EPTjust wondering when the head in the sand approach will end?
I guess when someone gets caught? Why wait until then to come up with a solution?
Will the community ever deal with maphacking?
| Blogs > dacthehork |
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
just wondering when the head in the sand approach will end? I guess when someone gets caught? Why wait until then to come up with a solution? | ||
|
NarutO
Germany18839 Posts
| ||
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:00 mTw|NarutO wrote: There is no proof solution. If you are good enough you can find walkarounds to every security. The only way to proof someone is not hacking is for them to stream their play. There are solutions but they require some work and aren't just "easy" hence no one bothers. Also 95% of people who watch don't know they exist or are naive Meaning there is no "real" reward for making your tournament antihack just more trouble. AS people don't think it's going on at all. | ||
|
CharlieBrownsc
Canada598 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:02 dacthehork wrote: There are solutions but they require some work and aren't just "easy" hence no one bothers. Also 95% of people who watch don't know they exist or are naive Meaning there is no "real" reward for making your tournament antihack just more trouble. AS people don't think it's going on at all. There is no such thing as unhackable | ||
|
WhuazGoodJaggah
Lesotho777 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:00 mTw|NarutO wrote: There is no proof solution. If you are good enough you can find walkarounds to every security. The only way to proof someone is not hacking is for them to stream their play. I can hack and have a stream on and you wouldn't notice. | ||
|
QooQ
United States96 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:10 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote: I can hack and have a stream on and you wouldn't notice. Explain yourself. | ||
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:08 CharlieBrownsc wrote: There is no such thing as unhackable so lets ignore it instead of taking some measures which would stop it ? aka forced streaming, screenshot or invasive program? | ||
|
Spekulatius
Germany2413 Posts
We are not the people in charge. The only thing the community can do is being indignant at maphacking. Which we are. It's up to the tournament organizers or Blizzard to remedy the problem. | ||
|
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
The only way to realistically solve this is to have the entire game stored server-side, and literally have only what you can see be sent to your client by the server. While we may be approaching computing that is fast enough to do this in a seamless way, the vast majority of residential connections are no where close to being able to handle something like that, as it stands now. Really the only way to PROACTIVELY stop maphacking is to wait for residential bandwidth to increase. I'd be surprise if this occurred a lot in online tournaments of any level worth talking about, but I'm sure it has happened. Blizzard (and any tournament organizers) can only reactively ban people. | ||
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:10 WhuazGoodJaggah wrote: I can hack and have a stream on and you wouldn't notice. umm require fullscreen streaming + tab through all running processes live etc? | ||
|
HardlyNever
United States1258 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:13 dacthehork wrote: umm require fullscreen streaming + tab through all running processes live etc? Dual monitors. Only stream from one. | ||
|
Najda
United States3765 Posts
Two monitors would be an easy workaround. Edit: Streaming only one of them of course. | ||
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:16 Najda wrote: Two monitors would be an easy workaround. Edit: Streaming only one of them of course. Open video options live on stream? Or more invasive measures | ||
|
guN-viCe
United States687 Posts
| ||
|
Chocolate
United States2350 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:19 guN-viCe wrote: Make each player required to stream to the Ref's only. That way no one can stream snipe. If the public want a stream too, theirs should be on a couple minute delay, if that's possible. It has already been said, but you could just stream a monitor w/o maphack and use one that does have it. | ||
|
dacthehork
United States2000 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:34 Chocolate wrote: It has already been said, but you could just stream a monitor w/o maphack and use one that does have it. So make them open graphics options live on stream with no interruptions? also invasive measures have been used in the past. A passive attitude is silly. | ||
|
WhuazGoodJaggah
Lesotho777 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:13 dacthehork wrote: umm require fullscreen streaming + tab through all running processes live etc? I would just load my module into a valid process and send the relevant data to another PC, so even if I would stream a monitor setup that shows only 1 monitor is connected you wouldn't be able to tell. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44612 Posts
There will always be maphackers and the community isn't exactly in control of a whole lot... | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I don't really know what *the community* can actually do, besides actively pester Blizzard to keep cracking down on known maphackers by sending in reports and replays with proof in them. But Blizzard is in charge. There will always be maphackers and the community isn't exactly in control of a whole lot... exactly... I don't like it but I don't exactly have the coding knowledge to fill the holes... isn't that what people at blizzard are paid for? | ||
|
gds
Iceland1391 Posts
| ||
|
TheWorldToCome
United States452 Posts
On January 26 2012 11:32 gds wrote: Is there such thing like "map hacking" in online poker? I mean does the poker client receives informations about your opponents cards? Yes, just google search "ultimate bet scandal" that was one poker site where there were "super users" who could see other players cards. | ||
|
FuRong
New Zealand3089 Posts
On January 26 2012 11:32 gds wrote: Is there such thing like "map hacking" in online poker? I mean does the poker client receives informations about your opponents cards? Not unless your name is Russ Hamilton. | ||
|
imre
France9263 Posts
And to answer this i'll second ppl saying that it's impossible to do anything proactively. The only way it could become a problem if it's used in online qualifier/big online tourney, otherwise it's not important... | ||
|
Fission
Canada1184 Posts
edit: by often i mean about 1 in 25-30 games. It's usually SUPER obvious. I don't really think its a huge deal tho, its inevitable on ladder. | ||
|
askTeivospy
1525 Posts
I don't think people really care much about hacks in SC2, a lot of people are surprised they exist which makes me lol o_O I don't play the game anymore since hackers from S1 / S2 (revealed hackers) are still playing this game, its really a joke. The way the game is designed though its 100% on blizzard to fix the issue, it feels like they don't care tho :| | ||
|
Rannasha
Netherlands2398 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:12 HardlyNever wrote: The only way to realistically solve this is to have the entire game stored server-side, and literally have only what you can see be sent to your client by the server. While we may be approaching computing that is fast enough to do this in a seamless way, the vast majority of residential connections are no where close to being able to handle something like that, as it stands now. Really the only way to PROACTIVELY stop maphacking is to wait for residential bandwidth to increase. Computing game actions on the server would actually require less bandwidth towards the clients. Right now, both clients receive a list of every action being taken in the game. With this they can compute how units move, how they deal damage, etc... If these computations would happen on the B.net server, the clients would only need to receive the events that take place within the players vision. Of course this would mean that the entire netcode has to be rewritten and the load on the Battle.net servers would increase a lot. Also, you no longer automatically have access to a full replay, as you would never receive every action that happens ingame, which is basically what a replay-file is. Though the last part could be easily fixed by the server sending the replay file to the client at the end of the game. | ||
|
v1dom
159 Posts
On January 26 2012 11:54 TheWorldToCome wrote: Yes, just google search "ultimate bet scandal" that was one poker site where there were "super users" who could see other players cards. This is wrong in as pertains to the original question. In online poker, almost everything is done "server side." This is what the previous posters were talking about. For competitive RTS, things have to be client side, because a quarter second delay on every action would be the doom of the game. For poker, that delay is almost imperceptible. In regards to the UB scandal, the issue wasn't the data being stored clientside (because it never was). It had to do with the original programmers who designed the software, having "back door" accounts, or ones that were able to see the complete server side data. The accounts in question (dubbed "Super Users") weren't even the "cheating accounts," but person(s) used the data from said accounts to relay information to themselves on other accounts, or other persons involved. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On January 26 2012 10:00 mTw|NarutO wrote: There is no proof solution. If you are good enough you can find walkarounds to every security. The only way to proof someone is not hacking is for them to stream their play. Even then, during beta, there were external maphacks that allowed the player to have a completely separate window as a maphack with your enemy's position and everything. I believe you couldn't "see" what they were doing - so you couldn't know what the dots were, but you could still know where the guy is moving and when he's expanding. Even a streamer could have that thing running on a second monitor. Overall, nowhere is safe!!! That said, I don't play that much but I've never been overwhelmed with the feeling that someone was maphacking against me. Maybe once or twice I've been suspicious, but meh, flukes happen too. Hopefully it stays that way. | ||
| ||
