|
On April 21 2008 02:54 Xeofreestyler wrote:
Cant we just find the person who created oblivion and uhh .. have him killed or something?
Obviously hacking cannot be condoned, but the blame rests on the hackers, not the people who area "enabling" them to hack. People are free to program whatever the hell they want. Its the players who must resist the temptation. In terms of overall software engineering, people are always on the lookout for exploits and vulnerabilities. People are actually employed to try to hack into systems. The overall effect is healthy development. The "beneficial" argument of hack development is more murky when it comes to the gaming community. I will say this however. Without maphacks, which have existed since the earliest days of sc/bw, we would not today have blizzard's warden, iccup's antihack, and perhaps some of the features in bwcharts. There will still be people with cheating mindsets, but they would have gone undetected.
Bottom line: it's a good thing that people are making maphacks which are purportedly "undetectable." Those with cheating mindsets will be drawn to use those hacks, and when a detection method comes along (as it inevitably does), they will be flushed out. I admit it's a bit of a twisted argument to make, but these hack writers, even though they have different intentions when writing the hack, are HELPING the community catch hackers (eventually), through "entrapment." Again, resisting the temptation to hack is the PLAYER'S OWN RESPONSIBILITY.
Wishing to have this person murdered is not the appropriate response.
|
On April 21 2008 03:05 Tropics wrote:
To be honest, I think it was kind of a silly move to release the method before the TSL is over - Past the iccup qualifiers there's a lot more at stake and a lot more incentive for people who have never hacked previously to start.
The TSL runs on iCCup though with the iCCup antihack, which detects this and many other hacks. Releasing the method won't change anything as replays from older games pre-TSL on non-iCCup servers are the ones being examined to check for hackers. As far as I'm aware, all TSL replays are clean.
|
United States1655 Posts
When the next round starts, I think we'll be needing a much better way of looking for hackers, given that they are probably fixing the hack right now.
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
localhost just returned from his weekend trip and commented on the situation on REPS.ru. I made a quick translation:
I'm not a hacker. I didn't use maphack or any other kind of hack in any of the official games I played. Inside our team on training games we occasionally use maphack, having warned each other. It's a part of the training process that we use to improve timing, vision is not that useful as it reveals stealthed units. It could happen that I, not having relaunched SC, played a couple of games in off mode right after training games.
I consider the method of revealing hackers a logical one, but not with a 100% guarantee. They <I guess he means TL> say themselves that not all people use select on enemy units and buildings. It's not always viable to click on enemy units ingame, especially in a time constraint situation.
I've just recorded a couple of VODs from the games of Ascension, the ones that are being used as evidence. 7 or 8 days ago I was contaced by Hot_Bid who was interested by those games and maphack. I took all action to be helpful in the situation and even sent him a VOD that proves my innocence. Hot_Bid was very surprised by what he saw in that video.
I'm clean and I ask not to be banned from the leagues. Why does my team has to suffer from the trial caused by a controversial moment in a game by a single player?
The very organizers of TSL, teamliquid.net in their official statement confirmed that their decision only concerns TSL: "We at TeamLiquid.net cannot speak for the other sites like WGT or ICCup, but we can speak for TSL. While Localhost was found only to be using a hack in Ascension and Excello Cup but not in WGT CL, ICCup CL or various other tournaments, we cannot make that distinction here. He violated our policy of hacking within the past year and will be removed from the current TSL".
(they have no claims about my games on WGT or iCCup)
Note that his post is directed towards the russian community so some of the points are not relevant. However, it seems really weak to be able to counter the evidence in any way. My personal opinion is a mixed one, localhost was doing quite well at WCG Russia, there is little point for him to hack. But well, some people do it pointlessely, that happens. =(
I feel bad somewhat. Until this day, my nation proudly wore the banner of being hacker-free. Not anymore, not anymore...
|
Hackers ruin this game. GG to those caught and punished.
|
I never knew Testie use to hack!
|
lol this just made me realise how little i click on enemy shit As zerg i dont really click on enemy shit too much apparently unless im useing scourges my p and t has clicks not alot either >-<
|
i had a game where testie hacked so badly against tot xiaozi when being obsed by inconrol. It was clearly hacking cause the rep is saved in fpvod
|
omg this is so hard to believe, well anyway GJ
|
I consider the method of revealing hackers a logical one, but not with a 100% guarantee. They <I guess he means TL> say themselves that not all people use select on enemy units and buildings. It's not always viable to click on enemy units ingame, especially in a time constraint situation.
IMO this is just BS from localhost. Once in awhile it is possible to have a short game where enemy units/buildings are not clicked, certainly. But in the vast majority of cases, I would say 99% of the time, when you worker/obs/scan the enemy base, you click on their buildings to see what they are making. When you see a protoss base and something warping, you obviously click on it to see if its a tech building or just a pylon for instance. Although there will be exceptions once in a blue moon, in most games of moderate length the "I don't click on enemy things" argument is completely absurd.
|
On April 21 2008 03:32 charcute wrote:
i had a game where testie hacked so badly against tot xiaozi when being obsed by inconrol. It was clearly hacking cause the rep is saved in fpvod
ban
|
It's too bad for LocalHost that he is the one player that can be proven 100% to have hacked. He showed them an FPVOD of a game where it's plainly clear he was clicking enemy units, than in the BWChart, those clicks don't show up. So it was on, but in off mode or lite mode; w/e it's called.
Therefore, due to simple rules: He had used a hack program in the last year, your banned. Deal with it.
|
Is it possible to alter a rep and add in some enemy unit selections?
|
Sad to see many hackers, nice to see them get what they deserve.
Thank you guys for your efforts! <3
|
|
|
On April 21 2008 03:43 SalvGG wrote:
It's too bad for LocalHost that he is the one player that can be proven 100% to have hacked. He showed them an FPVOD of a game where it's plainly clear he was clicking enemy units, than in the BWChart, those clicks don't show up. So it was on, but in off mode or lite mode; w/e it's called.
Therefore, due to simple rules: He had used a hack program in the last year, your banned. Deal with it.
Hm, I suppose its possible that someone could use the hack program for training but turn it off when playing real games.
That would mean that he never actually hacked....but impossible to know for sure. 
|
Braavos36401 Posts
We actually found that rep too, and we just dismissed it as an anomaly, because it's literally the only one we've found of a top player with 0 actions. We checked basically all the other Strelok reps and he has a billion clicks.
|
Catyoul
France2377 Posts
On April 21 2008 03:46 Kline wrote:http://download.yousendit.com/94C7BD8B5E78F9D1Strelok vs MistrZZZ 21 minutes without single selection from Strelok. No, i'm not accusing him, just seems suspicious for me.And yeah, that's just a single rep T.T;
bad link ? it's a draco vs mistrzzz rep.
|
|
|
On April 21 2008 03:44 fight_or_flight wrote:
Is it possible to alter a rep and add in some enemy unit selections?
In theory yes. Plan B?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
