|
On September 04 2007 16:16 Cambium wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2007 16:02 MarklarMarklar wrote:On September 04 2007 15:57 haduken wrote:On September 04 2007 15:49 MarklarMarklar wrote:On September 04 2007 15:47 Black Pearl wrote:
I think it would be a great idea to take information about mini map, but not in screen - in other ways programming like code or sth. We have old bwchart or RepASM4, where we can see APM or listing of actions so ... why no implement info about mini-map ? well it would be amazing if you could capture a players minimap actions, and completely follow how its used thruout a game. But is that possible? i think you would need the brood war API and substantial support/help from blizzard to do this without making the task astronomical. this is why people who at www.bwprogramming.com give up because it is simply too much work for a few guys with sparetime to do. Well if that's the case then i guess minisceenshots of the minimap is a better solution for BROODWAR. However, maybe blizzard could implement it for starcraft 2? to cambium: i didnt actually use real numbers. I just wanted anyone who has the programming ability to come along and say whats possible and whats not. so lets say you take 2 every seconds then how possible is it? I'm sure you dont have to take a screenshot of the ENTIRE screen! Only the required area which is about 130x95pixels 811byte in lowest quality from photoshop and at 100% quality its 3.2kb big. That shouldnt be too big a problem. If you don't use the print screen function that BW provides, you would have to write everything from scratch, which would require a ton of work, and I have nothing more to argue. Only then can you actually take a section of the screen.
Maybe using a third-party program that video-capture the mini screen based on the horizontal + vertical parameters. Again, i don't see the point when you can record the entire screen in a VOD.
|
On September 04 2007 16:18 haduken wrote:
i don't see the point. no system is unfallable.
Even a perfect anti-hack is only going to last 6months at most. i think the most blizzard or any company can do without spending too much is have strong procedure for discouragement, prevention and even prosecutation of hacking.
Well, going along with his idea...
Say he writes his own screen-snatching program and builds into the anti-hack, and write the screens to files that are encrypted, it will be very difficult to hack (provided that his program and the screens do not get cracked).
However, this would take forever to finish... How long you spend in developing your software is directly proportional to the time it takes for hackers to crack it.
|
On September 04 2007 16:20 haduken wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2007 16:16 Cambium wrote:On September 04 2007 16:02 MarklarMarklar wrote:On September 04 2007 15:57 haduken wrote:On September 04 2007 15:49 MarklarMarklar wrote:On September 04 2007 15:47 Black Pearl wrote:
I think it would be a great idea to take information about mini map, but not in screen - in other ways programming like code or sth. We have old bwchart or RepASM4, where we can see APM or listing of actions so ... why no implement info about mini-map ? well it would be amazing if you could capture a players minimap actions, and completely follow how its used thruout a game. But is that possible? i think you would need the brood war API and substantial support/help from blizzard to do this without making the task astronomical. this is why people who at www.bwprogramming.com give up because it is simply too much work for a few guys with sparetime to do. Well if that's the case then i guess minisceenshots of the minimap is a better solution for BROODWAR. However, maybe blizzard could implement it for starcraft 2? to cambium: i didnt actually use real numbers. I just wanted anyone who has the programming ability to come along and say whats possible and whats not. so lets say you take 2 every seconds then how possible is it? I'm sure you dont have to take a screenshot of the ENTIRE screen! Only the required area which is about 130x95pixels 811byte in lowest quality from photoshop and at 100% quality its 3.2kb big. That shouldnt be too big a problem. If you don't use the print screen function that BW provides, you would have to write everything from scratch, which would require a ton of work, and I have nothing more to argue. Only then can you actually take a section of the screen. Maybe using a third-party program that video-capture the mini screen based on the horizontal + vertical parameters. Again, i don't see the point when you can record the entire screen in a VOD.
That would ideally be the best solution...
edit:
The VOD solution, that is.
And also, the validation would be really complicated...
|
how could they crack the 30 screenshots a minute capturing everywhere they are looking on the map?
Even if their maphack DOESNT show up in the screenshots, how can they hide that they are viewing a certain location at a given time? You CAN see that...
THATS what i want to hear from you........................... ???
|
What is the point of capturing screen shots then? when you can just record the entire game in a video?
i'm not sure what you mean by cracking the 30 screenshots a minuate thing and i don't even think that is a good idea.
You idea requires a significant pool of samples to make an accurate analysis and you still need a human to make the analysis. Wouldn't the better idea is just video record the game and view it?
|
okay program a video capturing program that captures 1frame per second and saves it as a video file in the replay afterwards, it's the same concept in a different format.
It has to be small tho so it can be easily used. tops 1mb per game
|
Okay, that might work but its still very akward and is selective sampling. No point in reinventing the wheel my man.
|
why are you so negative towards this concept? the same with cambium?
People want a good anti-cheat, and this seems TO ME to be something that you cant beat if you work it out well.
|
Russian Federation25 Posts
Cambium, why do you always address the BW print screen function? Noone is going to use it, of course. And yes, it can be written "from scratch", and no, it won't "require a ton of work". In fact, that's pretty easy.
"All the hack has to do is to listen to the event that triggers the screen-capturing method, and turn off the hack when that happens..." - looks like you are in the world of Borland VCL events and Windows messages here, no offence  Your own function won't trigger any events or be triggered by any. It's not that trivial, but not that hard either. Yes it can be hooked, but it's waaaay harder than you think of key events. Especially, if the antihack will be kept updated.
Second, 1 Kb large minimap screen doesn't needed to be saved to the disk all the time. All screenshots throughout the game can be easily maintained in the memory. 30 mins / 30 secs * 1Kb = 60 Kb total, that's not even a piece of memory nowadays. After the game finishes, this "ton" of info can be saved or sent to the server immedientely. Or, those 1 Kb can be sent to the server each time they are taken. This may require a bit of bandwidth for, say, modem users, but well, that's the price 
About the defence of randomizer. Nice solution is, as already mentioned, the constant update of the antihack. In fact, this is where we shall anyway come to.
About the "guy, who's gonna view all that shit". As already stated (i'll just emphasize that) it's YOU, who is going to view that. You play a game, smth like "fuck, that guy is a haxor" pops up in your head and you just go and check the screens on the server. That's it. Of course, there's no 100% guarantee that if the screens are clear, the guy didn't hack. But if they aren't, you've got him.
About the viruses in the JPG. Funny statement, correct me if I'm wrong, but JPG isn't an executable in any way possible. Please, don't start the unaware virus panic.
About the DDoS. You are going to accept data only from the antihack program. It can be of course bypassed, but what can't?
About the storage size. Again, as already stated, it will require maybe a 1 GB HD space per day, and one day is enough to make up your mind and check the screens if you want. If you have found a hax on some screens you can save them on your computer or report the admin not to delete them.
Lastly, Id' like to say, that there are already some implementations of this idea in other games. I know at least Screen Shot Slient (SSC) for Counter-Strike 1.6. This project is several years old (maybe dead now), but it worked very well. Yes, it was bypassed, but we must understand, that this is normal. The only way of defence is constant updates. SSC was kept updated, while it was still alive. Maybe some consulting on technical details with SSC developer will free us from already made mistakes during coding. If he'd be so kind, of course.
|
On September 04 2007 16:54 MarklarMarklar wrote:
why are you so negative towards this concept? the same with cambium?
People want a good anti-cheat, and this seems TO ME to be something that you cant beat if you work it out well.
We are not negative. We just don't think the reward equates the effort. What you are suggesting doesn't actually prevent hacking, it only lets you somehow make an educated guess (although questionable) at who is hacking. If thats your goal then why develope something when simple alternatives exist?
|
On September 04 2007 17:00 6AP6APblCKA wrote:Cambium, why do you always address the BW print screen function? Noone is going to use it, of course. And yes, it can be written "from scratch", and no, it won't "require a ton of work". In fact, that's pretty easy. "All the hack has to do is to listen to the event that triggers the screen-capturing method, and turn off the hack when that happens..." - looks like you are in the world of Borland VCL events and Windows messages here, no offence Your own function won't trigger any events or be triggered by any. It's not that trivial, but not that hard either. Yes it can be hooked, but it's waaaay harder than you think of key events. Especially, if the antihack will be kept updated. Second, 1 Kb large minimap screen doesn't needed to be saved to the disk all the time. All screenshots throughout the game can be easily maintained in the memory. 30 mins / 30 secs * 1Kb = 60 Kb total, that's not even a piece of memory nowadays. After the game finishes, this "ton" of info can be saved or sent to the server immedientely. Or, those 1 Kb can be sent to the server each time they are taken. This may require a bit of bandwidth for, say, modem users, but well, that's the price About the defence of randomizer. Nice solution is, as already mentioned, the constant update of the antihack. In fact, this is where we shall anyway come to. About the "guy, who's gonna view all that shit". As already stated (i'll just emphasize that) it's YOU, who is going to view that. You play a game, smth like "fuck, that guy is a haxor" pops up in your head and you just go and check the screens on the server. That's it. Of course, there's no 100% guarantee that if the screens are clear, the guy didn't hack. But if they aren't, you've got him. About the viruses in the JPG. Funny statement, correct me if I'm wrong, but JPG isn't an executable in any way possible. Please, don't start the unaware virus panic. About the DDoS. You are going to accept data only from the antihack program. It can be of course bypassed, but what can't? About the storage size. Again, as already stated, it will require maybe a 1 GB HD space per day, and one day is enough to make up your mind and check the screens if you want. If you have found a hax on some screens you can save them on your computer or report the admin not to delete them. Lastly, Id' like to say, that there are already some implementations of this idea in other games. I know at least Screen Shot Slient (SSC) for Counter-Strike 1.6. This project is several years old (maybe dead now), but it worked very well. Yes, it was bypassed, but we must understand, that this is normal. The only way of defence is constant updates. SSC was kept updated, while it was still alive. Maybe some consulting on technical details with SSC developer will free us from already made mistakes during coding. If he'd be so kind, of course.
Would you code it then
|
Russian Federation25 Posts
On September 04 2007 17:32 haduken wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2007 16:54 MarklarMarklar wrote:
why are you so negative towards this concept? the same with cambium?
People want a good anti-cheat, and this seems TO ME to be something that you cant beat if you work it out well. We are not negative. We just don't think the reward equates the effort. What you are suggesting doesn't actually prevent hacking, it only lets you somehow make an educated guess (although questionable) at who is hacking. If thats your goal then why develope something when simple alternatives exist?
An educated guess? You say, that if I check the screens and see that the guy has, say, the whole map opened up that's a guess? He's busted, that's what it is.
And IF there's nothing on screens, then yes, it's not 100% that he's not hacking, but IF there is - that's why it's worth of it.
|
On September 04 2007 17:32 haduken wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2007 16:54 MarklarMarklar wrote:
why are you so negative towards this concept? the same with cambium?
People want a good anti-cheat, and this seems TO ME to be something that you cant beat if you work it out well. We are not negative. We just don't think the reward equates the effort. What you are suggesting doesn't actually prevent hacking, it only lets you somehow make an educated guess (although questionable) at who is hacking. If thats your goal then why develope something when simple alternatives exist?
So if a good anti-hack requires effort then its not worth it?
And of course it can prevent maphacking..
|
On September 04 2007 16:39 MarklarMarklar wrote:
okay program a video capturing program that captures 1frame per second and saves it as a video file in the replay afterwards, it's the same concept in a different format.
It has to be small tho so it can be easily used. tops 1mb per game
Your ideas suck for one very simple reason: you exclude anyone that doesn't have a modern PC. If you're going to make an anti-hack, you can't exclude a large part of the BW community by requiring them to play with stuff that will seriously slow down their client. You keep talking about hard drive space, but really, thats the least of the concerns. CPU activity would be too great for many people.
On September 04 2007 17:00 6AP6APblCKA wrote:1.Cambium, why do you always address the BW print screen function? Noone is going to use it, of course. And yes, it can be written "from scratch", and no, it won't "require a ton of work". In fact, that's pretty easy. "All the hack has to do is to listen to the event that triggers the screen-capturing method, and turn off the hack when that happens..." - looks like you are in the world of Borland VCL events and Windows messages here, no offence Your own function won't trigger any events or be triggered by any. It's not that trivial, but not that hard either. Yes it can be hooked, but it's waaaay harder than you think of key events. Especially, if the antihack will be kept updated. 2.Second, 1 Kb large minimap screen doesn't needed to be saved to the disk all the time. All screenshots throughout the game can be easily maintained in the memory. 30 mins / 30 secs * 1Kb = 60 Kb total, that's not even a piece of memory nowadays. After the game finishes, this "ton" of info can be saved or sent to the server immedientely. Or, those 1 Kb can be sent to the server each time they are taken. This may require a bit of bandwidth for, say, modem users, but well, that's the price 3.About the defence of randomizer. Nice solution is, as already mentioned, the constant update of the antihack. In fact, this is where we shall anyway come to. 4.About the "guy, who's gonna view all that shit". As already stated (i'll just emphasize that) it's YOU, who is going to view that. You play a game, smth like "fuck, that guy is a haxor" pops up in your head and you just go and check the screens on the server. That's it. Of course, there's no 100% guarantee that if the screens are clear, the guy didn't hack. But if they aren't, you've got him. 5.About the viruses in the JPG. Funny statement, correct me if I'm wrong, but JPG isn't an executable in any way possible. Please, don't start the unaware virus panic. 6.About the DDoS. You are going to accept data only from the antihack program. It can be of course bypassed, but what can't? 7.About the storage size. Again, as already stated, it will require maybe a 1 GB HD space per day, and one day is enough to make up your mind and check the screens if you want. If you have found a hax on some screens you can save them on your computer or report the admin not to delete them.
1.When dealing with DirectX, you can't merely copy pixels of the screen like you might when taking a screenshot of a web page. Therefore, some function must be called, and this function will involve using a DirectX library. A hack could in fact hook this called function, allowing them to disable the hack whenever you take a screenshot. Its not exactly rocket science.
2.HD space isn't that big of a deal. Be VERY careful with how much CPU time you're using though, as that IS a big deal.
3.See 1.
4.This would require some sort of site to store all the screenshots, and a database to keep track of which one goes with what game. If it doesn't then it requires some sort of client-to-client transfer, which is altogether a bad idea with todays routers and firewalls and such. So, going back to the site, it would require keeping track of loads of data, due to the sheer number of SC games that go on day-to-day (even if you were to prune them weekly or monthly or something)
5.There actually have been viruses in JPG's using their thumbnail capability to execute themselves.
6.Basically true, I suppose.
7.This assumes you're using client-to-client transfers, which, as I already stated, is a bad idea.
|
On September 04 2007 23:01 tec27 wrote:
1.When dealing with DirectX, you can't merely copy pixels of the screen like you might when taking a screenshot of a web page. Therefore, some function must be called, and this function will involve using a DirectX library. A hack could in fact hook this called function, allowing them to disable the hack whenever you take a screenshot. Its not exactly rocket science.
You can still copy them from the video memory via custom kernel mode driver. Try to hook that.
|
Russian Federation25 Posts
On September 04 2007 23:01 tec27 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2007 16:39 MarklarMarklar wrote:
okay program a video capturing program that captures 1frame per second and saves it as a video file in the replay afterwards, it's the same concept in a different format.
It has to be small tho so it can be easily used. tops 1mb per game Your ideas suck for one very simple reason: you exclude anyone that doesn't have a modern PC. If you're going to make an anti-hack, you can't exclude a large part of the BW community by requiring them to play with stuff that will seriously slow down their client. You keep talking about hard drive space, but really, thats the least of the concerns. CPU activity would be too great for many people. Show nested quote +On September 04 2007 17:00 6AP6APblCKA wrote:1.Cambium, why do you always address the BW print screen function? Noone is going to use it, of course. And yes, it can be written "from scratch", and no, it won't "require a ton of work". In fact, that's pretty easy. "All the hack has to do is to listen to the event that triggers the screen-capturing method, and turn off the hack when that happens..." - looks like you are in the world of Borland VCL events and Windows messages here, no offence Your own function won't trigger any events or be triggered by any. It's not that trivial, but not that hard either. Yes it can be hooked, but it's waaaay harder than you think of key events. Especially, if the antihack will be kept updated. 2.Second, 1 Kb large minimap screen doesn't needed to be saved to the disk all the time. All screenshots throughout the game can be easily maintained in the memory. 30 mins / 30 secs * 1Kb = 60 Kb total, that's not even a piece of memory nowadays. After the game finishes, this "ton" of info can be saved or sent to the server immedientely. Or, those 1 Kb can be sent to the server each time they are taken. This may require a bit of bandwidth for, say, modem users, but well, that's the price 3.About the defence of randomizer. Nice solution is, as already mentioned, the constant update of the antihack. In fact, this is where we shall anyway come to. 4.About the "guy, who's gonna view all that shit". As already stated (i'll just emphasize that) it's YOU, who is going to view that. You play a game, smth like "fuck, that guy is a haxor" pops up in your head and you just go and check the screens on the server. That's it. Of course, there's no 100% guarantee that if the screens are clear, the guy didn't hack. But if they aren't, you've got him. 5.About the viruses in the JPG. Funny statement, correct me if I'm wrong, but JPG isn't an executable in any way possible. Please, don't start the unaware virus panic. 6.About the DDoS. You are going to accept data only from the antihack program. It can be of course bypassed, but what can't? 7.About the storage size. Again, as already stated, it will require maybe a 1 GB HD space per day, and one day is enough to make up your mind and check the screens if you want. If you have found a hax on some screens you can save them on your computer or report the admin not to delete them. 1.When dealing with DirectX, you can't merely copy pixels of the screen like you might when taking a screenshot of a web page. Therefore, some function must be called, and this function will involve using a DirectX library. A hack could in fact hook this called function, allowing them to disable the hack whenever you take a screenshot. Its not exactly rocket science. 2.HD space isn't that big of a deal. Be VERY careful with how much CPU time you're using though, as that IS a big deal. 3.See 1. 4.This would require some sort of site to store all the screenshots, and a database to keep track of which one goes with what game. If it doesn't then it requires some sort of client-to-client transfer, which is altogether a bad idea with todays routers and firewalls and such. So, going back to the site, it would require keeping track of loads of data, due to the sheer number of SC games that go on day-to-day (even if you were to prune them weekly or monthly or something) 5.There actually have been viruses in JPG's using their thumbnail capability to execute themselves. 6.Basically true, I suppose. 7.This assumes you're using client-to-client transfers, which, as I already stated, is a bad idea.
1. I understand, that it's also hookable. Almost everithing is. But as I mentioned, it's harder. I just wanted to say, that key events are ridiculous. Constant updates are needed to deal with hacks. Here, I can't argue too deep due to the lack of knowlage of actual implementation, but I suppose, that SSC author had some sort of defence, strong enough to last until next update.
2. I don't thing that a copy of small area of screen once in about 30 seconds is a big deal for CPU. [Edit] By "memory" I meant RAM, not HD.
3. Didn't actually get, what to see in 1. If you mean to hook randomizer, then see 1.
4. Yes, it will require a site, for example ICCup will maintain it. I don't think, that 1 Kb per 30 seconds from players is a "load" of data. Front page of their web site is much heavier. Yes, firewall is needed to be set up to allow antihack to send data, but setting up your firewall is becoming normal today, isn't it? All in all, the "sheer" number has to be concretely estimated. You think it would be a lot, and I think that 1 Kb per 30 secs even multiplied by couple of thousands of games simultaneously isn't a lot for a modern internet site.
5. Wow, to be honest, I didn't know that, but I suppose, that it's not the problem with JPG format itself, but with the viewer you're using. If your viewer is trying to execute JPG somehow then, well, even txt is not safe if you'll rename it to exe and launch. If JPG is dangerous then we'd better close our browsers right now, turn off computers and hide somewhere, because JPG is everywhere today.
7. I do not assume any client-to-client transfers. I, of course, agree that it's a bad idea. Actually, screenshots are sent to the site, saved there, and then viewed by users through their browsers. And from the site's point of view, storage space required is not big (esp. for the modern web site).
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
jpg's can have viruses in them
but LOL at some of you people. "what's the point it's going to be defeated anyway" holy shit
i don't see the point. no system is unfallable.
Even a perfect anti-hack is only going to last 6months at most. i think the most blizzard or any company can do without spending too much is have strong procedure for discouragement, prevention and even prosecutation of hacking.
We are not negative. We just don't think the reward equates the effort. What you are suggesting doesn't actually prevent hacking, it only lets you somehow make an educated guess (although questionable) at who is hacking. If thats your goal then why develope something when simple alternatives exist?
come ON haduken. i can understand the complaining from a technical perspective (though other games already do this, so you need to demonstrate why it can work for say CS but not possibly for SC), but face it - we're not going to code the mother of all unstoppable anti-hack. we don't need to. this program doesn't need to cure AIDS, it just needs to maybe catch a couple hackers, or, i mean, even if this *deters* just a couple hackers it would be totally worth it
like, we're not forcing YOU to do it. if SOMEONE feels like they want to invest the effort into coding this, who are you to say, no, you shouldn't go do it?
|
lol. you just don't get my point did ya? what he is suggesting can already be accomplished by simple alternatives such as fps vod. I'm assuming the main benefit of his solution is a viable way to transfer a reasonably small sized "screens" files across the internet which i personally find very hard because of all the world constraints + committments. Hey, if anyone got the time and motivation to do this then by all means, don't let a pessimistic fuck like me get in ur way.
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
FPS VOD is impossible for me. I can never run such a plugin because it'd be an unbelievably huge resource drain to Camtasia every single game.
|
It doesn't have to be every 30 secs. It can be programmed to screencap on random time within a certain range. Anyway, it sounds like there is a lot of info to send if the game goes on long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/6682/untitled1vw2.jpg)
