|
On February 20 2012 22:36 Roblin wrote:Show nested quote +On February 20 2012 21:40 skeldark wrote:On February 20 2012 21:32 Roblin wrote:On February 20 2012 21:14 iloveav wrote:On February 20 2012 19:21 Dakota_Fanning wrote:On February 20 2012 19:12 Tofugrinder wrote:On February 20 2012 00:03 TibblesEvilCat wrote:
also sc2 is allowed by law now (in the new user agreement) to perdoically scan the pc ram to see what processes are in use Really?!? Why hasn't this been a huge topic if correct? Blizzard has no right in knowing what processes I run.. This was huge topic before. And Blizzard has right to do anything you have agreed with. And since this is in the EULA which you acknowledged (else you couldn't play), they can do it. And they do it. Actually its a grey area: You cant read the licence agreement before you buy the game, and once you bought it you cant return it to a store (at least in spain its a 100% no-go). I guess you could find those if you search online, but thats like the "small letters" in a contract, of the fast sliding letters in a tv add. Basicly you agree to the terms before you get to read them :D. Warning: the below assumes you have a computer which can access the internet and that you know how to navigate the internet and that you know the title of the game whos EULA you are searching for. step 1: open your favourite web-browser step 2: go to "www.google.com" step 3: search for "<gamename> EULA", where <gamename> is to be substituted by the name of the game. step 4: click on top result congratulations, you did not need to buy the game to read the EULA of the appropriate game. if you can read this post that means you have access to a computer as well as access to internet and thus "I did not have access to the EULA until it was too late" is not an acceptable excuse. And? How exactly did the seller show it to you if you find it on your own? Because by law, thats what he have to do BEFORE the deal. And who say that the eula i find is the eula they will come up with. Why write any contract? People could just google random contracts and take the one they like. You logic is .... normaly not worth my time to awnser it... You can not change a deal after the deal is done. And by accepting the money and the product the deal is done. So eula by installation is like 99% of this "agree here". Just an click and nothing worth. Why do they inculde it then? because many people dont know.Most contracts are not legal and the once who write it know that. But most of the time you dont end up by curt so you can foul people with less intelligence. + Show Spoiler +The seller has no obligation to have you read the EULA before you use the merchandise, he is only the middle hand much like a messenger. Companies which produce a product does however have an obligation to give you the knowledge required to not screw up while handling the product, and if they do not, they can be sued for it. the following examples are all rumors and I have not confirmed them to be either true or false, but technically speaking they can be true since none of the examples contradict the law of the time. someone buys a cover which is used to protect the front windshield from snow, the next morning that individual is in a car accident, later he/she sues the company who made the windshield cover since it never said that you should not drive the car while the cover is still on, he/she wins and since that day all such windshield covers have a note which tells you not to drive while its still on the front windshield. once upon a time someone buys a microwave,aftr months of using it correctly, he/she thinks that his/her dog seems to be very cold, and decides to put the dog in the microwave to warm it up, obviously the dog dies, later he/she sues the microwave company because it never said you shouldn't put live animals in it, since then the microwaves have several notes either on the microwave itself or in an instruction booklet which comes with it which tells you a number of things which should not be put into the microwave. this is true for the software companies as well, the difference is that software companies use EULAs, the role that these EULA fulfill is to tell you what you can expect to happen legally if you do something regarding the product. if you do not agree with the EULA then you do not have the right to use the software because the company does not have any gaurantee that you will use it correctly. my point is that everything legally asked by every party is indeed fulfilled: the seller sells merchandise, he has no obligation to make sure that you use the merchandise correctly, for such troubles you are always directed to the company which produced the product. this is done by selling the product in their stores. the producer must give you the opportunity to learn about all consequences which can happen if you use the product incorrectly, if they do, they have no obligation to make sure that you do use it correctly, and if you use it in a way which you have been told you should not, they are legally allowed to do the appropriate action described by them. this is done by EULAs which can be found in several locations, such as the internet and at least in the case of SC2 in the instruction booklet (with the EULA of the time of writing the book), as well as in a message which you must agree with before being able to use the product. there is absolutely nothing wrong going on around here, the seller gives you opportunities (buying the game), which you can choose to ignore, the product gives you opportunities (installing the game), which you can choose to ignore. p.s. it is very clearly stated in the SC2 EULA that it can be changed by blizzard at any time for any reason, however, if they do change it, every consumer must agree to the new one before being allowed to play the game. oh, and also heres some parts of the EULA you might be interested in, the below in quotation marks (" ") is copy/pasted: "THIS SOFTWARE IS LICENSED, NOT SOLD. BY INSTALLING, COPYING OR OTHERWISE USING THE GAME (DEFINED BELOW), YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO INSTALL, COPY OR USE THE GAME. IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE." "Changes to the Agreement and/or Game. Blizzard may replace this Agreement with new versions (each a “New EULA”) over time as the Game and the law evolve. This Agreement will terminate immediately upon the introduction of a New EULA, and you will be given an opportunity to review and accept the New EULA. If you accept the New EULA, and if the Account registered to you remains in good standing, you will be able to continue playing the Game subject to the terms of the New EULA. If you decline to accept the New EULA, or if you cannot comply with the terms of the New EULA for any reason, you will no longer be permitted to play the Game. New EULAs will not be applied retroactively. Blizzard may change, modify, suspend, or discontinue any aspect of the Game at any time. Blizzard may also impose limits on certain features or restrict your access to parts or all of the Game without notice or liability." source: http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/legal/sc2eula.htmlin english: these are things you have agreed upon, when you bought the game you had a 30-day time period where you could choose to reject your purchase, this is not related to the purchase at a store, but instead you contact blizzard whom probably invalidates the key-code in your product and sends you the money. if you do not reject this, then you instead agree that they may change the EULA however much they want and you will not get a refund after the 30 daytime period.
Different countries. Different consumer protection laws. Different validy of EULAs.
But hey - you generalized everything - so simply: You're wrong.
Edit:
More ontopic:
Listen to Ashur. He knows what he's talking about.
|
How is Warden a new topic? Years ago people figured out that blizzard had stated in teh EULA that they have the right to scan your running processes to check for hacks/bots in WoW. Warden is ooooooold.
And yes (decent) hacks auto-disable so they avoid warden detection. Most people i know who hack have done so for years without getting caught except when they get caught by admins. (Considering it was wow, they actually already profitted enough from hacking at that point that they just made a new account and continued hacking/botting).
.
And Warden is like having a network encryption that can be broken in 5 minutes by someone who knows what he's doing, on a network that everyone is using. It only prevents the most basic hacking/botting.
This is blizzards standard procedure for everything, lowest effort for maximum profit. Give the illusion of preventing hacking but not really doing anything more than basic protection.
|
why would you hack in a RTS doesnt make any sense
|
On February 21 2012 02:50 Mr. Black wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 02:34 -orb- wrote:
What's the purpose of this thread?
Just because warden scans your computer doesn't make it perfect.
Warden is an anti-hack tool blizzard has been using for years, and guess what? It's not successful. It still catches the idiots, but over the past decade it has been proven time and time again that you can get around warden (quite easily in fact).
Hell, even in WoW when warden was supposed to be the strictest/catch anything etc you still had thousands upon thousands of players botting using Glider without warden having a clue. Hell, I did (fuck leveling in WoW... one of the most frustrating wastes of time in a video game ever), and I never got caught despite just using a program I downloaded off the internet and configuring it rather than programming my own bot/hack or something.
tl;dr: Warden isn't perfect, hackers will ALWAYS get around it. This thread has no purpose and is misguided in the first place I think the purpose is to convince hackers not to hack, a noble but quixotic task. Just because you think leveling in WoW is a frustrating waste of time, doesn't mean it's ok to hack to automate it. By that logic, isn't getting good at SC2 a "frustrating waste of time"? Don't hack in any game. If a game has parts that are a "frustrating waste of time," then play a better game.
The two are not even comparable. Leveling in WoW was a process that you 100% HAD to do to play the game. You couldn't just start at max level to PvP if you wanted to play, you had to spend the hundreds of hours it would take to level yourself. Leveling was a process that didn't do anything beneficial for you outside the game (whereas improving at sc2 improves YOUR personal skill, as opposed to the stats on an in-game fictional character). It was a process that was widely regarded as horribly designed and frustrating to bother with. Thus, powerleveling services from slave labor in china boomed. Bots popped up all over the place.
Imagine this: in order to play WoW at a competitive level both at PvE (end-game raiding against bosses with a large group of people working together) and at PvP (arena 2v3/3v3/5v5), you had to invest a RIDICULOUS amount of time into the game. Some of it was completely wasted time. Grinding for the sake of grinding is just stupid, plain and simple. In SC2 it is completely different. Taking the time to improve helps you personally because your brain gets the knowledge it needs and improves. Grinding in WoW doesn't do anything for your brain at all... it is literally worse than working a job. Why the fuck would I pay to work a job? You may ask why I played at all, but you have to understand PvP and end-game PvE were fun, while there was nothing fun at all about grinding levels
|
I really wonder how widespread hacking is in sc2. I remember in early WC3 when ALOT of top players would get banned and stats swiped ect. The only such thing I have noticed so far in sc2 is the sorcery/iGWare thing when sorcery only admitted to hacking. I dont even know if the account was suspended or just got a 2week ban. Possibly it was not banned at all.
If a number of top level WC3 players (as in doing well in offline turneys) got caught, it would not be suprising if a bunch of known names would be hacking in SC2. But scandals of known players hacking are extremely low unless I missed some of them.
Anyone got examples of GMs getting banned, suspended or otherwise caught hacking?
|
Yeah, I'm wondering how often this happens, too. I don't really see the point - I guess you could get some thrill out of doing it and not getting caught, but after a while, wouldn't it get boring? You're not actually getting any better.
|
On February 21 2012 14:07 PlateCaptain wrote:
Yeah, I'm wondering how often this happens, too. I don't really see the point - I guess you could get some thrill out of doing it and not getting caught, but after a while, wouldn't it get boring? You're not actually getting any better.
People 6 pool to masters. Other people cannon rush all day long. It's not particularly fun, it's not making them better players, all that matters is winning. For some people, that's enough. Winning is everything.
|
On February 21 2012 10:01 rOse_PedaL wrote:
why would you hack in a RTS doesnt make any sense
Some players like to take whatever edge they can get to win. See instances of stream cheaters like CombatEX and Deezer, same concept imo. I suppose other people simply want to test their hacking abilities...? I have no idea, I've never done anything like this but that's my take on the matter.
|
On February 21 2012 07:34 Pusekatten wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 03:40 dehdar wrote:On February 21 2012 02:32 Pusekatten wrote:Nice OP you have made, I read the one where you said blizzard used VAC, and was gonna comment that they used Warden instead so you could change it, but the thread got closed while I was writing  Well anyway, as this is a thread about hacks, I was wondering if bots = hacks? and if they are detected the in the same way? Depends on how you develop your bot. I spent 2-3 weeks developing a bot for Aion, which was basically just a statemachine, which changed according to pixelchanges on the screen. By purely basing all logic in my bot on pixelsearching I knew for a fact it would be undetectable. Whenever a player would whisper me or an admin, the font colour would be "unique" and "Welcome to the jungle" would play with max volume, so I could rush to my computer and answer  Later I learned others had implemented the same, but were using SMS gateways to notify the player instead of playing music :D I implemented a lot of small cool features and kept tweaking my bot to the point, where I could just leave it for hours without worrying about it being stuck or unable to recover from dying. I finally realised paying for a game that I'm letting a bot play might be an indication that I'm - excuse my language - piss bored with the game. So I quit. I also realised that developing the bot was a lot more fun than actually playing wow, it sounds complicated, at least for someone like me who doesn't have any programming experience. I did however use a bot on wow, for farming herbs and mining like most do, but I also quit when I figured out I payed for logging inn a raiding once or twice a week, wasn't really worth it anymore. Was just wondering how much programming experience do you need to make something like the bot program you made? Sounds like a fun experience
If you are genuinely interested/curious, then I have no doubt you can make your own bot.
The easiest thing to do would be to first understand the basic programming operations and flow control mechanisms(google):
+, =, ==, !=, ++, for, while, do, if, else...
This will take you 2-3 days.
Then you could use a program like AutoIt to make your own bot. There are plenty of code examples that you could use, and there is a huge community where you can get help - stackoverflow.com for instance.
If you need a list of exactly what to learn, where to learn it, where to find bot examples, then I'll compile a list for you whne I'm home... which reminds me, I'm at work! What am I doing here
|
On February 21 2012 14:45 Kharnage wrote:Show nested quote +On February 21 2012 14:07 PlateCaptain wrote:
Yeah, I'm wondering how often this happens, too. I don't really see the point - I guess you could get some thrill out of doing it and not getting caught, but after a while, wouldn't it get boring? You're not actually getting any better. People 6 pool to masters. Other people cannon rush all day long. It's not particularly fun, it's not making them better players, all that matters is winning. For some people, that's enough. Winning is everything.
There has been some debate here during the BW days that hacking could help with learning timing ect. I have never tried hacks so I dont know if that is true. I do consider hackers to be really sad people. Also it's really annoying to win a close game and when you watch the replay it's obvious that your opponent was hacking. It kinda destroys the epicness of the game/replay. Like a good movie ruined by a twist at the end.
|
On February 21 2012 11:23 Eatme wrote:
I really wonder how widespread hacking is in sc2. I remember in early WC3 when ALOT of top players would get banned and stats swiped ect. The only such thing I have noticed so far in sc2 is the sorcery/iGWare thing when sorcery only admitted to hacking. I dont even know if the account was suspended or just got a 2week ban. Possibly it was not banned at all.
If a number of top level WC3 players (as in doing well in offline turneys) got caught, it would not be suprising if a bunch of known names would be hacking in SC2. But scandals of known players hacking are extremely low unless I missed some of them.
Anyone got examples of GMs getting banned, suspended or otherwise caught hacking?
In fact I was wondering about the same question too: How many top-notch players actually cheat?
I used to play Counterstrike on quite a high-level long ago. There were times when the entire scene was extremely plagued with wallhackers/aimbots. I know that several high-class players back then (including national team members) hacked in almost every online league match. Also it later turned out that several people I played with for months in a clan were actually wallhacking in most of our games (which we didn't know back then). This all led me to the conclusion that a lot of people will use every advantage (legal or not) they can get as long as they're quite sure they can't be caught - very similar to doping in sports.
On other hand, I never had this impression with the SC2 scene and I'm somehow pretty confident that the percentage of hacker on a high-level is very low. I guess this mainly results from the fact that hacking isn't that much beneficial in an RTS and that the scene in general is far more "mature" than the FPS scene.
|
There is research on a new rts coding method to make map hacking impossible.
|
The cheats that never get detected are the ones never released to the community and kept in a small circle for enjoyment purposes.
Any code monkeys savvy enough can do it.
Sorry =(
|
On February 22 2012 11:08 EtherealDeath wrote:
There is research on a new rts coding method to make map hacking impossible.
Do you have a name or link for it? Not that there would be a ton of information on the intricacies of the system but it might be interesting to see a general concept.
|
I have discovered a lot of hackers on the ladder! many many masters on EU and NA. Less on KR tho! which i don't know! But its actually many games i discover them hacking too. Some people have actually told me they hacked just for "the fun" i guess and when i checked the replay it was clearly hack.
Just don't understand why people does it. They are just destroying for everyone else enjoying this game. But whatever i may post about hackers in this thread they wont stop so...
|
This thread has gone out of control.
It appears that whoever is contributing to this thread with factual knowledge are immediately under the accusation of being a hacker. This is very, very sad.
+ Show Spoiler +Anyway, I did a bit of research and if you Google "StarCraft 2 Hack" one of the first hits will be "StarCraft 2 Simple Hack" or something. It appears that this so-called "Simple Hack" is and has been a working maphack since the StarCraft 2 Beta, and it has thus far been undetectable and nobody has ever reported that they have been banned for using it. Note again that this hack has been around since beta and is still undetected.
To all of you who "defend" Blizzard's enthusiastic anti-hack system, you're wrong.
+ Show Spoiler +PS: part of my research is provided by a friend of mine, a friend who's been hacking for a long time. He's been using this particular hack for around a year now, he says, and has never been banned or warned. I've seen this hack being used it person and I got to admit, it's quite impressive. It appears that you can use the Observer-Panel in-game and know of everything that's going on: production, APM, ressources, units lost, etc., etc.
Of course this is sad but let's face it, we can't do anything about it.
|
On February 22 2012 11:18 Grohg wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 11:08 EtherealDeath wrote:
There is research on a new rts coding method to make map hacking impossible. Do you have a name or link for it? Not that there would be a ton of information on the intricacies of the system but it might be interesting to see a general concept.
It's a PDF that was linked earlier in this thread. The researchers call it OpenConflict. The basic idea is that it uses cryptographic techniques to hide information in memory that shouldn't be visible.
The current model of SC2 (and many other RTS games) is that both clients have full information about the game state (map, units, production, etc...). It is then up to the client to only display the information that should be accessible to the player. This means that hacks that show you this information are extremely easy: Just read the relevant parts of memory and print it out as a 2D picture. You can make it pretty and all, but the basic functionality is straightforward.
It's not very viable to use a model where the clients only have partial information and then have the server (Battle.net in our case) compute what happens and transmit that. It requires a ton of processing power on the Battle.net servers and it would create additional latency (imagine a player scanning or claiming a Xel'naga tower: suddenly a burst of new information has to be transfered).
The OpenConflict system that was presented in the PDF that I mentioned earlier still has both clients having all the information, but in an encrypted form. The client is only able to decrypt the parts that the player is supposed to see/know.
The downside of this system is that it's still a p2p system where clients broadcast their moves to the other. These broadcasts can still be intercepted by a 3rd party program and displayed. It's not a full maphack, but still rather powerful ("<Player> starts construction of Dark Shrine").
|
|
|
On February 23 2012 00:39 Rannasha wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 11:18 Grohg wrote:On February 22 2012 11:08 EtherealDeath wrote:
There is research on a new rts coding method to make map hacking impossible. Do you have a name or link for it? Not that there would be a ton of information on the intricacies of the system but it might be interesting to see a general concept. It's a PDF that was linked earlier in this thread. The researchers call it OpenConflict. The basic idea is that it uses cryptographic techniques to hide information in memory that shouldn't be visible. The current model of SC2 (and many other RTS games) is that both clients have full information about the game state (map, units, production, etc...). It is then up to the client to only display the information that should be accessible to the player. This means that hacks that show you this information are extremely easy: Just read the relevant parts of memory and print it out as a 2D picture. You can make it pretty and all, but the basic functionality is straightforward. It's not very viable to use a model where the clients only have partial information and then have the server (Battle.net in our case) compute what happens and transmit that. It requires a ton of processing power on the Battle.net servers and it would create additional latency (imagine a player scanning or claiming a Xel'naga tower: suddenly a burst of new information has to be transfered). The OpenConflict system that was presented in the PDF that I mentioned earlier still has both clients having all the information, but in an encrypted form. The client is only able to decrypt the parts that the player is supposed to see/know. The downside of this system is that it's still a p2p system where clients broadcast their moves to the other. These broadcasts can still be intercepted by a 3rd party program and displayed. It's not a full maphack, but still rather powerful ("<Player> starts construction of Dark Shrine"). The concept is far from new, I think I've even seen in discussed by blizzard devs around the WoW beta.
From reading about these things for many years I'm not sure it has to use enough bandwidth and server cpu resources to really matter. To be honest I've gotten the impression it can often be done to save resources and to increase various performance aspects. Getting smaller parts over time instead of huge chunks can make client performance more consistent/fluid(depending on what the data is used for) for example.
Would be fun to hear blizzards thoughts on it. That the game is the way it is and would have to be changed isn't very interesting since sc2 is a pretty new game, they must have made decisions about it during the development. Unless no one at the sc2 team thought about these aspects, which isn't completely impossible I guess.
|
The ladder basically shows that blizzard doesnt give a fuck about hackers. On EU you can already make some of them out just by their clantags. For 5 years.
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
