|
On May 10 2005 14:53 superpenguin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2005 14:48 MaRiO.BrOs_ wrote:
In BWChart, if you click a building you half see, poof, suspicious. I even saw some LAN games with those kind of proofs you have against Lastgosu. This is the typical comment by someone who think "suspicious action = hack". Find a flaw in this method if you can : http://www.starcraftdream.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4983Then when you will know what you are talking about, you can talk but you will not say the same thing 
I'm just saying that programs who detect selection aren't 100% reliable. Enough.
|
i dunno, something just isnt right about this newfangled hack detection. All the effort that has gone into new patches, constant bwchart revisions, all the anti-cheat technology developed around the globe from hanstars, to bws, to pgt. And out of all of this, one stupid ultra borderline method of just comparing an action at a specific tick rate is suddenly unvealed on us all? Penguins cheat detection method is the kind you would have expected the first be released in broodwar, not the last after everything else that has been done.
I have a feeling after all these accusations have been made theres going to be a lot of retractions once a flaw is found in his methods or something. Theres too much human interaction necessary to make these decisions now, and people always manage to fuck shit up. I think he needs to analyze the bw replay format compared to vod's and what not for nitty gritty testing, to see what possible ways the two can deviate from reality and return while providing a seemleesley accurate replay.
|
On May 10 2005 14:53 superpenguin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2005 14:48 MaRiO.BrOs_ wrote:
In BWChart, if you click a building you half see, poof, suspicious. I even saw some LAN games with those kind of proofs you have against Lastgosu. This is the typical comment by someone who think "suspicious action = hack". Find a flaw in this method if you can : http://www.starcraftdream.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4983Then when you will know what you are talking about, you can talk but you will not say the same thing
yeah but seriously, the word "suspicous" in bwchart really confuses the major of bwplayers, i mean REALLY. I can't remember how many times i kept saying that suspicious is ...just suspicious.
By the way, the old Lasgo only good at catching hacker by the "select" method, it had a flaw like when you move/attack on the unexplored area, if there is a building there, the program will show a nice circle which someone may think that it's a hack, eventhough the ACTUAL action is a move/attach ground.
So MaRiO.BrOs_, if you catch a whole bunch of hacker using LasgoOP based on the circle (which you very likely did), you may want to revise those "proof" because they are not proof.
|
On May 10 2005 14:58 MaRiO.BrOs_ wrote:
I'm just saying that programs who detect selection aren't 100% reliable. Enough.
It's 100 reliable when used correctly. To use it correctly you follow the method. If you think i'm wrong and that's theres so many case where it's unreliable, find one ! you say that's it's easy, but you just give a subjective opinion.
|
I surely can make a difference between attack and select.
|
On May 10 2005 14:58 MaRiO.BrOs_ wrote:
I'm just saying that programs who detect selection aren't 100% reliable. Enough.
It is and it isn't.
It is not 100% reliable in the boderline cases. (5 seconds is enough)
But other than that, it is 100% reliable.
You didn't read his article.
|
On May 10 2005 15:02 NewbSaibot wrote:
i dunno, something just isnt right about this newfangled hack detection. All the effort that has gone into new patches, constant bwchart revisions, all the anti-cheat technology developed around the globe from hanstars, to bws, to pgt. And out of all of this, one stupid ultra borderline method of just comparing an action at a specific tick rate is suddenly unvealed on us all? Penguins cheat detection method is the kind you would have expected the first be released in broodwar, not the last after everything else that has been done.
I have a feeling after all these accusations have been made theres going to be a lot of retractions once a flaw is found in his methods or something. Theres too much human interaction necessary to make these decisions now, and people always manage to fuck shit up. I think he needs to analyze the bw replay format compared to vod's and what not for nitty gritty testing, to see what possible ways the two can deviate from reality and return while providing a seemleesley accurate replay.
This is not a new method, it's just another approach.
|
You can't be serious ?
In BWChart, if you click a building you half see, poof, suspicious. I even saw some LAN games with those kind of proofs you have against Lastgosu."
thats probably not what superpenguin is talking about.
There are 1 or 2 suspicious moves in BW chart in almost every game, due to the scountig probe/scv/drone at about 1.30 -1.50 minutes crusing in your enemy's base..
i havent read about the whole process of detecting map hackers. but as far as i understood
superpenguin is 100% sure of what he is doing.
And i dont think we are talking about" bwchart shows suspicous move = hacker thing".
if it was that easy , why did he write a tutorial about detecting map hack with his new method ?
-edit-
damn you guys are so fucking fast ....
|
the thing i dont like most about this rash of new hack claims, is that the method itself hasnt undergone the typical processes of perfection. Where was the beta? Where was the "heres a new method we need to try out". Just all the sudden a week after he releases one program, there is the "100% hack detection method if you look close enough". How long did you test these methods penguin? How many scenerios did you put it through to try and break it? How many times did you purposely setup a fake game and cheat a tiny bit and then see if you can catch yourself? How many times did you get someone else to cheat for you to see if you could find it?
I just dont feel this method has been given enough research to be making claims on anybody yet. Better to let 10 guilty men go free than imprison 1 innocent.
cant wait till someone accuses me of defending hackers or being one.
The other thing is how certain penguin is of himself, yet has he earned our trust for being so certain with him? I mean hes released like 1 real program that gained any notariety, and it was extremely simple at that. No offense to him or anything, but he hasnt done anything to make me believe he has enough knowledge of the game to develope secure anti-cheat methods. And what about developer support? How do the makers of lasgo, pgt, bws, ngi, etc comment on this? Have any of them looked in to it? I'd at least like to see some fellow programmer support saying "yes i aggree this solution works".
|
On May 10 2005 15:14 NewbSaibot wrote:
the thing i dont like most about this rash of new hack claims, is that the method itself hasnt undergone the typical processes of perfection. Where was the beta? Where was the "heres a new method we need to try out". Just all the sudden a week after he releases one program, there is the "100% hack detection method if you look close enough". How long did you test these methods penguin? How many scenerios did you put it through to try and break it? How many times did you purposely setup a fake game and cheat a tiny bit and then see if you can catch yourself? How many times did you get someone else to cheat for you to see if you could find it?
I just dont feel this method has been given enough research to be making claims on anybody yet. Better to let 10 guilty men go free than imprison 1 innocent.
cant wait till someone accuses me of defending hackers or being one.
The other thing is how certain penguin is of himself, yet has he earned our trust for being so certain with him? I mean hes released like 1 real program that gained any notariety, and it was extremely simple at that. No offense to him or anything, but he hasnt done anything to make me believe he has enough knowledge of the game to develope secure anti-cheat methods. And what about developer support? How do the makers of lasgo, pgt, bws, ngi, etc comment on this? Have any of them looked in to it? I'd at least like to see some fellow programmer support saying "yes i aggree this solution works".
well i'm not a programmer but as i said this method is not new. In fact it's the same as lasgo method or w/e you call it.
|
suffeli
Finland772 Posts
Reading through all lostgosus posts he seems really strange and delusional... if he wasn't hacking the reaction with these kind of hacking accusations would be different. I think he is too much obsessed BW in winning means everything to him. And I really wouldn't be suprised if he was afraid of losing, and winning TLT would be his rocket ride to BW fame... an event he was surely not wanting to lose.
|
On May 10 2005 15:14 NewbSaibot wrote:
the thing i dont like most about this rash of new hack claims, is that the method itself hasnt undergone the typical processes of perfection. Where was the beta? Where was the "heres a new method we need to try out". Just all the sudden a week after he releases one program, there is the "100% hack detection method if you look close enough". How long did you test these methods penguin? How many scenerios did you put it through to try and break it?
the program originaly come from the original bwac code, there wasnt any process to follow and it could lead to errors when not used correctly, because most people were uninformed that borderline cases could exists. After 1.12b came out and knowing that lasgo was a little to busy to revive bwac, i asked him to share some code with me and i rewrote a big part of the bwac feature in PenguinPlug.
The first thing i did was to make all possible classic test case : test the 3 actions, under the 2 different fog of war + the full visibility state, both without a maphack and with a maphack on udp 2 human players network games. In all test case, the innocent was never accused by penguinplug, and the actions on bwchart concerned only locations and not objects. In all test cases where it was possible to catch a cheater from an action he did, penguinplug did caught him.
The 2nd step was the real testing. The SCD forum also have a small ladder with 300 players (most of you will probably laught about it since it's not something for gosu like TLT or any other serious tournament). durring 2 month, a non-released penguinplug version with bwac features was tested by a team called "the hacker-police" (http://www.starcraftdream.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3202), formed of people that had a good knowledge of the old "bwac" behavior before 1.12's time. 5 members of the "hacker-police" had the aim of checking at least 5 replays every day of the the games in the league, and i can tell for sure that more than 2000 games have been watched with it by the hacker police members with the purpose of testing this new penguinplug feature. only 3 of the 300 players were "arrested", but not even once there were any unexpected results.
We latter concluded that it was more fair to use bwscanner for the next seasons because this kind of detection by replays doesnt prevent all cheat programs and was too much time consuming to check more than a small part of the player.
However, we were satisfied that it allowed us to ban some cheaters, that's still better than banning no cheaters. Like i said in the method introduction, it's not a perfect way to catch all cheaters, but it's the only one you know about (if you dont make any assumptions about your enemy having a program installed on his computer to detect cheats localy).
You can be sure that it's not something i elaborated in 3 hours, i studied it since 1.10 by using bwac, and continued it by explaining the method and releasing the program that we now have in 1.12b.
I think the method and the tools are mature, that's why you see me posting about it here. Anyway, someone that is accused and guilty will say he is innocent, and will invent whatever reason that is subjective enough to be invented. So far the best reasons for me to be wrong were "if i was cheating i would play better/less stupid", "you are not a good player enough", "you are a nerd" or "you have no life" and i wont argue about if it's true or false but it certainly prove nothing. The "i have a too high APM to cheat" is a very funny one, lois invented something new here
Everything is mature, but it's not "mature in everybody's mind", i mean that it realy took some time on the SCD communauty get the people informed, i wasnt expecting that everyone would agree here on the first sight. The world is not flat, it's a sphere
Now those who want to belive it or not do what they want, and those who take the decisions about the players i accuse can make the decision they want, but i would find sad if nothing would have been done about it.
Better to let 10 guilty men go free than imprison 1 innocent.
i agree on that, and i said what i said keeping that in mind.
|
well now that you have confirmed that a satisfactory testing phase was conducted i am more at ease with the accusations. It's just usually these are the things people salivate over, waiting in anticipation of their release. You surprised us all both with your auto-unally hack and now this.
Btw, who edited your post for you?
|
OK. So logically - why would Lois, in that rep, at that time, target that particular nexus? Also, i can't remember - but did any units start heading that way? I remember the game situation and there was some action happening around Lois' base at the time and for him to "target" the nexus on the other side of the map does not make any sense at all.
|
On May 10 2005 17:09 Verbloten wrote:
OK. So logically - why would Lois, in that rep, at that time, target that particular nexus? Also, i can't remember - but did any units start heading that way? I remember the game situation and there was some action happening around Lois' base at the time and for him to "target" the nexus on the other side of the map does not make any sense at all.
We catch cheaters because they make mistake when clicking on things. If we have to find a philosophical explanantion about it, it will be hard. But this expand was probably the first thing in the way to his main base... check the replay by yourself and try to answer your own questions.
|
On May 10 2005 17:09 Verbloten wrote:
OK. So logically - why would Lois, in that rep, at that time, target that particular nexus? Also, i can't remember - but did any units start heading that way? I remember the game situation and there was some action happening around Lois' base at the time and for him to "target" the nexus on the other side of the map does not make any sense at all.
If you look at the rep, he sends an scv to scout Nookie's natural and tells the scv to attack move where the expansion was located under fog of war. Imo, I think superpenguin's method to find hackers is very accurate. There is no way to re-produce the type of action that Lois was able to do under fog of war. Lois had no vision anywhere in the vinicity of the nexus for a while so there's no way it could have been a borderline case. The evidence is pretty solid imo unless someone can re-produce an attack command on a building under fog of war.
|
superpenguin you are just an fucking idiot trying to take me down.
I would ignored posts like calling me hacker or not.
people say if i dont hack why do i try to defend my self this hard ?
but since they banned me from WGT without enough proof or clear evidence
and treating me as a hacker for sure and spread every community about it.
I wouldnt just let it go.
If anyone of you were me you would do same thing that i did.
If im fucking hacker i would made more clear evidence strange move or opposite build order against enemy if you have brain think about it.
proove out at least more real agressive evidence that everyone 100% clearly can believe before you treat someone as a shit.
And fucking unban me from WGT I fucking have no idea why i got banned from it.
I dont fucking know who banned me you are abuser.
Fucking funny that superpenguin said im the only one hacker in TLT TOP 100.
And now saying "i caught someone else! he click some gas depot which is impossible!"
-_-
Im not friend of Verbloten but it seems to be he has the brain to think in the middle of side.
|
If im fucking hacker i would made more clear evidence strange move or opposite build order against enemy if you have brain think about it.
Thats hacker talk right there.
|
logically why would he? obviously he would not want to do that. it would get him caught. he did it accidentally. now he's caught. deal wit it.
why would bwchart or penguinplug record that? they didn't. broodwar did. in the rep file that you saved. you uploaded proof of yourself cheating and didn't realise it.
lastgosu if you want some advice: don't call so much attention to yourself. you think you are too big. if you just let this whole thing fade away no one would have remembered you. you could have came back as someone else and got away with this all over again. and let someone else post for you. your posts here have made you look bad and made this whole controversey into something way more memorable than it would have been. you shot yourself in the foot because you think yourself too big and important.
|
hmm a good player with big gut hacked and got caught.... so tragic
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
