This question is not the first of its kind. I've seen plenty and so have you. In these kinds of questions the asker is clearly going to violate the ToS\ToU agreement the game throws in your face when you install it. Is this act illegal? If it is, why do we encourage\support\answer these questions?
We've had discussions like this in the past, here for example.
The problem tends to be that when it comes to things that are illegal, it's really kind of a weird gray area on which we are not experts and we're generally told to assume good faith whenever possible. Plus, what "legal" is isn't something that's agreed upon worldwide.
For instance, some people/companies/governments would argue that emulators are illegal, or that abandonware is illegal, or modding your console is illegal, or flash carts are illegal, burning "backup copies" of games is illegal, etc. The community is likely to be strongly divided whenever these things come up.
EULAs, ToSes, and ToUes are so complex and dense that interpreting a question and determining what is and isn't covered by them can be impossible until they're tested in some clear way.
Even easy rules in this space, like:
Cheating, hacking, glitching, or otherwise gaining an unfair advantage in a multiplayer game
can be problematic.
Can we accurately sort "fair" from "unfair?" If a glitch is widely known and used often, does that make it fair? (ie, think about fighting game glitches where everybody "knows" how to break the game a certain way as a certain character or with a certain move) How widely known is wide enough?
What constitutes "multiplayer?" Do games you only play with friends count as multiplayer? Wouldn't item duping in Borderlands 2 fall afoul of this? Do games with only leaderboards count as multiplayer? If so, then wouldn't modding or savescumming in XCom: Enemy Unknown be considered cheating in a multiplayer game, regardless of your intent?
I don't know that I have a clear answer to the underlying problem here. I know that we want to avoid being a "get the hax" site, but that also sometimes what we're told is 'illegal' or against a complex agreement isn't always so, or isn't a good frame of reference.
In the past, the way I've approached these things is to ask "is there a reason why this question could/would be asked that appears valid? Can I assume good faith?" - if so, then I generally consider it safe. Then, I would answer with the caveat that "hey, I'm no expert, but I think it's possible that you could get into trouble with this if you used it in the wrong way."