[QUOTE=bobbleheadbob;52049924]Related: Is there any reason a server would have an empty playerlist in the browser but show over 100 players?[/QUOTE]
Valve / SRCDS never anticipated there to be so many players in a server. While the packet itself for the player-list does support fragmenting, it's not really implemented in SRCDS. If a server has over 70-80 players then the packet will be too big for most network connections (MTU) and will be fragmented but the server / steam will have no idea what that is or how to process it properly so it shows it as nothing or empty.
Am I the only one who finds it funny that penguin has resorted to getting his host or whatever to come here and plead on why it's legal and crap?
[QUOTE=The Commander;52050005]Am I the only one who finds it funny that penguin has resorted to getting his host or whatever to come here and plead on why it's legal and crap?[/QUOTE]
Let me refer you back to my response which is only six posts up:
[B]"I don't agree with what he's doing specifically with these redirect servers."[/B] and [B]"All I'm doing here is defending my own routing method and also offering new things that you can do to resolve the issue without giving everybody a headache."[/B]
Clearly, somebody needs to work on their reading comprehension skills. Also, thanks for adding new information to the conversation. Nobody asked me to come on here and give my $0.2.
The only reason you are here is because penguin and king are banned and you have come here on their behalf, everyone knows it.
You have never joined the conversation any other time their servers were brought into question.
Anytime anyone brings your company up I'll be sure to redirect them here to let them know how you really operate.
[QUOTE=The Commander;52050005]Am I the only one who finds it funny that penguin has resorted to getting his host or whatever to come here and plead on why it's legal and crap?[/QUOTE]
Considering this is a public forum and related to gmod itself and Ertug runs a company that hosts a few of the top community's in Gmod, (Sup/Icefuse/etc), I think he has every right and shouldn't be suspected of being here solely for "Sup's" purpose
You are so simple minded and childish tbh, you completely throw out the window the possibility that ertug didn't know this thread existed or the fact that previous discussions were solely about REDIRECT servers but since this discussion has brought to light anycast and things that might actually effect ertug as a company that majors in gmod aka ertug's method of boosting servers higher onto the server list for example etc, there is many reasons as to why ertug could be here now and I don't see why you choose to pick your biased and misguided opinion as the right one.
[QUOTE=The Commander;52050041]The only reason you are here is because penguin and king are banned and you have come here on their behalf, everyone knows it.
You have never joined the conversation any other time their servers were brought into question.
Anytime anyone brings your company up I'll be sure to redirect them here to let them know how you really operate.[/QUOTE]
I would highly recommend that you work on your reading comprehension skills buddy. You are clearly trying to bait me into a conversation. Good try.
[QUOTE=NootNootEh;52050042]Considering this is a public forum and related to gmod itself and Ertug runs a company that hosts a few of the top community's in Gmod, (Sup/Icefuse/etc), I think he has every right and shouldn't be suspected of being here solely for "Sup's" purpose[/QUOTE]
I completely agree. He was just trying to bait me. It must be a slow day for him I presume.
[QUOTE=ertug20;52050051]
I completely agree. He was just trying to bait me. It must be a slow day for him I presume.[/QUOTE]
I am not the one who has been sitting in this thread for over 12 hours actively monitoring replies.
If you want to ruin your reputation as a hosting provider by coming up with reasons for penguin that is on you.
I know who I won't be suggesting to people in future.
[QUOTE=The Commander;52050041]The only reason you are here is because penguin and king are banned and you have come here on their behalf, everyone knows it.
You have never joined the conversation any other time their servers were brought into question.
Anytime anyone brings your company up I'll be sure to redirect them here to let them know how you really operate.[/QUOTE]
Seems a bit unreasonable, he's clearly said he doesn't agree with it and has every right to defend his company.
[QUOTE=The Commander;52050095]I am not the one who has been sitting in this thread for over 12 hours actively monitoring replies.
If you want to ruin your reputation as a hosting provider by coming up with reasons for penguin that is on you.
I know who I won't be suggesting to people in future.[/QUOTE]
I get email notifications as I would hope you do too. Clearly giving your opinion these days is a crime. I hope that you don't want me to turn into Youtube and start shutting servers down because it "offends" or "hurts" you.
It's also not like you were ever friendly or non-toxic to me regardless of my arguments or if you agreed with me. I'll never know why you always hated me but I'll always try to see the best in you.
[QUOTE=The Commander;52050095]I am not the one who has been sitting in this thread for over 12 hours actively monitoring replies.
If you want to ruin your reputation as a hosting provider by coming up with reasons for penguin that is on you.
I know who I won't be suggesting to people in future.[/QUOTE]
You act as if you can't refresh a page every few minutes and still remain productive. As a bystander, I'm not entirely sure how you've convinced yourself that Ertug is defending Penguin's actions despite condemning them. He even gave you a direct quote, and yet you still refuse to budge. If your goal is to be toxic, threaten people, and be intellectually dishonest, then you've accomplished it for sure. If you're going to continue to post it would be in your best interest to actually take in the conversation and stop brick-walling other peoples opinions/statements.
I still don't understand why people shit on somebody earlier when they suggested implementing a system of game-server tokens like Valve has for CSGO. Force them to sign in with a steam account that owns GMOD and only allow the connection to the master-list if the server has a authorized token.
I doubt it's a great deal of work to implement and frankly, it takes 2 fucking minutes more when setting up your server to create and that's it so its hardy a ballache for server hosts. Then in the rare case FP actually want to ban people for anything they actually can.
[QUOTE=olicool11;52050132]I still don't understand why people shit on somebody earlier when they suggested implementing a system of game-server tokens like Valve has for CSGO. Force them to sign in with a steam account that owns GMOD and only allow the connection to the master-list if the server has a authorized token.
I doubt it's a great deal of work to implement and frankly, it takes 2 fucking minutes more when setting up your server to create and that's it so its hardy a ballache for server hosts. Then in the rare case FP actually want to ban people for anything they actually can.[/QUOTE]
Some clients have no idea what FTP or what Lua is let alone how to get the token system key and also to set it up on their servers. There are also services out there to where they provide steam accounts specifically because of what Valve made to "verify" the servers. It does not work very well and will not work.
[QUOTE=ertug20;52050121]
It's also not like you were ever friendly or non-toxic to me regardless of my arguments or if you agreed with me. I'll never know why you always hated me but I'll always try to see the best in you.[/QUOTE]
I don't even know what you are talking about here to be honest but you can PM about this if you wish because that doesn't belong here.
[QUOTE=GaleTheHusky;52050131]You act as if you can't refresh a page every few minutes and still remain productive. As a bystander, I'm not entirely sure how you've convinced yourself that Ertug is defending Penguin's actions despite condemning them. He even gave you a direct quote, and yet you still refuse to budge. If your goal is to be toxic, threaten people, and be intellectually dishonest, then you've accomplished it for sure. If you're going to continue to post it would be in your best interest to actually take in the conversation and stop brick-walling other peoples opinions/statements.[/QUOTE]
My part in the conversation is that I am going to list the ips of the redirects everytime they show up again in the AU like I did on the previous page.
I am not being the one dishonest here, that is SuperiorServers doing that believing they are entitled to do anything they like.
So, what are the possible solutions so far for at least dampening this bullshit? Blocking IPs obviously isn't working, so perhaps we could try regex against the hostname? That still feels like just a patch, however... Would it be possible to implement a traceroute against servers in certain IP ranges, and monitor the number of connection jumps?
[QUOTE=The Commander;52050158]My part in the conversation is that I am going to list the ips of the redirects everytime they show up again in the AU like I did on the previous page.
I am not being the one dishonest here, that is SuperiorServers doing that believing they are entitled to do anything they like.[/QUOTE]
Congratulations. I still have no idea what that has to do with me and the clients that I host. Still just seems like you're commenting towards me just to bait me.
[QUOTE=TFA;52050159]So, what are the possible solutions so far for at least dampening this bullshit? Blocking IPs obviously isn't working, so perhaps we could try regex? That still feels like just a patch, however...[/QUOTE]
They are already trying and tried regex. It's not working. The best way to solve a issue is to patch the beginning of the issue which is how individuals are able to send their 'server' to valve's master lists. I already stated a good solution earlier in the chat but I doubt that they would take notice.
There wouldn't be a jump. For there to be a jump of hops, the "proxy" would have to respond to ICMP or TCP just like a router which it will simply not do. Doing a layer four traceroute still wouldn't really work as expected.
Also it's concerning that nobody bothered to mention that NoxiousNet is still hosting redirects.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/7OwjJGV.png[/t]
[QUOTE=Alex_grist;52050182]Also it's concerning that nobody bothered to mention that NoxiousNet is still hosting his redirects.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/7OwjJGV.png[/t][/QUOTE]
They were brought up last time and reported.
It seems they don't have redirects in the AU again or Shigbeard and I would have reported this as well.
[QUOTE=TFA;52050159]So, what are the possible solutions so far for at least dampening this bullshit? Blocking IPs obviously isn't working, so perhaps we could try regex against the hostname? That still feels like just a patch, however... Would it be possible to implement a traceroute against servers in certain IP ranges, and monitor the number of connection jumps?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, currently he's using Wingdings to get around regex. Not to mention that servers that just had "super" in their name were blacklisted despite not being involved at all. So essentially, while it was a good try the original target remains unaffected.
[QUOTE=The Commander;52050201]They were brought up last time and reported.
It seems they don't have redirects in the AU again or Shigbeard and I would have reported this as well.[/QUOTE]
Either way I'm still seeing them (through Steam browser), the warnings were for all to stop hosting redirects not just SUP.
[QUOTE=ertug20;52050141]Some clients have no idea what FTP or what Lua is let alone how to get the token system key and also to set it up on their servers. There are also services out there to where they provide steam accounts specifically because of what Valve made to "verify" the servers. It does not work very well and will not work.[/QUOTE]
The phrase RTFM comes to mind, I've no formal IT education etc I just know how to read the instructions which I'm sure they can do. Hosting a server isn't meant to be inherently easy, though I understand FP wouldn't want to shoot themselves in the foot and put people off.
On the latter note I don't doubt there is, I do agree its certainly far from a perfect solution. I'd have thought that if a system such as this were implemented and they do create a new token you could just revoke it automatically at the point it connected to the master-list with an IP associated with a prior banned token. Again I'll admit that my knowledge of this could be fuller but as far as I am aware its technically possible.
[QUOTE=Alex_grist;52050214]Either way I'm still seeing them (through Steam browser), the warnings were for all to stop hosting redirects not just SUP.[/QUOTE]
FPS is either too lazy or it is much easier for them to just blacklist using the in-game custom server browser as they are doing now. The blacklists were never pushed out to Valve so the server will show up on legacy.
[QUOTE=ertug20;52050222]FPS is either too lazy or it is much easier for them to just blacklist using the in game and custom server browser as they are doing now. The blacklists were never pushed out to Valve.[/QUOTE]
I'm aware, however the NoxiousNet redirect is still up and functional, it shouldn't make a difference.
[QUOTE=Alex_grist;52050231]I'm aware, however the NoxiousNet redirect is still up and functional, it shouldn't make a difference.[/QUOTE]
I assumed that you said that it showed up through the legacy steam browser. I'm sure that Robotboy is too busy blacklisting SUP over and over to care about other communities right now.
It does prove however that banning somebody will not fix the issue properly. They need to patch how they're doing it.
[QUOTE=ertug20;52050241]I assumed that you said that it showed up through the legacy steam browser. I'm sure that Robotboy is too busy blacklisting SUP over and over to care about other communities right now.
It does prove however that banning somebody will not fix the issue properly. They need to patch how they're doing it.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, it's the legacy browser but it shouldn't matter; If the redirect is showing up and they don't want them existing then it's not relevant which browser it's using really.
Just sent RobotBoy a modified menu state which turns the game into a top-server-joining bot. If it gets redirected, it will know.
We'll see if he uses it. I won't post the code here unless he declines, else aStonedPenguin will have an easier time finding a way around it.
[QUOTE=Alex_grist;52050253]Yeah, it's the legacy browser but it shouldn't matter; If the redirect is showing up and they don't want them existing then it's not relevant which browser it's using really.[/QUOTE]
Good luck getting Valve to constantly ban IP addresses over and over. I wouldn't count on it at all. Unless they had an API function for it, it isn't plausible.
[QUOTE=bobbleheadbob;52050256]Just sent RobotBoy a modified menu state which turns the game into a top-server-joining bot. If it gets redirected, it will know.
We'll see if he uses it. I won't post the code here unless he declines, else aStonedPenguin will have an easier time finding a way around it.[/QUOTE]
There were exploits in the past to "redirect" players to another server without physically redirecting them. While it would indeed add a layer to stop them, I wouldn't really call it a permanent solution. Robotboy should know if the server actually redirects or not though. It shouldn't be rocket science.
[QUOTE=ertug20;52050267]Good luck getting Valve to constantly ban IP addresses over and over. I wouldn't count on it at all. Unless they had an API function for it, it isn't plausible.[/QUOTE]
Well Robotboy stated before (I think) that continuing to host redirects would result in the main server being banned, which is what SUP have going on now. I personally don't mind the redirects but it doesn't seem reasonable to have a double standard, although it's likely that nobody had reported them again since it was said.
[QUOTE=Alex_grist;52050292]Well Robotboy stated before (I think) that continuing to host redirects would result in the main server being banned, which is what SUP have going on now. I personally don't mind the redirects but it doesn't seem reasonable to have a double standard, although it's likely that nobody had reported them again since it was said.[/QUOTE]
It's a vicious cycle, to be honest with you. They ban the IP and they change it, etc. The best and semi-permanent solution is to fix the hole so that nobody else can do it without going through more hoops and finding more exploits.
In the least, it would take them longer to find these exploits to utilize them.
Honestly at this point it's a matter of security.
If we can't blacklist SUP's servers, we can't blacklist anyone's servers.
Whatever the solution, we're better off having a plan for when someone else who is doing REALLY malicious shit gets blacklisted but just won't quit.
[QUOTE=bobbleheadbob;52050359]Honestly at this point it's a matter of security.
If we can't blacklist SUP's servers, we can't blacklist anyone's servers.
Whatever the solution, we're better off having a plan for when someone else who is doing REALLY malicious shit gets blacklisted but just won't quit.[/QUOTE]
I don't think that there really is a proper solution, to be honest with you. No matter what, they can most likely get around it.
The way that I look at it is that if no other game company needs to ban a server running their game (with the exception of Valve who DMCAs because you give players in-game skins :scream:), then there really shouldn't need to be any involvement by a company into community-based matters unless it's seriously bad. Seriously bad being they make either the entire server list unusable or break something major. I wouldn't categorize one server doing shady things as detrimental to everybody else's servers and the game as a whole but that's just me.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
