EPTBanhammer 5000? - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ionize
Ireland399 Posts
| ||
|
Uriel_SVK
Slovakia427 Posts
| ||
|
bbsss
Netherlands163 Posts
Why did you not respond on my comments Ashur? The argument of implementing this being "hard" sounds like bullocks to me since Blizzard can afford the best programmers. | ||
|
Ashur
Czech Republic646 Posts
On October 05 2010 18:57 Angry_Fetus wrote: Completely agree. I see shit posts like this all the time on various FPS forums. Some self-righteous asshat will come and post a topic, admitting he makes hacks, making the topic just to get a reaction and an ego boost. It's simply a veiled attention grab, nothing more. What's even more familiar is the "I messaged the developer with information and they didn't care, so I decided to make/release a hack. I sure showed them. God, I'm so smart." I wouldn't mind this topic, if you didn't openly advertise that you have attempted making the first maphack for SC2 (I bet your parents are proud *applaud*) and then freely give out the source code. What are you accomplishing by releasing the source code? It seems you just tried to give offence and throw your hatred based on reality ignorance with insults (asshat, parents, arrogance) on my head. I don't want to be part of such a thing, so I will just let it be.. I might say that post such as this shoudn't be tolerated at those forums, because they bring just a flame to the discussion. Anyways, to answer your question I can only suggest you to read the topic again properly, because the *answer is already written in one of replies. Note that the source I am privately linking is not mine. It's the bad guys who found the way themselves and published it and cooperate on it in an approx. group of ten. Most of the people are programmers-beginners, that are interested in how does the mechanism work and how it can be countered. Hope this explanation helped you a bit. *answer link: + Show Spoiler + BigBen's part - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6499971 On October 05 2010 19:47 Uriel_SVK wrote: Very good read. Any advice on the brand of whiskey we should drink? Pick one from the Islay distilleries  On October 05 2010 20:26 bbsss wrote: I have yet to hear an argument against them importing a serversided -what data should be available for client- system. Apperently HoN and LoL have this system already. Sorry I am flooded by messages a bit. As Ilintar already wrote that you can choose between two main things. One of them is that everything is stored clientside which gives you good performance and replays (current SC2 solution), or on the other hand (HoN solution) everything serverside, which would bring some problems. It is nearly impossible to (re)implement for so many objects that StarCraft 2 have to handle (HoN is a game with ~ten objects), StarCraft got thousands. In addition StarCraft have got amazing map editor, where you can change almost every single rule how the game really works, and thats the other problem, because how do you know what the server should hide and show in custom maps? It would require some HW, which is actually not so big problem for such a company. If you ask what else can be done to stop such a cheat, I must say... I don't know. Seriously no idea. It was bad Blizzard guys knew that its flawed in this way (and yes, they really did know that during the beta, guys at anticheat dept. are not that stupid to find it on their own, so they basically knew it in even during concept of StarCraft 2), but sadly, they didn't do anything to prevent it because of performace issues. | ||
|
Anfere
Canada231 Posts
In WC3, it wasn't possible to maphack due to warden in the ladder, but everyone maphacked in custom games despite the Warden. So i don't have much knowledge of how it works, but the warden worked perfectly on the ladder but was garbage on custom games. | ||
|
kflynn
69 Posts
ignorance may be bliss, but the point of this thread is to point out that cheating is undetectable. | ||
|
horsman
Canada45 Posts
It in theory should be possible to detect code that is looking at star2's memory, and should be possible to distinguish between the habits of virus scanners and hacks. This would probably require considerable effort. Examples from literature 1 2 | ||
|
bbsss
Netherlands163 Posts
On October 05 2010 20:26 Ashur wrote: Sorry I am flooded by messages a bit. As Ilintar already wrote that you can choose between two main things. One of them is that everything is stored clientside which gives you good performance and replays (current SC2 solution), or on the other hand (HoN solution) everything serverside, which would bring some problems. It is nearly impossible to (re)implement for so many objects that StarCraft 2 have to handle (HoN is a game with ~ten objects), StarCraft got thousands. In addition StarCraft have got amazing map editor, where you can change almost every single rule how the game really works, and thats the other problem, because how do you know what the server should hide and show in custom maps? It would require some HW, which is actually not so big problem for such a company. If you ask what else can be done to stop such a cheat, I must say... I don't know. Seriously no idea. It was bad Blizzard guys knew that its flawed in this way (and yes, they really did know that during the beta, guys at anticheat dept. are not that stupid to find it on their own, so they basically knew it in even during concept of StarCraft 2), but sadly, they didn't do anything to prevent it because of performace issues. So argument one is good performance; I don't see how serverside handling would in any way reduce the performance clientside. Increase in serverload, so what. The other is comparing the amount of objects between hon and starcraft. It's not as if this has to be manually converted or am I mistaken | ||
|
kflynn
69 Posts
actually no, this is not true. windows does not give us a way to stop, or to even be aware, that another process is reading your memory. the papers you linked to are neat but deal with the detection of intrusion into networked systems, not relevant to our problem. | ||
|
Ilintar
Poland794 Posts
On October 05 2010 19:47 Uriel_SVK wrote: Very good read. Any advice on the brand of whiskey we should drink? I find Johnny Walker Black Label to be quite good, Jack Daniels Single Barrel is also good if a bit heavier. | ||
|
Armathai
1023 Posts
I wanted to thank Ashur and Ilintar for their work on BW while they were active though! You guys did amazing work and I wish you and rest of the programmers had continued with the awesome tools and creative ideas. I hope Blizzard hires you guys sometime, even if it's only on a case by case basis to help them with shit, and if you don't know how... you'll have a challenge! | ||
|
Ronald_McD
Canada807 Posts
If the law wasn't preventing it, would there be some way to stop these hacks that isn't too extreme? | ||
|
bLuR
Canada625 Posts
 | ||
|
ArghUScaredMe
United States712 Posts
On October 06 2010 03:51 Ilintar wrote: I find Johnny Walker Black Label to be quite good, Jack Daniels Single Barrel is also good if a bit heavier. I'm sorry. The scotch snob got me all worked up to respond to this. Stay AWAY from blended scotch. Single-malt is your best friend: Glenlivet 12yo (light body, most mainstream of all, fruity and awesome) Balvenie 12yo Cragganmore 15yo (VERY smooth!) Macallan Highland Park Glenfiddich Start with these. They all generally cost $35-55 for 750ml and are commonly found in liquor stores worth their salt. Try different scotch from different areas of scotland- Highland, Lowlands, Speyside (my fav), Islay, etc... Ditch blended Johnny Walker crap out of it. Jack Daniels is not a scotch, it's a mere whiskey. Scotch by definition is whiskey that comes from Scotland, just like Cognac comes from Cognac, France and rest are just Brandy. | ||
|
l2k-Spec-Ops_X
United States61 Posts
http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/09/intels-walled-garden-plan-to-put-av-vendors-out-of-business.ars I think Ashur might be right. They would need (if they don't have one already) a cell team to be actively fingerprinting the existing and emerging hacks that come out to make any other approach be somewhat effective. (And I only mean effective enough to keep the general public appeased... as there could/will still be a few hackers out there with unique fingerprints that will slip through, but if they ever get big in tournaments, the community could likely spot them and call them out, that's where the Entropians come in ^^) ArghUScaredMe, I know the general consensus among scotch enthusiasts is to go single malt; however, I do have an affinity for the blended JWB and Johny Walker Blue instead. I like the kick of Black Label over the smoother and different taste of single malt, personally. And while Blue can be a lot smoother (although it is not consistant as many of it's ingrediant manufacturers are out of business) it still has that special zing to it =) Ilintar, I do like Single Barrel, but personally find Gentleman Jack my preference as far as bourbon goes. (For arghUScaredMe, If JD had 1% less Indian corn it would be considered a Bourbon, but JD proudly keeps it a "Tennessee Whiskey") I've tried Brandy once, and I thought it was horrible. Anyone have any good labels? (Please post something productive to the OP before answering my drinking questions in the same post; as not to get us off track =-P) | ||
|
Zona
40426 Posts
And it's interesting how all SC2's traffic must inconveniently go through Blizzard's servers, but lacks the usual anti-hack benefit that such a system provides, since computation is still done client side. | ||
|
CrAzEdBaDgEr
Canada166 Posts
You have good taste! As someone who does quite a bit of programming, I understand the curiosity that drives people to do this, but as a gamer, I am very sad that people take away the fair play and innocence that make games like SC2 great. | ||
|
TheRabidDeer
United States3806 Posts
On October 06 2010 01:46 bbsss wrote: So argument one is good performance; I don't see how serverside handling would in any way reduce the performance clientside. Increase in serverload, so what. The other is comparing the amount of objects between hon and starcraft. It's not as if this has to be manually converted or am I mistaken Serverside handling would result in massive amounts of lag, which is the performance he speaks of. The server would have to keep track of each individual thing on the map. Can you imagine how much more laggy it would be if the servers suddenly had to manage several hundred times more information than what they currently do? There are also other issues with it. For example, in HoN the pudge-like character that has the hook, if he casts the hook and it goes towards a player, then the player that cant see pudge sees the hook always come from the SW corner of the game regardless of where it actually came from. He cant interpret where he really is because the game cant handle what it doesnt see. | ||
|
freelander
Hungary4707 Posts
On October 05 2010 20:26 bbsss wrote: I have yet to hear an argument against them importing a serversided -what data should be available for client- system. Apperently HoN and LoL have this system already. Why did you not respond on my comments Ashur? The argument of implementing this being "hard" sounds like bullocks to me since Blizzard can afford the best programmers. "have yet to hear" it has been explained 5000 times already, even in this very thread | ||
|
samalie
Canada87 Posts
WAY back in the Everquest days there was a program called ShowEQ. When it first came out, the datastream was essentially unencrypted, so a user of the program could sniff out in the packets what creatures were spawned, where they were, etc. It flourished in Linux, undetectable, until someone ported it to Windows to run in tandem with the EQ client. Then Sony started searching for the ShowEQ executable, ala Warden today. Mass bannings happened. But the linux people lived on, and IIRC a windows verson came out which allowed the remote packet sniffing of Linux. ShowEQ florished. Sony encrypted the datastream. Hackers learnt where the decryption code was in memory. Import the decryption routine in ShowEQ, hack once again worked. It turned into a back and forth battle...they'd try to kill it off, the hackers found a new way to do it. We're basically in the same boat here...all the info that is needed is in the datastream during a match. Sure, its probably encrypted, but if someone puts forth enough effort they'll figure out how to watch the stream...on another PC...which is undetectable in every way by Blizzard. Shit, it would be undetectable in any situation except (obviously) a live tournament. THere's money involved in this....so it WILL happen. Its just a matter of when. | ||
| ||
