[QUOTE=frosty802;33503006]I guess no-one reads / looks around anymore?
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1143435[/url]
That beats SH, afew false positives are known if it happens too much just remove the player kick parts and only pay attention to the messages that say "<player name>, has cheats"
Maybe I should release an updated version.[/QUOTE]
Thanks, I did see that but I thought it may have been patched? and by that what do you mean? It falsely detects sometimes?
I see, well as far as I am aware it still works, haven't heard anything from anyone saying otherwise.
I was gonna make an anti-cheat with Frosty that had a global hackers list.
That will never work, and I would never trust it with you involved in it tazy.
Someone could easily modify the anti-cheat to ban people just cause they want to..
Things like that never work with Lua.
[QUOTE=Drakehawke;33505978]Someone could easily modify the anti-cheat to ban people just cause they want to..
Things like that never work with Lua.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't work like that.
It downloads a global ban list from a server which has known hackers.
You cant just add a ban to it, you need to apply to add a ban to it, with proof etc.
[QUOTE=tazy4tazy;33506283]It doesn't work like that.
It downloads a global ban list from a server which has known hackers.
You cant just add a ban to it, you need to apply to add a ban to it, with proof etc.[/QUOTE]
And who says the people who have the ability to aren't corrupt bastards?
[QUOTE=tazy4tazy;33506283]It doesn't work like that.
It downloads a global ban list from a server which has known hackers.
You cant just add a ban to it, you need to apply to add a ban to it, with proof etc.[/QUOTE]
So every time someone hacks on my server, I have to somehow acquire evidence of them doing so (which would be what?) then send it to someone to have them judge and approve it?
People wont go to that much trouble to share their bans, most are primarily concerned with their server so wouldn't bother doing all that, they'd just ban them locally.
[QUOTE=tostopagaben;33503414]Thanks, I did see that but I thought it may have been patched? and by that what do you mean? It falsely detects sometimes?[/QUOTE]
In simple terms, frosty's anti-hack sends out a "ping". If the server doesn't get a response in time then it kicks the player with a message that they didn't check out.
Sometimes this leads to a false positive; Especially during the initial player connect.
I just removed the kicks and changed the admin message to read "suspicious player". If that message comes up multiple times for the same player then they are probably cheating.
The point of frosty's anti-cheat is not to catch cheaters and kick/ban but to block their scripts. I like that approach because I don't care if someone has used "cheats" as long as they don't use them on servers. There could be legit reasons to have those types of scripts... testing, curious, servers that allow it, scripts that do other things other then to cheat. I don't think someone should be punished right away with a ban.
[QUOTE=centran;33506892]In simple terms, frosty's anti-hack sends out a "ping". If the server doesn't get a response in time then it kicks the player with a message that they didn't check out.
Sometimes this leads to a false positive; Especially during the initial player connect.
I just removed the kicks and changed the admin message to read "suspicious player". If that message comes up multiple times for the same player then they are probably cheating.
The point of frosty's anti-cheat is not to catch cheaters and kick/ban but to block their scripts. I like that approach because I don't care if someone has used "cheats" as long as they don't use them on servers. There could be legit reasons to have those types of scripts... testing, curious, servers that allow it, scripts that do other things other then to cheat. I don't think someone should be punished right away with a ban.[/QUOTE]
This. I know where tazy4tazy is coming from and basically my idea is this. We do this but It will be way more advanced allowing server super admins to change the way it behaves such as auto-kick or just notify admins. Ban them, log them, apply a global ban list of known cheaters.
This I hope will give a much broader apporach and finally sort them out, yes I understand that patches will eventually be made but if that were to happen I'll just modify it some more.
Infact I now have a growing team, tazy4tazy (yes I know not amazing but its the mind power that helps) and killerLUA (hopefully, he gave me a request just need to talk to him).
Sooner or later I'll open up a thread about all this and hopefully get this thing off the ground and working. As said before the more servers that will opt-in the better.
[QUOTE=Drakehawke;33506426]So every time someone hacks on my server, I have to somehow acquire evidence of them doing so (which would be what?) then send it to someone to have them judge and approve it?
People wont go to that much trouble to share their bans, most are primarily concerned with their serve r so wouldn't bother doing all that, they'd just ban them locally.[/QUOTE]
If someone is aimbotting, you rec a demo/vid and send it to us, most of the time, the global bans will be mainly from ::Frosty's or another team members server.
::Frosty, me, And killerLua aren't curroupt.
The global ban feature will also have a toggle switch, if you dont want it on, you wont HAVE to have it it on.
[QUOTE=tazy4tazy;33507517]If someone is aimbotting, you rec a demo/vid and send it to us, most of the time, the global bans will be mainly from ::Frosty's or another team members server.
::Frosty, me, And killerLua aren't curroupt.
The global ban feature will also have a toggle switch, if you dont want it on, you wont HAVE to have it it on.[/QUOTE]
So I have to see someones hacking, go on the server, and then specta- oh wait, SethHack tells them when they're being spectated.
So how do I get evidence again?
[QUOTE=Drakehawke;33507984]So I have to see someones hacking, go on the server, and then specta- oh wait, SethHack tells them when they're being spectated.
So how do I get evidence again?[/QUOTE]
Use a custom spectate if you're going with his idea. I honestly think it's just stupid though, since I can easily spoof evidence.
My point is, nobodies going to go to the trouble of gathering evidence. And even if they did they would find it extremely difficult in a lot of cases.
You can use CalcView to spectate them without sethhack telling them.
And besides.
I don't really care if you get evidence and report them or you dont.
Me, Frosty or KillerLUA can add bans.
[QUOTE=tazy4tazy;33510159]You can use CalcView to spectate them without sethhack telling them.
And besides.
I don't really care if you get evidence and report them or you dont.
Me, Frosty or KillerLUA can add bans.[/QUOTE]
Yeah! Apathy! Who cares about the potential users?!
Really, honestly, I don't think you are trustworthy and you should close the door on your way out.
My Anti-Cheat:
[url]http://pastebin.com/vhgq02q4[/url]
I don't have enough experience with anti-cheats, but I did create an addon that detects when hook.Call, hook.Add, or hook.Remove has been replaced.
The lua file should be called "lua/enum/!.lua" for this to work, since it needs to be ran before the gamemode.
The cool thing about this is that it will work regardless of whether the hacks are ran before it or after it.
You can edit this portion of the code:
[lua]/*
** Gotcha is called when hook.Call is changed.
*/
local function Gotcha( )
RunConsoleCommand( "say","I'M HACKING!" )
end
/*
** Should the following hook be allowed?
** Event is the function name, like Think or HUDPaint
** Name is the custom name that was given to the function.
** ( Don't disallow just because of the name, seth could always spoof it if his dumb ass ever found out how to )
** Funct is the function, you can grab info from this.
*/
local function AllowHook( event, name, funct )
MsgN( "E: " .. event .. " N: " .. name .. " SRC: " .. debug.getinfo( funct ).short_src )
return true
end[/lua]
As I said, I don't have much experience with hacks so it won't detect everything, but it will disallow hooks if you know the data of the hook functions of hacks.
Did you do the variable stripping manually or write a script to do it?
[QUOTE=tazy4tazy;33510159]You can use CalcView to spectate them without sethhack telling them.
And besides.
I don't really care if you get evidence and report them or you dont.
[B]Me, Frosty or KillerLUA can add bans.[/B][/QUOTE]
So if someone pisses you off, when the global ban sytem is finished, you can ban everyone you want from like 20 popular servers.
Getting mad is common for 12 year olds.
A community-based ban system would probably be the only way this could ever work.
[editline]3rd December 2011[/editline]
Of course, proof would be required and it would have to be confirmed by some kind of moderators and stuff.
[QUOTE=DarKSunrise;33555333]A community-based ban system would probably be the only way this could ever work.
[editline]3rd December 2011[/editline]
Of course, proof would be required and it would have to be confirmed by some kind of moderators and stuff.[/QUOTE]
As I outlined earlier, no-ones going to go to the trouble of getting proof.
-Wrong thread-
Why not have a system that gives you a specific key to submit bans for your group/community, then other communities can see your list, and if they trust you, choose to use your list of bans.
[QUOTE=Delremos;33557710]Why not have a system that gives you a specific key to submit bans for your group/community, then other communities can see your list, and if they trust you, choose to use your list of bans.[/QUOTE]
because that's slow
[QUOTE=OldFusion;33494682]Hex anti-cheat is a horrible approach of doing stuff. It uses functions that every cheat has hooked/patched and scans using a blacklist.[/QUOTE]
Lets see you do better.
[QUOTE=small noob;33572802]Lets see you do better.[/QUOTE]
Just because someone can't personally do it doesn't mean that person isn't allowed to criticize something.
If you suck at doing something I will say you suck at it. What does it matter if I suck at it too? It still sucks.
[QUOTE=Hentie;33548887]My Anti-Cheat:
[url]http://pastebin.com/vhgq02q4[/url]
I don't have enough experience with anti-cheats, but I did create an addon that detects when hook.Call, hook.Add, or hook.Remove has been replaced.
The lua file should be called "lua/enum/!.lua" for this to work, since it needs to be ran before the gamemode.
The cool thing about this is that it will work regardless of whether the hacks are ran before it or after it.
You can edit this portion of the code:
[lua]/*
** Gotcha is called when hook.Call is changed.
*/
local function Gotcha( )
RunConsoleCommand( "say","I'M HACKING!" )
end
/*
** Should the following hook be allowed?
** Event is the function name, like Think or HUDPaint
** Name is the custom name that was given to the function.
** ( Don't disallow just because of the name, seth could always spoof it if his dumb ass ever found out how to )
** Funct is the function, you can grab info from this.
*/
local function AllowHook( event, name, funct )
MsgN( "E: " .. event .. " N: " .. name .. " SRC: " .. debug.getinfo( funct ).short_src )
return true
end[/lua]
As I said, I don't have much experience with hacks so it won't detect everything, but it will disallow hooks if you know the data of the hook functions of hacks.[/QUOTE]
Eh, I botched up the code a bit. you should "return false" to allow the hook, which is pretty weird. Someone can fix it for me.
[QUOTE=small noob;33572802]Lets see you do better.[/QUOTE]
Disclosing the anti-cheat makes it completely useless
But our 560 cheat bans speak for themself
[QUOTE=OldFusion;33577898]Disclosing the anti-cheat makes it completely useless
But our 560 cheat bans speak for themself[/QUOTE]
Where can I find your server?
I will join with cheats enabled.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
