Slotastic, Real Vegas (curgam malta) and Lucky Club?

[maphesto]

I did a reverse IP check on some sites and this came:



How can they be on the same server without connection?

EDIT: I meant Jackpot Capital, but I checked RICH Club

 

[DepositSpinLose]

sorry to ask........

sorry but.....

can you please tell us a little more to what you are seeing? for those of us that are not totally in the know.....i don't know what you are saying. there are way too many of these "in the know" threads that say little or means nothing for us "average knowledge" members. what i mean is why not take a few minutes and explain the jist of what you mean. i don't know from these code threads if i should take is as bad or good. please elaborate a little. gee tanks.

 

[dionysus]

I'm just a layman, but perhaps different owners source out to same 3rd party providers, the way unrelated celebs have the same agents

 

[KasinoKing]

I'm a laymen too when it comes to this, but surely most servers host 100s or even 10,000s of different websites which aren't in any way related.
So I don't understand what is the significance of a shared IP...

KK

 

[maphesto]

You may be right! Have to check more when I come home. I was in a hurry and may have been too quick with my post...

 

[The Dude]

This is really a red herring - in other words, it's is nothing to be alarmed about. All it means is that they are being hosted by an RTG server - they are RTG powered casinos. The ownership and management of Slotastic has absolutely nothing to do with Real Vegas. All you are telling us is that they have the same software.

Please don't go warning people about something that should have been an inquiry - not a freakout fest .

 

[maxd]

Thread title edited: sorry, "WARNING!" is pretty much reserved for official Casinomeister Warnings.

Good work though.

 

[rainmaker]

.

I did a reverse IP check for my own site and found 164 domains hosted on the same web server.

One domain may even contain explicit content according to the report (not my site hehe )

As KK said. One server can host thousands of sites.

 

[chayton]

It seems like ever since they moved the RTG servers a couple years ago every RTG casino develops lags and issues all at the same time, so the idea that most of them are sharing an IP or even a server doesn't surprise me. Some days it feels like they're running all the casinos from an old clunker in some guy's basement.

 

[maxd]

Not terribly unexpected that a number of presumably unrelated sites would trace back to the same server farm but the same IP?

[profile]Webzcas[/profile] would know the deal with things like this. Where's he at?

 

[vinylweatherman]

Not terribly unexpected that a number of presumably unrelated sites would trace back to the same server farm but the same IP?

[profile]Webzcas[/profile] would know the deal with things like this. Where's he at?

This coming from an industry that believes that when players can be traced back as sharing the same IP, they are immediately "red flagged" as possible multi-accounters, and we get the old "linked accounts" justification for restrictions and confiscations.

Either casinos know damn well that these are bullshit excuses for saying players are linked, or they know from experience that a shared IP is very STRONG evidence of linkage, beyond that of the IPs just being in the same group, such as a common server farm, or honest unlinked players that just happen to live in the same town and use the same ISP.

The casinos themselves may be separate, but maybe there is a link at a higher level, such as the ultimate beneficial (and of course secret) owners. This was pretty much the case with Rival, and the 4 top guys there were very careful to keep their names secret. When they were "outed", we saw all Canadians banned Rival wide in a knee-jerk reaction because this is where these secretive 4 guys lived. The Rival white labels also link back in many ways to the same central support, same processor, same central database, and same operating companies (Bonne Chance & Silverstone), which themselves were designed to obscure the trail that ultimately lead back to the 4 people at the top.

It could be that the structure at the top of RTG is more similar than they would have us believe, with RTG being far more than just the software supplier. RTG have already inserted the Hastings layer between themselves and the operators, most likely to obscure, than for clarity and transparency. They then allow Hastings to pretend to operate an independent complaints resolution process that rogue casinos can treat with contempt without fear of any sanction being applied by Hastings or RTG. Maybe the large number of supposedly independent RTG casinos are controlled by a much smaller, but secretive, group of owners.

We have already caught Virtual at it, pretending they have nothing to do with the mystery company that bought the old Crystal Palace casinos, yet Virtual promoted these supposed competitor casinos on their own fake independent review site, saying they were all "the best", and by pure coincidence, all offering the exact same bonus code to put into the cashier if you were a new player. I bet you will find these two groups also share the same IP addresses.

The next step would be to follow the counter argument, that is that it is simply the fact that they are RTG that causes this. It can be done by looking to see whether the accredited RTG casinos that we know are independent operations also show up as linked to each other in reverse lookup.

Apart from poor provision, having the same IP address for unrelated SECURE services could mean that if one is hacked, they are all exposed. In layman's terms, hack JC, and you have them all by the b******s.

The same applies to a home network sharing the same IP, hack into one device, you have access to them all.