Scoras.io, Serious concerns regarding fairness and Possible rigging

[Nrcewker]

I lost around $420 while playing their instant games, Aviatrix and Hacksaw Gaming's Dice. I thought I was just having a bad day and then I suddenly thought of verifying the Dice bets. But to my surprise there isn't any option to check the fairness.

Then I contacted support regarding the same and they responded with this:



I did not straight up accuse them of cheating. Rather, I asked for additional information so that I could verify the bets myself. But then the chat got transferred to MOJO (who operates the Bitcointalk handle here on the forum) and he gave me this response:



Then I waited another 24 hours, still showing some faith. But when I messaged them they said they hadn't received any update on this. However, when I said that I would have to take further steps by making this matter public, out of nowhere within 3 minutes, they said they had received a report.



If anyone wants the link to the file they gave me, here it is: https://cdn.files-text.com/us-south1/api/lc/att/19873220/25d166d75ac39a7d2f129d1ed3ef156b/NRN-RO-220905-01-IT-R1%20-%20Neronika%20Limited%20-%20%20Romania%20Game%20Integration%20Audit%20Report%20V1.0%20%281%29.pdf

Then after reading the report, I found what I believe are some loopholes and messaged them about the same in the support chat:




So for anyone wondering, the report is from 2022, is for Neronika Limited and not for Scoras. It also doesn't appear to cover Hacksaw Dice in the report.

When I pointed this out, the agent asked me to send an email regarding this to Support@Scoras.io.

My concern is that if the end goal was to send an email then why did they waste another 48 hours of my time?

Okay, now from here comes the interesting part.

I emailed the support team regarding the same and wanted these specific details:

• Server seed
• Client seed
• Nonce
• Hashing algorithm
• Published verification methodology
• Exact RNG/game version
• Provider-generated RNG value for the round

Now again, I waited 24 hours. I messaged both MOJO/Nick on Telegram regarding the update as they said I would get an update within 24 hours. But Nick was ignoring me, so I opened a live chat with support. I said I would take this public, and then he instantly replied with this:



Now after another 12–16 hours, I received this response from the support team by email:




They said in the email:

All these rounds were correctly closed by the provider and all wins were credited.

However, the provider table only shows that the rounds exist and were settled with the recorded status.
It does not say how the RNG generated the actual Dice number. I asked them for verification, and what did they give me? Information that I already had?

Now, I am still waiting to verify my bets. It's been more than 80 hours.

Now, why do I feel there is something fishy going on and possibly the game is rigged:

- On the first day out of nowhere, MOJO/NICK joined the conversation and redirected me to Telegram to continue the conversation. Maybe he doesn't want things to be recorded on Live Support and Telegram chats can be deleted.



I don't understand why a technical or fairness dispute involving my gambling account needed to be moved to Telegram instead of remaining in the official support channel.

And if you pay close attention MOJO is NICK only, so if he simply wanted to have a conversation with me, he could have done so there.

- I was surprised that, just by wagering around $1,000, I suddenly became a VIP.
- I was offered 20% lossback on my losses.

My total loss was calculated as 420.32 USD. So 20% = 84.06 USD.

They additionally gave me a $20 Bitcointalk bonus (which I had an issue with earlier), resulting in 106.06 usd being added.

- Out of curiosity, I asked them about the wagering requirement of the lossback. To my surprise to make me feel better, they said they would remove the 1× wagering requirement as well.



But from my perspective, I was asking for technical evidence regarding the fairness of the games and the conversation instead moved toward:

• VIP host
• Lossback
• Bonuses
• Wagering requirements
• Removing the wagering requirement

That made me more suspicious that the situation was being handled through an informal/off-platform arrangement rather than simply answering my technical questions.

Their responses changed during the investigation

This is one of the main reasons I decided to make this public.

Initially:

You can check that through the fairness option.

When I asked where:

Right now it's not available.

Then:

Our results on the dice game are 100% accurate, not rigged.

When I asked how I could verify that, they couldn't provide the verification mechanism. Later the matter was escalated to their aggregator/provider.

Eventually, they provided the 2022 certification document and provider-side round records.
Now they say the available mechanisms are essentially:

• Certification/validator
• Aggregator records
• Provider-side round verification

But they cannot provide me with the cryptographic information required to independently reproduce my individual Dice result.

Conclusion I would like to highlight

I am not saying that the casino is rigged simply because I lost money. I understand that losing money is part of gambling. However the pattern through which I lost the money increased my suspicion. The fact that there is no way for me to independently verify my individual bets makes me even more concerned.

On top of that the off site communication, the sudden VIP status, the 20% lossback offer, the bonus, and the willingness to remove the wagering requirement have made me even more suspicious about how this situation is being handled.

Despite repeatedly asking for the necessary technical details I still have not received the information required to independently verify the actual Dice results.

I have also received what appear to be repetitive/automated responses over the past 3 to 4 days instead of a direct technical explanation.

So I would like the Bitcointalk community's opinion on this.

Should I not be able to verify my bets that I place on a Crypto Casino ? Do you think the information provided by Scoras is sufficient to establish that my individual bets were fair and correctly generated?
And based on the evidence and the way this matter has been handled should I open a Scam Accusation against Scoras?

[SCORAS]

Thank you for putting everything into one post. Since this is now public, I want to respond clearly and address the important points.

First, we take questions regarding game fairness seriously. You are completely entitled to question your results and ask for information.

However, there is an important distinction between asking for additional technical verification and suggesting that SCORAS has somehow manipulated or rigged a game.

At this point, we have seen no evidence whatsoever that SCORAS manipulated your rounds, changed your results, or incorrectly settled your bets.

1. We have spent considerable time investigating this for you

Over the last several days, our team has spent a significant amount of time trying to help you with this matter.

We have:

• Reviewed your complaint through support.
• Escalated your rounds through our provider/aggregator.
• Requested additional documentation.
• Provided you with the documentation that was sent to us.
• Requested verification of your individual rounds.
• Received confirmation that the rounds were correctly closed by the provider and that all applicable wins were credited.
• Forwarded additional technical questions on your behalf.
• Continued communicating with you through live chat, Telegram and email.

We genuinely believe we have gone to considerable lengths to assist you.

2. What the provider confirmed

The information returned to us confirms that the rounds you questioned existed and were correctly settled by the provider.

You are correct that these records do not allow you to independently reconstruct the underlying RNG calculation.

We have never claimed that the round records themselves provide the server seed, client seed, nonce or underlying RNG value.

Those are two different things.

The records verify what happened to the rounds from the provider side.

Your request has now gone considerably further and concerns the internal technical operation of Hacksaw Gaming's RNG, including:

• Server seed
• Client seed
• Nonce
• Hashing algorithm
• Verification methodology
• Exact RNG/game version
• Provider-generated RNG values

This is information relating to Hacksaw Gaming's game and systems, not SCORAS's systems.

3. You now need to contact Hacksaw Gaming regarding those technical questions

This is the most important point.

SCORAS is the casino operator. We do not develop Hacksaw Gaming's games, operate their RNG, generate their Dice results or have access to proprietary provider-side RNG architecture.

We cannot provide information that we do not possess.

We have already contacted the relevant parties and forwarded your questions in an attempt to help you.

If you now require a detailed explanation of exactly how Hacksaw's RNG generated a particular Dice number, what RNG/game version was running, whether historical rounds can be cryptographically reconstructed, or whether server seed/client seed/nonce information exists for this particular product, you will need to contact Hacksaw Gaming directly.

They are the appropriate party to answer questions about the internal technical operation of their game.

We cannot speak on behalf of Hacksaw regarding proprietary information or promise that they will provide specific internal data.

4. The certification document

You correctly pointed out that the document provided was from 2022 and was not a SCORAS-specific 2026 certificate.

That was the documentation supplied to us after we requested supporting information, and we forwarded what we received to you.

We did not create it, modify it or attempt to misrepresent its contents.

However, we accept that its scope should have been explained more clearly when it was originally forwarded to you.

The document should not be interpreted as independently reconstructing the RNG calculation of your specific Dice rounds.

5. The original support response

You also correctly pointed out that support initially told you that you could check the result through a fairness option and that this functionality was subsequently not available.

That initial support response was incorrect.

We acknowledge that openly.

The agent should have verified the functionality before giving you that answer.

However, an incorrect answer from a support agent about where a verification feature is located is not evidence that a game was rigged.

6. Regarding the 24-hour timeframe

We initially believed we could obtain the requested information within 24 hours.

Unfortunately, once your questions became increasingly technical and required information from external parties, we could no longer control the response time.

We should not have continued giving you an expectation of 24 hours when the final response depended on a third party.

We accept that criticism.

But we would rather tell you that we are waiting for information than invent an answer simply to satisfy a deadline.

7. Telegram / Nick / MOJO

There was absolutely no attempt to move you to Telegram because we wanted to hide anything.

You are free to publish the Telegram messages, live-chat conversations and emails.

Nothing was offered to you in exchange for keeping this private.

The purpose of communicating directly was actually the opposite: we were trying to give you more personal assistance instead of making you repeatedly explain the same situation to different support agents.

In hindsight, once this became a technical fairness investigation, email should have become the primary channel earlier so there was one centralized record.

8. VIP status, lossback and bonuses

You have also connected your VIP status, lossback and bonuses with your fairness complaint.

These things are separate.

You lost approximately $420.32, and we offered you approximately 20% lossback.

You also had the separate $20 Bitcointalk bonus.

We additionally offered to remove the wagering requirement.

None of this was conditional on you remaining silent.

At no point did we tell you:

"We will give you this money if you stop asking questions."

At no point did we ask you to delete anything.

At no point did we ask you not to post on Bitcointalk.

At no point did we ask you to withdraw a complaint.

You were completely free to accept the lossback and continue asking questions, which is exactly what happened.

Trying to give a player additional customer service after a losing session should not be presented as evidence that their game results were manipulated.

9. SCORAS does not generate Hacksaw Dice results

This needs to be very clear for everyone reading this thread.

SCORAS does not control the RNG of Hacksaw Gaming's Dice game.

We do not manually determine whether a player wins or loses.

We do not select the Dice result.

We do not change the result after a bet is placed.

The game and its underlying systems are operated provider-side.

The information we received confirmed that the disputed rounds were recorded and settled by the provider.

Your remaining questions concern the internal RNG methodology behind those results.

Those questions ultimately belong with Hacksaw Gaming.

10. Have we proven that you can independently reconstruct the RNG?

No.

And we are not going to claim otherwise.

The information we provided confirms the provider-side rounds and settlement.

It does not provide you with the cryptographic information necessary to independently reconstruct each Dice outcome.

If your definition of verification specifically requires server seeds, client seeds, nonces and the ability to mathematically reproduce the outcome yourself, then your question is whether Hacksaw Gaming provides that functionality for this particular game.

That is a question for Hacksaw Gaming.

11. Where SCORAS stands now

We have spent a substantial amount of time on this case and genuinely tried our best to help you.

We have involved our support team.

We have involved management.

We have contacted our provider/aggregator.

We have requested documentation.

We have checked your rounds.

We have forwarded your technical questions.

We have provided you with the information that has been made available to us.

There is a limit to what SCORAS can technically provide regarding a third-party game.

We cannot give you Hacksaw's proprietary RNG information if we do not have access to it, and we cannot create server seeds, client seeds, nonces or RNG values ourselves.

Therefore, if you wish to continue investigating the internal RNG methodology of Hacksaw Dice, the appropriate next step is to contact Hacksaw Gaming directly and ask them your technical questions.

We have genuinely tried to assist you beyond what our normal support team is capable of doing.

Final point

We completely accept criticism regarding how some parts of the communication were handled.

Support gave you an incorrect initial answer regarding the fairness option.

We should have explained the certification document more clearly.

We also should not have promised specific response times for questions whose answers depended on external providers.

Those are things we can improve.

But none of those things demonstrate that SCORAS rigged your game.

There is currently no evidence presented showing that SCORAS manipulated a single one of your Dice outcomes.

Your remaining dispute is essentially:

"I want to independently reconstruct how Hacksaw Gaming's RNG generated my individual Dice outcomes."

We understand that request.

But that is now a technical question regarding Hacksaw Gaming's product and RNG, and Hacksaw Gaming is the appropriate party to answer it.

We have spent several days trying to obtain answers and information on your behalf, and we believe we have done everything reasonably within our ability as the casino operator to assist you.

You are completely free to continue discussing the matter publicly and to contact Hacksaw Gaming directly with your remaining technical questions.

[Nrcewker]

You yourself said

You are correct that these records do not allow you to independently reconstruct the underlying RNG calculation.

And again you said this

Have we proven that you can independently reconstruct the RNG? No.

This is exactly what I am saying. I am not asking you to prove that Hacksaw's RNG reconstruction is correct or secured, rather I am asking you to verify the bets that I have placed on your casino, which is lost and disputed.

If you now require a detailed explanation of exactly how Hacksaw's RNG generated a particular Dice number... you will need to contact Hacksaw Gaming directly.

Why should I, as the customer of Scoras have to investigate the provider myself ? I did not open an account with Hacksaw Gaming. I did not deposit money with Hacksaw Gaming. I did not place the bet on Hacksaw Gaming's website. Right?

I played the game on SCORAS. If SCORAS chooses to offer a third party game in their platform then I would also expect that they have sufficient evidence and documentation to demonstrate that the game being offered to its customers is operating correctly.

There is currently no evidence presented showing that SCORAS manipulated a single one of your Dice outcomes.

I know I dont have evidence to prove the game is rigged, infact I am collecting that only now. But that doesn't prove that my disputed results were independently verifiable.

If SCORAS cannot independently verify the RNG result of a disputed round and SCORAS is the operator through which I placed the bet and lost the money then what mechanism does SCORAS use to ensure and show to its customers that the individual results are fair and correctly generated?

And please don't simply say

Contact Hacksaw.

I am asking SCORAS because my deposit, transaction and bet took place on SCORAS.

If SCORAS completely relies on Hacksaw(or the other aggregators) for the fairness, integrity and honesty of the rounds of the game then please explain what checks SCORAS performs before offering that game to customers and what evidence you can provide to a customer when a specific round is disputed.
 
So after 3 to 4 freaking days, I am still on the same boat that is I have lost the money on SCORAS, I disputed specific rounds, and I still cannot independently verify how the Dice results were generated.


I am saying that SCORAS has not given me a method by which I as the customer who placed and lost the bets and that too on SCORAS, can independently establish that the disputed Dice results were genuinely generated as claimed.

That is the issue I want answered.

And at last if SCORAS believes that this responsibility lies entirely with Hacksaw Gaming, then please explain why SCORAS offers the game to customers without having the ability to independently resolve a customer's legitimate dispute concerning the integrity,fairness and honesty of an individual result.

"If something cannot be independently verified, there is a higher possibility of manipulation."

I would like a direct answer to that question rather than another referral to Hacksaw.

[LoyceV]

Over the last several days, our team has spent a significant amount of time trying to help you with this matter.

You could have saved yourself a lot of time by being provably fair

[SCORAS]

If SCORAS cannot independently verify the RNG result of a disputed round and SCORAS is the operator through which I placed the bet and lost the money then what mechanism does SCORAS use to ensure and show to its customers that the individual results are fair and correctly generated?

This is a fair question, and I will answer it directly.

SCORAS does not operate a separate copy of Hacksaw Gaming's RNG that allows us to independently regenerate every individual game result ourselves.

The verification mechanisms available to us as the casino operator are the provider/aggregator records, the round information supplied by the provider, the settlement records, and the certification/integration documentation available through the provider chain.

In your specific case, we requested the disputed rounds to be checked.

The response we received confirmed that the rounds existed, were closed correctly by the provider and that the corresponding results and credits were processed accordingly.

That is the mechanism currently available to us for checking a disputed provider-side round.

What you are asking for now goes one step further.

You are asking for the ability to personally reconstruct the mathematical RNG calculation behind an individual historical Hacksaw Dice result using information such as:

• Server seed
• Client seed
• Nonce
• Hashing algorithm
• Exact RNG version
• Raw provider-generated RNG value

We do not have access to those internal values.

That is not us refusing to provide them.

We simply do not possess them.

Why should I, as the customer of Scoras have to investigate the provider myself?

I understand your argument.

You deposited with SCORAS and you played through SCORAS.

That is exactly why we did not simply tell you on day one to go somewhere else.

We have spent the last several days contacting the relevant provider chain, requesting your rounds, requesting documentation, forwarding your questions and trying to obtain answers on your behalf.

We have genuinely spent a significant amount of time on this case.

However, there is a technical limit to what we can obtain or independently produce ourselves.

If the question is:

"Did these rounds exist and were they correctly recorded and settled by the provider?"

We have already had that checked and received confirmation.

If the question is:

"Can SCORAS independently reproduce Hacksaw Gaming's internal RNG calculation and reveal the underlying RNG inputs for these historical rounds?"

The answer is no.

We cannot independently reconstruct a system that is operated internally by Hacksaw Gaming when those technical values are not exposed to us.

That is the point we have been trying to explain.

If SCORAS completely relies on Hacksaw(or the other aggregators) for the fairness, integrity and honesty of the rounds of the game then please explain what checks SCORAS performs before offering that game to customers and what evidence you can provide to a customer when a specific round is disputed.

For your dispute, the evidence available to us was requested through the provider chain.

We obtained:

• The provider-side round records.
• Confirmation of the status of the disputed rounds.
• Confirmation that the rounds were correctly closed.
• Confirmation that applicable wins/results were credited correctly.
• The certification/integration documentation that was supplied to us after our request.

We provided that information to you.

We have also openly acknowledged that this material does not allow you to personally reconstruct the RNG output.

We are not trying to hide that fact.

But there is another distinction that needs to be made here.

Independent player-verifiable RNG and independently tested/certified RNG are not necessarily the same thing.

A game not exposing server seeds, client seeds and nonces to the player does not automatically mean that the operator can manipulate the result.

Likewise, the fact that SCORAS cannot personally recreate Hacksaw's proprietary RNG calculation does not mean SCORAS controls or manipulates that calculation.

I am saying that SCORAS has not given me a method by which I as the customer who placed and lost the bets and that too on SCORAS, can independently establish that the disputed Dice results were genuinely generated as claimed.

On this specific point:

Yes. We acknowledge that we have not provided you with a method that allows you personally to cryptographically reconstruct these historical Hacksaw Dice outcomes.

We are not going to pretend otherwise.

But that is different from establishing that the outcomes were manipulated.

The information available to SCORAS and subsequently provided to you verifies the rounds through the provider-side records.

Your requirement is a different standard: you want player-side reproducibility of the RNG itself.

If Hacksaw Dice does not expose the necessary values for player-side reconstruction, SCORAS cannot create that functionality after the fact.

"If something cannot be independently verified, there is a higher possibility of manipulation."

I understand why you would prefer every casino game to be provably fair in the cryptocurrency sense where you can reproduce every result yourself.

That is a completely reasonable preference.

But lack of a player-facing provably-fair mechanism by itself is not evidence that a particular result was manipulated.

Those are two separate issues.

And regarding LoyceV's comment:

You could have saved yourself a lot of time by being provably fair

I actually agree with the general point.

Player-verifiable/provably-fair functionality is extremely useful because situations like this become much easier to resolve.

If a player can enter the seeds/nonce and reproduce the result themselves, there is very little room for disagreement.

That is something we can take from this situation moving forward.

But we also have to deal with the system that exists today.

SCORAS did not develop Hacksaw Dice and does not control its RNG implementation.

We therefore cannot retroactively turn the game into a player-verifiable provably-fair game ourselves.

What we could do was escalate the rounds, request the provider records, request documentation and continue requesting technical information.

We did that.

We have spent several days and considerable internal time trying to help you with what started as a relatively simple round verification request and developed into a detailed investigation of Hacksaw Gaming's RNG architecture.

I don't regret trying to help you.

But there comes a point where we have to be transparent about the technical boundary.

SCORAS can request and verify provider-side records.

SCORAS cannot independently manufacture or recreate proprietary Hacksaw RNG data that Hacksaw does not expose to us.

If Hacksaw makes further technical information available to us regarding these rounds, we will of course review it.

But I do not want to continue promising you information that we may simply not have access to.

So the direct answer to your question is:

No, SCORAS currently cannot provide you with server seed/client seed/nonce information that allows you personally to reconstruct these particular historical Hacksaw Dice outcomes.

Yes, SCORAS did request and receive provider-side confirmation of the disputed rounds and their settlement.

And no, the inability to provide player-side cryptographic reconstruction is not, by itself, evidence that SCORAS manipulated those rounds.

That is the most transparent answer I can give you.

[Nrcewker]

We have already had that checked and received confirmation.

SCORAS can request and verify provider-side records.

So you are yourself admitting now that a player cannot independently verify his bets? You can only provide the provider-side records.
Now what do the provider-side records actually contain? They only show that the rounds existed and were correctly settled.

“Correctly settled” ≠ “verified as fairly generated.”

Okay, let's keep this simple. Enough manipulation and off-topic discussions. You are not answering my main question.

If I cannot independently verify my own bets then how can you say those bets are fair and transparent?

Forget RNG, nonce, server seed etc. Treat me as a layman and answer this.

I am trusting my money with your casino but you have now confirmed that I cannot independently verify my bets. So as a customer, what evidence do I have that the games are fair and transparent?

[bitbollo]

@Scoras
help on this matter? if a player can't verify the previous bets ...

No one has mentioned that there are data fabricated but "fair" means somewhat that can be scrutinized by a player otherwise isn't a fair game. Ok this data comes from provider... RNG doesn't has sense here. The player need to verify these games the outcomes. no one cares about the input (or how you have a RNG for tossing out data...).
Provide elements for verifing it otherwise you have not a "fair" system or provably fair.

Last but not least, can you please avoid to post WALL OF TEXT that keeps ultra long to read this post/topic/your replies?

I have passed your second post to this app and it looks like enterely AI. Freely to use but the result is completely creepy not only for long text but also for the whole content.
https://app.gptzero.me/?scanType=basic&source=landing&triggerScan=true

[LoyceV]

"fair" means somewhat that can be scrutinized by a player otherwise isn't a fair game.

That's not necessarily correct: a game can still be fair even if it's not provably fair. But the player can never be sure about it.
As far as I know, that's the case with most brick and mortar casinos: there's no way for the player to verify fairness, but certification and authorities should make sure it's fair. With online games, it's a big ask to just trust the website.

It's the "provably" part that makes all the difference. If a game can be designed to be provably fair, not doing it doesn't really make sense.

[bitbollo]

@LoyceV
How can you have a "FAIR" game if you cannot verify? Here there is no third part making any check!
It's implicit in crytpo casino that FAIR means verify the games hence PROVABLY fair - mathematically fair. Otherwise this could be considered just a label autoassigned by casino and nothing more.
Even the casino is pretty aware of this , Scoras.io mentioned the existence of :

Server seed
Client seed
Nonce
Hashing algorithm
Exact RNG version
Raw provider-generated RNG value

This implies they have a PROVABLY FAIR system in place (or at least they are planning to have this according their third party).

[LoyceV]

How can you have a "FAIR" game if you cannot verify?

Simple: you bet head or tails, I throw a coin. I'm not cheating, so it's fair. But you can't know for sure, and that's because me being fair doesn't make it provably fair.

It's implicit in crytpo casino that FAIR means verify the games

I've never seen the word "fair" used separated from the word "provably" in this context.

This implies ~

I'd never rely on anything "implied", coming from a business that's known to use their ToS to avoid payouts.

[bitbollo]

fairness in crypto gambling meaning reproducibility of a result/outcome. otherwise it's just a label.
it's not just matter of ToS, all businesses claim to have a FAIR system... even the game with 3 ringing bell on the street can be considered FAIR if they wouldn't run

Related your example of tossing coin, I would not derail in an OT, but the simple fact that you can throw a coin doesn't means this is a fair game. It's a game with a potential outcome of 50% thats all.
You can just cheat the way you launch the coin, using a rigged coin or just the fact you're the only one launching the coin doesn't imply its a fair game.
Having a chance (theoretically) of 50% doesn't means you're acting fair or the game itself is fair...that's why it is used in a mathematically way to check a result.... otherwise we are just checking if they have tossed a coin and not if they are rigging the game, the coin itself or how they are tossing it.

[DireWolfM14]

~

Wow, that's a lot of words just to avoid giving the client what he asked for.  More words than I care to read, but this is enough:

At this point, we have seen no evidence whatsoever that SCORAS manipulated your rounds, changed your results, or incorrectly settled your bets.

WE have seen NO evidence that you are not manipulating the games, but there's plenty here to see that you're attempting to manipulate the narrative.   

[yahoo62278]

Not taking a side here, just an interested observer. Has anyone tried to verify a hacksaw bet on any other casino? Is the process the same on all casinos for this provider? Would add more to the story if we knew it was only this casino or all of them facing the issue.

[Zwei]

why on god's green earth would you play hacksaw dice? that game has a 4% house edge, and it's not provably fair.

Has anyone tried to verify a hacksaw bet on any other casino? Is the process the same on all casinos for this provider?

you can't verify any hacksaw bet yourself, their dice game is the same as their slots, you just "trust" that they are not fucking you over. same with most other game providers.

imo, as long as scoras.io isn't operating a cracked/modified version of the game, there is really nothing you can hold against them in terms of the game fairness.
they are just a publisher, same as all the other casinos who host hacksaw games.

[Shishir99]

Guys, please help me understand: does the casino need to prove the fairness of a 3rd-party game? Hackshaw in this case? Has any casino done this before?
From my understanding, casinos are responsible for the fairness of the in-house games they built themselves. They need to provide you with a method to verify your bets, provide the client seed, server seed, nonce, and let you know which algorithm they are using. 

If you play a 3rd-party game and believe it's rigged, just make sure the casino isn't showing you a fake game. If it's an official game from a provider, you need to contact the provider to verify the bet results if they have the provably fair technology. The casino itself cannot access that kind of data from its side. If the provider does not help with this, you need to file a complaint against them. Not against the casino where you played. If you file a complaint against the casino, then you can do it against all the casinos that list these specific games from this specific provider.

Your title should say, Hackshaw Gaming, Serious concerns regarding fairness and Possible rigging.

[DireWolfM14]

imo, as long as scoras.io isn't operating a cracked/modified version of the game, there is really nothing you can hold against them in terms of the game fairness.
they are just a publisher, same as all the other casinos who host hacksaw games.

So if I'm to understand this correctly, Hacksaw Games can be hosted by any online casino?  I wasn't aware this was a thing.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

So if I'm to understand this correctly, Hacksaw Games can be hosted by any online casino?  I wasn't aware this was a thing.

I remember seeing lots of slots from that brand in various casinos, where the casinos act as intermediaries for the original provider. I suppose the casino simply takes a cut of the profit made by the provider. It’s quite common; there are plenty of others, such as NoLimit City, Pragmatic Play, etc. You probably don't visit many casinos, as most of them are very similar these days.

[Nrcewker]

I think some people are actually missing my main point.

I am not saying that other casinos always provide verifiable bets for Hacksaw dice. If hacksaw doesnt provide that verification method then that's a separate issue.
But my dispute is with SCORAS because I placed the bet on SCORAS.

According to Scoras:

You are correct that these records do not allow you to independently reconstruct the underlying RNG calculation.

No, SCORAS currently cannot provide you with server seed/client seed/nonce information that allows you personally to reconstruct these particular historical Hacksaw Dice outcomes.

Fine I get that, its hard for SCORAS to get the RNG(verification) of the bet.

But then my question is very simple What evidence or proof Scoras have to prove me that the exact game or configuration I played was properly tested and the result that was generated was actually generated by Hacksaw and not tampered in between reaching me?

The provider-side record proves the round existed and was settled. I am not disputing or questioning that.

What I am questioning is the integrity,fairness and transparency of the actual outcome.

I placed the bet on SCORAS then trusted SCORAS with my money and SCORAS chose to offer this game on its platform. If SCORAS cannot verify the outcome then SCORAS needs to explain what evidence it expects its customers to rely on to believe that the outcome was genuinely fair and not manipulated.

[SCORAS]

@Nrcewker

I think this is the point that is getting lost in this discussion, so I want to make our position clear one final time.

Hacksaw Dice is NOT an in-house SCORAS game.

We did not build it, we do not operate its RNG, and we do not control how the outcome of each round is generated. It is a third-party product supplied by Hacksaw Gaming.

If this were a SCORAS in-house game, then absolutely — the responsibility would be on us. We would control the infrastructure and could provide whatever verification mechanism the game was built around, such as server seed, client seed, nonce, hashing method, etc.

But that simply isn't the situation here.

As other members have already pointed out, Hacksaw games are distributed across many casinos. SCORAS integrates the provider's game; SCORAS does not generate the individual outcomes.

So there are two completely separate questions:

1. Can a player independently/provably verify a Hacksaw Dice round?

That is ultimately a question for Hacksaw Gaming and the verification functionality they provide for their product.

2. Is there evidence that SCORAS manipulated your Hacksaw Dice rounds?

Despite everything discussed in this thread, we have still not seen evidence showing that SCORAS manipulated your rounds, changed an outcome, operated a modified version of the game, or incorrectly settled your bets.

And @Nrcewker, if you do not believe what we are telling you, that is completely fair enough.

You are more than welcome to contact Hacksaw Gaming directly and ask them about the game, its fairness, how their rounds are generated, what information is available for verification, and whether the version offered through our integration is legitimate.

We have absolutely no problem with you doing that. In fact, if you still have doubts about Hacksaw's product after everything we have provided, contacting Hacksaw directly is the logical next step.

We hold the original integration. We are not running some modified or cracked copy of Hacksaw Dice.

I also want to clarify something regarding the document we previously provided to you.

That document relates to testing performed on the game aggregator we use. It is legitimate documentation relating to the aggregator through which the games are provided. We have provided you with the documentation that was made available to us rather than pretending we possess provider-side information that we simply do not control.

We are genuinely sorry for your loss, and we understand why losing money can lead someone to ask questions.

However, I also think it is important to acknowledge how we have treated you throughout this situation.

We have supported you, communicated with you, answered as many questions as we possibly could, contacted the relevant parties, and requested additional information on your behalf.

We also gave you lossback, and I want to make something especially clear about that:

You did not ask us for that lossback.

We offered it ourselves because we genuinely wanted to keep you happy as a client. Nobody forced us to do that, and it wasn't something we provided because you demanded compensation. It came strictly from our side as a gesture toward you as a customer.

On top of that, you also received our BitcoinTalk member giveaway.

We genuinely like having you on board as a client, @Nrcewker. Throughout this entire situation, our intention has been to help you and maintain a good relationship with you.

I'm sorry that despite everything we have done, we apparently haven't been able to make you happy with the answers or assistance we've provided. But I can genuinely say that we tried our best.

There is ultimately a limit to what SCORAS can provide regarding a product that we did not develop and do not control.

If anyone produces actual evidence that SCORAS served a fake or modified Hacksaw game, altered a bet, changed an outcome, or incorrectly settled a round, then bring that evidence forward and we will address it.

But repeatedly asking SCORAS to provide an in-house provably-fair verification system for a third-party Hacksaw product does not change the technical reality.

If this were our game, I would agree with you. But it isn't.

If you still believe there is something wrong with the underlying Hacksaw game, please contact Hacksaw Gaming directly. You are completely entitled to question them and ask them to verify whatever they are able to verify from their side.

From our side, we have provided the information and documentation available to us, contacted the relevant parties, answered your questions, supported you, provided lossback voluntarily, and included you in our BitcoinTalk giveaway.

I'm sorry that this still hasn't been enough for you, but we really have tried our best.

Unless there is new evidence specifically showing wrongdoing by SCORAS, I believe our part of this discussion has now reached its conclusion.

Repeating the same questions cannot produce information or functionality that only the third-party provider controls.

[yahoo62278]

I think some people are actually missing my main point.

I am not saying that other casinos always provide verifiable bets for Hacksaw dice. If hacksaw doesnt provide that verification method then that's a separate issue.
But my dispute is with SCORAS because I placed the bet on SCORAS.

According to Scoras:

You are correct that these records do not allow you to independently reconstruct the underlying RNG calculation.

No, SCORAS currently cannot provide you with server seed/client seed/nonce information that allows you personally to reconstruct these particular historical Hacksaw Dice outcomes.

Fine I get that, its hard for SCORAS to get the RNG(verification) of the bet.

But then my question is very simple What evidence or proof Scoras have to prove me that the exact game or configuration I played was properly tested and the result that was generated was actually generated by Hacksaw and not tampered in between reaching me?

The provider-side record proves the round existed and was settled. I am not disputing or questioning that.

What I am questioning is the integrity,fairness and transparency of the actual outcome.

I placed the bet on SCORAS then trusted SCORAS with my money and SCORAS chose to offer this game on its platform. If SCORAS cannot verify the outcome then SCORAS needs to explain what evidence it expects its customers to rely on to believe that the outcome was genuinely fair and not manipulated.

Sorry man but your issue is not with the casino at all. Yes you placed the bet at SCORAS, we can agree on that, but your issue is 100% with the provider namely Hacksaw for this case. If the process is the same for every single casino out there with players not being able to verify a bet they place, then you cannot blame the casino for offering 3rd party games. This is why I asked my question previously. I knew the answer but wanted someone to confirm.

You cannot just call out this casino because this is the casino you decided to make a bet on. You may as well make a thread against every single casino that offers 3rd party games since they're all in the same boat.

Guys, please help me understand: does the casino need to prove the fairness of a 3rd-party game? Hackshaw in this case? Has any casino done this before?
From my understanding, casinos are responsible for the fairness of the in-house games they built themselves. They need to provide you with a method to verify your bets, provide the client seed, server seed, nonce, and let you know which algorithm they are using. 

If you play a 3rd-party game and believe it's rigged, just make sure the casino isn't showing you a fake game. If it's an official game from a provider, you need to contact the provider to verify the bet results if they have the provably fair technology. The casino itself cannot access that kind of data from its side. If the provider does not help with this, you need to file a complaint against them. Not against the casino where you played. If you file a complaint against the casino, then you can do it against all the casinos that list these specific games from this specific provider.

Your title should say, Hackshaw Gaming, Serious concerns regarding fairness and Possible rigging.

This is correct and whom he should have an issue with. SCORAS is no different than any other casino out there as far as offering a provider. They probably all say provably fair games as well but I would have to research that to see. If they do then maybe they need to add a disclaimer to their websites saying something to the fact that players cannot verify bets and play slots at your own risk or whatever.

So if I'm to understand this correctly, Hacksaw Games can be hosted by any online casino?  I wasn't aware this was a thing.

I remember seeing lots of slots from that brand in various casinos, where the casinos act as intermediaries for the original provider. I suppose the casino simply takes a cut of the profit made by the provider. It’s quite common; there are plenty of others, such as NoLimit City, Pragmatic Play, etc. You probably don't visit many casinos, as most of them are very similar these days.

Exactly.