|
Dakota_Fanning
Hungary2335 Posts
On April 23 2009 01:41 The6357 wrote:does it detect map hacks as well? i've been using it for a few weeks now and i've never seen a map hack detected....it's always multi command and auto gather :p btw thank you so much for a great program 
It only detects some part of maphack (build anywhere hack for example).
Mostly many only will see autogather/autotrain hack because there is a setting in the general settings tab:
"During a replay scan if a player is found hacking, skip scanning his latter actions"
If this is checked (it is by default), the scan engine will move to the next player if somebody has been found hacking during a scan. This speeds up the scan. And since the autogather/autotrain is the first hack the engine looks for, even if the player used other hacks, no need to find them, a hacker is a hacker no matter how many times he hacked in a replay.
|
Dakota_Fanning
Hungary2335 Posts
On April 23 2009 02:06 Diomedes wrote:
It detects any action at 5 as a hack. I have a replay where I have actions at 5, a normal manual split, and it says its a hack.
Donno how there are actions at 5 and 10 rather than 6 and 12. Maybe terrible lag at the beginning with lan lat does that?
Plus, any decently minded cheater just turns off autosplit
It does not detect every action at 5 as autogather/autotrain. Usage of latency changer is known, built into the scan engine, and is not flagged as autogather/autotrain.
If you think you found a false positive, plz send me the replay so I can review it and adjust the scan engine (if it is really not hack).
|
Dakota_Fanning
Hungary2335 Posts
On April 23 2009 11:02 darnoconrad wrote:
Dakota,
What happens if there are 2 hackers in 1 game? Will it announce both hackers like "hacker blue zerg, hacker red zerg" ?
Exactly.
On April 23 2009 12:16 alien3456 wrote:
When a hacker is found, does it just add their nickname to the list of known hackers? What if they change or use someone else's nickname?
Only the name under the player hacked is added to the database. Every hacker is free to stop hacking and start a new account. The database does not handle akas.
|
The replay has"
5 Select Command Center
5 Train SCV
5 Select SCV(x4)
5 Move ( bla bla)
15 Select SCV
etc
|
|
|
On April 23 2009 14:04 Dakota_Fanning wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2009 01:14 WhuazGoodNjaggah wrote:On April 22 2009 18:23 Dakota_Fanning wrote:On April 22 2009 16:33 WhuazGoodNjaggah wrote:On April 21 2009 21:50 hymn wrote:On April 21 2009 20:38 WhuazGoodNjaggah wrote:On April 21 2009 18:43 Dakota_Fanning wrote:On April 21 2009 18:40 EscPlan9 wrote:
Does this have any conflicts with Chaos/ADV? Sounds interesting!
Also lulz worthy... last time I played Phantom BGH, I was maxed out with fully upgraded scouts and NO ONE ATTACKED YET so I killed the player closest to me. He starts spamming the network latency at a ridiculous pace, obviously automated. We all start laughing that he's using a hack in a UMS game, then he does a drop hack. lol hacking in UMS No whatsoever. BWHF Agent can be run with any launcher. It does not interact or conflict with Starcraft or any other program. it does not interact with StarCraft? *hehe* Yes. It doesn't need to. If I got it correctly the hack database program checks the replay for hacks. It doesn't check the starcraft program files but only the saved replay file. Like BWChart - it doesn't interact with starcraft but with the replay files. That's a very nice program, cool. it DOES interact with StarCraft, as it depends on the LastReplay.rep saved by StarCraft. I could make a plugin, which alters this path to sort the last replay into matchup folders and BWHF would fail. sure this is a bullshit scenario, i just wanted to pick a little on him :D btw Dakota_Fanning wrote:
BWHF Agent continues to remain legit by Blizzard's terms actually this is not really true. StarCraft License:
3. Responsibilities of End User. A. Subject to the Grant of License hereinabove, you may not, in whole or in part, copy, photocopy, reproduce, translate, reverse engineer, derive source code, modify, disassemble, decompile, create derivative works based on the Program, I disagree. From your points: -I did not copy Starcraft. -I did not photocopy Starcraft. -I did not reproduce Starcraft. -I did not reverse engineer Starcraft. -I did not derive source code from Starcraft. -I did not modify Starcaft. -I did not disassemble Starcraft. -I did not decompile Starcraft. -I did not create derivative works based on the Program. then tell me where this code is comming from: http://www.google.com/codesearch/p?hl=de#R3PjQYgHtjw/trunk/src/hu/belicza/andras/bwhf/control/BinReplayUnpacker.java&q=unpack package:http://bwhf\.googlecode\.com As you can read in the beginning of the file in the javadoc comment: The algorithm comes from JCA's bwreplib.
Java port and optimization for Java environment by Andras Belicza.This code is not part of Starcraft and not derived from Starcraft. It's the decoder part of the code algorithm used to pack replay files. Starcraft creates screenshots in PCX format. Why didn't u point out my PCX loader code too? Maybe because PCX screenshots are not part of Starcraft? Maybe replays aren't too?
I know that its from JCA's bwreplib. but the point is, where is bwreplib comming from.
what do you think is the meaning of the hex-numbers from comments like these of bwreplib-source:
bwreplib-sourcecode
/*
* function1 - 004DA810 - called from uncompress_replay
*
* returns a character OR 0x306 as error
* OR 0x100 + 2 + the length of a region already present
*
*/
int function1(esi_t *myesi)
those are offsets for functions inside starcraft.exe. just open up an old starcraft executable in a debugger/disassembler and check the offsets.
so yes, you are partly right. YOU didnt reverse StarCraft, YOU did not derive source code from StarCraft, BUT the stuff you base your work on is made using such technics which makes YOUR program violate the eula too.
if you take the rims from a car someone stole you still dont legally own those rims, it doesnt matter if they have new color or new tires arround them.
sure its VEEERY unlikely that someone is banned for using BWHF, but the risk is about as high as using an app which is only reading the memory of bw and not editing it.
|
Dakota_Fanning
Hungary2335 Posts
If the functions from JCA's bwreplib truly come from Starcraft.exe, then yes, BWHF Agent is based on Starcraft.
But I wouldn't put it into the same category with programs that read Starcraft's memory. Reading (accessing) a process' memory can be detected. BWHF Agent doesn't read Starcraft's memory.
Then I would put it in the same category where BWChart is.
|
You dont need to question weather this code is ripped from StarCraft or not. 2 Options, either ask JCA or open up StarCraft v1.09b in OllyDbg or any other debugger you could also use any other memory reader (artmoney, cheatengine, tsearch,...) then read the bytes at 0x507120 which is contained in the name of your first byte array. it's exactly the same.
yes, accessing a process' memory can be detected allthough this is not an easy task (multiple APIs needed and some basic executable file knowledge). Detecting BWHF is way easier, the use of a single windows API is enough http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa365465.aspx
For certain features it is required to have BWHF running while StarCraft is open, BWChart on the other hand NEVER needs to be opened while StarCraft is open.
|
Is it really such a big deal? I don't think that it's worth arguing over. The program is nice and no one is ever going to get in trouble over it.
|
This is an awesome program! Thanks so much :D! I ran a bunch of replays through and one of them I had labeled "Hack Detect" and I was right !
|
Problem is that you can get false positives for instance if someone clicks a unit and the unit goes behind fog of war -- the delay between the two players will cause the program to think the person was clicking the unit UNDER the fog when they weren't. This is why replay analyzers confirm and it seems like this program is fully automated.
Also, I'm pretty sure 100% of people on b.net MH -- I thought everyone was on iccup? :o
|
On April 24 2009 04:18 Tyrant wrote:
Also, I'm pretty sure 100% of people on b.net MH -- I thought everyone was on iccup? :o
I'm pretty sure you're 100% wrong.
|
Dakota_Fanning
Hungary2335 Posts
On April 24 2009 04:18 Tyrant wrote:
Problem is that you can get false positives for instance if someone clicks a unit and the unit goes behind fog of war -- the delay between the two players will cause the program to think the person was clicking the unit UNDER the fog when they weren't. This is why replay analyzers confirm and it seems like this program is fully automated.
Also, I'm pretty sure 100% of people on b.net MH -- I thought everyone was on iccup? :o
BWHF Agent does not report selections which go under the fog of war at all (so there is no chance to mistake there).
|
Damn this is so freakin' amazing, it's total pwnage against hackers. :D
|
Wow I wish I had a key for this itd be neat to actually be able to report hackers and finally add some justice to the BW community :o
|
How is a so-called "hack scanner" any different from a hack?
|
any way to get the IP of the hacker instead of just the username. or is that illegal.
|
On April 24 2009 09:49 Disintegrate wrote:
How is a so-called "hack scanner" any different from a hack?
One allows you to scan for hacks that were used. The other is the hack that is being scanned for. If that isn't clear take this example:
Imagine a bottle and a bottle cap. One is the bottle - the container used to hold a substance. The other is the Cap - the thing that closes the container.
I hope that it is clear they are 2 different things.
The above part was the body of my post, and this part is the conclusion of my post. Two different things see?
Good luck in kindergarten.
|
Dakota_Fanning
Hungary2335 Posts
On April 24 2009 09:49 Disintegrate wrote:
How is a so-called "hack scanner" any different from a hack?
BWHF Agent is NOT just a good intentioned hack program, because it doesn't "hack" into starcraft that other hack programs do. BWHF Agent is an independent program not touching Starcraft in any way (only replay and PCX screenshot files).
|
Scanning 38481 replays done in 53 min 41 sec 436 ms
Found 424 hacker replays.
Skipped 16 replays.
wonder how many it would have said had it been possible to check for map hacks as well
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
