| Blogs > KingofHearts |
|
KingofHearts
Japan562 Posts
10 years down after sc1 and the issue of maphack still exists.. this is frustrating as a player and consumer . plus i think blizzard have what it takes to implement an antihack system to their game.thats what makes it more disappointing. not stopping something bad when you have the power to. /rant    | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
 | ||
|
Dubzex
United States6994 Posts
| ||
|
jello_biafra
United Kingdom6638 Posts
On May 30 2011 11:25 Dubzex wrote: Are you ranting about sc:bw? I thought Blizzard stopped caring about hacks for that game years ago. I could be wrong here but I think Blizzard has more important things to worry about like D3, HOTS, WOW, and the new MMO instead of a game that they are actively trying to phase out so they can bring more people, especially Koreans, into the world of SC2. Pretty sure he's talking about SC2. Someone needs to make a modern day penguin plug for SC2, that would solve the problem! (for those who don't know penguin plug was an old plugin for BW that took advantage of a "back door" in the popular maphack of the time and made the player unally themselves after 5 minutes so their own units would destroy their base lol) | ||
|
Dubzex
United States6994 Posts
On May 30 2011 11:26 jello_biafra wrote: Pretty sure he's talking about SC2. Someone needs to make a modern day penguin plug for SC2, that would solve the problem! (for those who don't know penguin plug was an old plugin for BW that took advantage of a "back door" in the popular maphack of the time and made the player unally themselves after 5 minutes so their own units would destroy their base lol) I don't know, it definitely seems like he is talking about SC:BW... On May 30 2011 11:17 KingofHearts wrote: 10 years down after sc1 and the issue of maphack still exists.. | ||
|
KingofHearts
Japan562 Posts
| ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
On May 30 2011 11:20 darkness wrote: As far as I know, chasing maphacks is like cats'n'mice. In other words, if you patch a maphack exploit, there will be new one. Correct me if I'm wrong. Technologically, making the game 100% maphack free is pretty trivial. Just change the network architecture from p2p to client-server. Or at least give players that option if they so choose. The problem is economical and not technological. Blizzard only doesn't do it because it's not worth the cost vs benefit. They would spend considerable money to implement it. And how much more money do they think they would make from a maphack free game? Very little. They don't think it's worth it. This kinds of thing would have to go through the CFO which would simply analyse the ROI (return of investiment) and say no. A maphackable game is more profitable. | ||
|
Cube
Canada777 Posts
| ||
|
elmizzt
United States3309 Posts
On May 30 2011 11:36 KingofHearts wrote: im talking about sc2 10 years since sc1 and the issue still exists! hahahahahah oh wow. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
On May 30 2011 11:34 Dubzex wrote: Someone needs to make a modern day penguin plug for SC2, that would solve the problem! (for those who don't know penguin plug was an old plugin for BW that took advantage of a "back door" in the popular maphack of the time and made the player unally themselves after 5 minutes so their own units would destroy their base lol) Isn't it against the rules to use 3rd party programs? If not, then I welcome this suggestion. | ||
|
L3gendary
Canada1470 Posts
On May 30 2011 11:49 VIB wrote: Technologically, making the game 100% maphack free is pretty trivial. Just change the network architecture from p2p to client-server. Or at least give players that option if they so choose. The problem is economical and not technological. Blizzard only doesn't do it because it's not worth the cost vs benefit. They would spend considerable money to implement it. And how much more money do they think they would make from a maphack free game? Very little. They don't think it's worth it. This kinds of thing would have to go through the CFO which would simply analyse the ROI (return of investiment) and say no. A maphackable game is more profitable. Huh? The game is not p2p it is client-server. And there are plenty of games that are client-server and hacking is rampant. Sorry to say but it's just a reality of online games. Idk any games that handle hacking very well. Most tournaments have their own anti-cheats and lan is obviously not a problem so its mostly just annoying on ladder in that u might run into a hacker every 1 in 100 games or something. | ||
|
tobi9999
United States1966 Posts
| ||
|
KingofHearts
Japan562 Posts
| ||
|
Cambium
United States16368 Posts
On May 30 2011 12:17 L3gendary wrote: Huh? The game is not p2p it is client-server. And there are plenty of games that are client-server and hacking is rampant. Sorry to say but it's just a reality of online games. Idk any games that handle hacking very well. Most tournaments have their own anti-cheats and lan is obviously not a problem so its mostly just annoying on ladder in that u might run into a hacker every 1 in 100 games or something. BW is definitely p2p, not sure about SC2, I would guess it's the same. I would actually like to read more about this kind of stuff, a link would be appreciated. I don't see how making it client-server would solve the problems though, it has to do what's being transmitted, not where it's coming from, no? | ||
|
Cube
Canada777 Posts
On May 30 2011 12:34 Cambium wrote: BW is definitely p2p, not sure about SC2, I would guess it's the same. I would actually like to read more about this kind of stuff, a link would be appreciated. I don't see how making it client-server would solve the problems though, it has to do what's being transmitted, not where it's coming from, no? the idea here is that when it goes through a server, the server can check what's being transmitted and detect maphacks. | ||
|
VIB
Brazil3567 Posts
On May 30 2011 12:17 L3gendary wrote: You're probably misunderstanding what I said. I'm talking about the specific problem of maphacks. Not about general hacks. Maphacks specifically are only possible because the player data are shared between both clients in p2p instead of being handled by a third party server. This problem is 100% solvable with a server as referee.Huh? The game is not p2p it is client-server. And there are plenty of games that are client-server and hacking is rampant. On May 30 2011 12:34 Cambium wrote: Yes it's what's being transmitted. The problem is that if it's p2p then both clients have to tell each other what they're doing to keep synced.I don't see how making it client-server would solve the problems though, it has to do what's being transmitted, not where it's coming from, no? If the game was client-server then the clients would only tell what they're doing to the server and would never know what the other is doing. The server would receive data from both sides, calculate what both can see, and only share with the players what's in their vision. And not what's under the fog of war. edit: made an image: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/RSxAe.png) | ||
|
sob3k
United States7572 Posts
| ||
|
Backpack
United States1776 Posts
| ||
|
Cambium
United States16368 Posts
On May 30 2011 12:41 VIB wrote: You're probably misunderstanding what I said. I'm talking about the specific problem of maphacks. Not about general hacks. Maphacks specifically are only possible because the player data are shared between both clients in p2p instead of being handled by a third party server. This problem is 100% solvable with a server as referee. Yes it's what's being transmitted. The problem is that if it's p2p then both clients have to tell each other what they're doing to keep synced. If the game was client-server then the clients would only tell what they're doing to the server and would never know what the other is doing. The server would receive data from both sides, calculate what both can see, and only share with the players what's in their vision. And not what's under the fog of war. that's an interesting idea, i'd never thought about it that way. However, wouldn't that put an enormous amount of strain on the server? I always thought of the client-server model as the server relaying the data and does no calculations. The server would obviously keep track of the frame counter, but that's it. | ||
|
Geovu
Estonia1344 Posts
On May 30 2011 12:44 Backpack wrote: Nothing is unhackable. Three step process to creating an unhackable machine: 1) Unplug machine 2) ??? 3) A result! | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Rain Dota 2 6052Calm  4486Flash  3210Bisu 1751Horang2 1667Hyuk 1004Jaedong 955Mini 617Soma 551firebathero 466[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Other Games singsing2375 Hui .320 ceh9295 Liquid`VortiX238 FrodaN176 ArmadaUGS80 Mew2King55 KnowMe46 Trikslyr45 ZerO(Twitch)20 |
|
OSC
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
The PondCast
OSC
WardiTV Invitational
Online Event
RSL Revival
RSL Revival
WardiTV Invitational
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs Soma
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
