, what some consider to be suboptimal, opt-out system currently in use. Due to those responses, I felt that the disabler mod was the only way to resolve the issue without relying on the mod itself to respect a config file option.

I have no desire to "improve" third-party opt-out data collection, as I don't believe that any data should be collected from uninformed users, without their explicit consent, nor should any such data be retained without robust data protection and detailed privacy and retention plans. Commercial organizations and even large governments have trouble with data which is naively "anonymized" or appears to be "innocuous," it's something that should never be taken lightly.

[Agathorn]

Answers to some recent questions and statements:

Can we see some statistics?

There have been 6,546 ModStatistics users on 0.24 so far. 3,580 of them have tried 64-bit KSP! Simple queries like that are easy to write, but making them efficient enough to put on the webpage takes substantially more time and forethought. I currently have less time than I'd like to work on the site. That said, there are two things I'd like to do:

1. I've written a script which will scrub the raw data and prepare it for public release, and it just needs a little more work before it's ready to produce dumps.
   
2. I'd like to hear from modders and other interested parties about what kinds of stats you'd like to see. This will help me plan the site and start with queries that will be most useful to the public.

My main concern is that everytime I hear mention about providing the stats collected to the public, it sounds like said stats are needing to be sanitized first. This is my concern. If the RAW stats are not acceptable to release to the public AS IS, then it implies it is collecting data that it should not be.

I think the issue here is transparency. Its all well and good to tell someone it doesn't collect XYZ, but showing what is collected is better. Its just like when some app on my computer asks to submit a crash report. If it doesn't have a button to let me see said report before submitting, then I won't submit it. But if it does let me see said report, i'm usually inclined to send it after a quick look.

[Hamster]

"Harmful" "infringing" and "wage a modding war" are some strong statements if you want to have a civil discussion. Some have argued that your mod is harmful, as it damages the modder/player relationship. I've seen many requests to get away from the, what some consider to be suboptimal, opt-out system currently in use. Due to those responses, I felt that the disabler mod was the only way to resolve the issue without relying on the mod itself to respect a config file option.

I have no desire to "improve" third-party opt-out data collection, as I don't believe that any data should be collected from uninformed users, without their explicit consent, nor should any such data be retained without robust data protection and detailed privacy and retention plans. Commercial organizations and even large governments have trouble with data which is naively "anonymized" or appears to be "innocuous," it's something that should never be taken lightly.

I have to completely agree with this. And it's a shame that a Mod have closed that thread and removed the download link to that disabler plugin.

I currently do not see any other way, as to delete all ModStatistics dll from any mod what I download.

The opt out feature have a basic problem, without starting the game there is NO CONFIG file, where you could disable it.

And that means during the first start it will most likely send the statistics anyway.

[stupid_chris]

Due to those responses, I felt that the disabler mod was the only way to resolve the issue without relying on the mod itself to respect a config file option.

I think talking to MAjiir about the possibility of making a disabler plugin would have been the best thing to do, I hardly think he would have opposed.

I have to completely agree with this. And it's a shame that a Mod have closed that thread and removed the download link to that disabler plugin.

I currently do not see any other way, as to delete all ModStatistics dll from any mod what I download.

It's been removed due to license violations, not because of it's nature.

[westamastaflash]

It seems quite simple. If you don't like it, simply choose not to use mods that have it enabled. I don't see the big deal. The code is available for your inspection should you be concerned. Do you inspect all the code for every mod you install to ensure that it's not sending data out to the world?

[cpast]

I have to completely agree with this. And it's a shame that a Mod have closed that thread and removed the download link to that disabler plugin.

I currently do not see any other way, as to delete all ModStatistics dll from any mod what I download.

The opt out feature have a basic problem, without starting the game there is NO CONFIG file, where you could disable it.

And that means during the first start it will most likely send the statistics anyway.

You can always make the file yourself, but maybe, until Majir updates the UI, he could put up a download consisting of a ModStatistics folder with a settings.cfg with disabled=true?

[Mad_Wack]

Correcting a few points of fact:

• Data is not sent to a third party. It goes to a dedicated server which I personally administer. (The domain name is stats.majiir.net, which I thought was a pretty good giveaway!)
  

You are a third party.

[Sandworm]

It seems quite simple. If you don't like it, simply choose not to use mods that have it enabled. I don't see the big deal.

Because we are all running a dozen+ mods. At least one or two will update each day. Inspecting each every time they update takes valuable time away from playing KSP.

The code is available for your inspection should you be concerned.

Not everyone has coding skill and even those who think they do aren't going to spot everything.

Do you inspect all the code for every mod you install to ensure that it's not sending data out to the world?

In a way, yes. My secure network keeps track of all outbound connections. It spotted this mod. I whitelisted the domain initially, but thought twice once I realized the fingerprinting power of this mod.

In short: things like this should be opt-in.

[xEvilReeperx]

I think talking to MAjiir about the possibility of making a disabler plugin would have been the best thing to do, I hardly think he would have opposed.

We must not be reading the same posts

I think the disabler plugin is harmful in this regard. It's no easier to use than the original mod; it doesn't provide any information or UI to the user; and it disables the mod in a way that's unreliable and unpermanent. Furthermore, this kind of hostile mod interaction is not a good sign; it's much better for modders to communicate rather than wage a modding war.

I think the real cheery on top in there is the anger about the lack of information or UI for the user though. Either trolling or there's quite a lot of anger in that paragraph

[stupid_chris]

We must not be reading the same posts

If you don't believe me ask the man yourself <.<

[forfeit]

It's been removed due to license violations, not because of it's nature.

I would agree that there's a problem if I had, say, taken his code and changed the URL it reports to. In fact the code disables the mod in question, it in no way duplicates his work. Is the takeaway from this that mod authors are not allowed to reuse assembly names, namespaces, class or variable names from other code?

It may have started as a fork, which is entirely fine under the Github ToS, but it is no longer using anything that could be construed as original or novel code covered by the license.

[Hodo]

Sorry I have to chime in on this problem.

Majiir, while I am sure you had the best of intentions this is not a choice YOU, as a player and a modder should make. This is a choice that the individual downloading a mod or plugin should have. Otherwise it is no different then if I were to put a GPS tracker on your car and every car like it, because I wanted to know how many miles on average they were driven per day and at about how fast they were driven and when.

It is pure and simple, invasion of privacy, which in the United States of America, Canada and the United Kingdom, punishable in the court of law. I have seen used programs very much like this one that are tracking software programs that leave a door open for hackers, and worms. The thing that has set me the most against it, is the fact that it clones itself. This personally sends up giant flaming red flags for me.

This computer I don't keep any sensitive information on, nothing you can't find out about me online or if you just ask. But there are people who are not as paranoid or security minded as myself.

So I have gone through and removed all the .dlls for the mod, and will continue to do so, if I even download or even recommend any of your plugins or mods that use this spyware program until a option to use it is programmed in and it is made abundantly clear to the downloader what it does, and where it does it.

[RoverDude]

IMO this is a case of good intentions transforming into a hill that, to be honest Majiir, you really have to ask yourself if you're willing to die on. Especially since no matter how this shakes out, it's something the community is not soon going to forget, and I really do question if it's worth all of the turmoil and violation of trust (real or perceived, it's irrelevant) that has ooccured.

May be time to decide what's more important - being right, or being effective. Because from where I stand, this does not look very effective.

[Sandworm]

It is pure and simple, invasion of privacy, which in the United States of America, Canada and the United Kingdom, punishable in the court of law.

That's a bit of an overstatement. But I would say that by collecting information about people/users modstatistics can run into all sorts of privacy laws regarding PII. Canada's PIPEDA? Massachusetts' Data Protection Act? Even if someone doesn't believe they are collecting PII, you have to look at each and every jurisdiction from which you collect informations. Is it worth the risk?