Quack Anti Cheat [Public Release]

[Bizz]

And everyone on my server just got banned.
Lolk
"foreign source file I"

EDIT: Never mind someone tried to infect my server and QAC attempted to protect against it., wasn't QAC's fault. Sorry

[zerothefallen]

[QUOTE=bizzclaw;44582778]And everyone on my server just got banned.
Lolk
"foreign source file I"

EDIT: Never mind someone tried to infect my server and QAC attempted to protect against it., wasn't QAC's fault. Sorry[/QUOTE]

QAC isnt protecting against it, twas already infected, qac was banning everyone who attempted to spread the infection p sure

I suggest shutting off QAC till its fixed

[Azza]

what the fuck is wrong with you people

[Zyler]

It's funny how people are so defensive about their individual anti-cheats, but half the people here (on both sides) have apparently used hacks against some of the people they're supposedly trying to protect.

Saying "I only DDosed a server once" doesn't make it ok, and I really don't care about the specifics of 'he said, she said' either. As far as I can see you're all fucked because you're trying to justify yourself as being the better person when you all (again, supposedly) used hacks while promoting your own anticheat.

Coding practices aren't more important than being a decent goddamn human being and not ruining the enjoyment of other people.

[Cyaddd]

Screen grab is a horrible method of anti-cheating. Any some-what capable coder can quickly code an panic-mode/bypass. Not to mention a detector.

[BayLife]

[QUOTE=Cyaddd;44587157]Screen grab is a horrible method of anti-cheating. Any some-what capable coder can quickly code an panic-mode/bypass. Not to mention a detector.[/QUOTE]

That doesn't make it a horrible method of anti-cheating. That makes it a method of anti-cheating that is able to be bypassed.

[Cyaddd]

[QUOTE=BayLife;44587196]That doesn't make it a horrible method of anti-cheating. That makes it a method of anti-cheating that is able to be bypassed.[/QUOTE]

The fact of whether or not it's easy to bypass, it was a good idea in the beginning when nobody knew about it, but it's pretty much useless. If you're unable to define whether or not the meaning behind horrible can mean something other then shitty, than you have issues.

[BayLife]

[QUOTE=Cyaddd;44587198]The fact of whether or not it's easy to bypass, it was a good idea in the beginning when nobody knew about it, but it's pretty much useless. If you're unable to define whether or not the meaning behind horrible can mean something other then shitty, than you have issues.[/QUOTE]

Not every script has a way to bypass it. Do you think he should just remove it? [B][I]The whole point of an anti-cheat is to have the broadest spectrum as possible.[/I][/B] Some cheats have a way to bypass it and some don't. How easy it is to bypass it is completely irrelevant to the purpose of an anti-cheat, which is to catch as many cheaters as possible. If you're unable to comprehend that then I'm afraid it is you who has issues.

[Cyaddd]

[QUOTE=BayLife;44587222]Not every script has a way to bypass it. Do you think he should just remove it? [B][I]The whole point of an anti-cheat is to have the broadest spectrum as possible.[/I][/B] If you're unable to comprehend that then I'm afraid it is you who has issues.[/QUOTE]

Did I just say he should remove it? No. I'm simply pointing out there are ways to bypass it and that people who decide to use this should be aware that it's not 100% reliable mkay?

[BayLife]

[QUOTE=Cyaddd;44587246]I'm simply pointing out there are ways to bypass it and that people who decide to use this should be aware that it's not 100% reliable mkay?[/QUOTE]Who the fuck uses an anti-cheat and expects it to be 100% reliable?

[Cyaddd]

[QUOTE=BayLife;44587261]Who the fuck uses an anti-cheat and expects it to be 100% reliable?[/QUOTE]

Trust me, such idiots do exist.

[Leystryku]

[QUOTE=Cyaddd;44587268]Trust me, such idiots do exist.[/QUOTE]

Those idiots don't just exist, they're everywhere. They are the same people that buy an Anti-Virus expecting it to be 100% reliable.

[Baby Weiner]

[QUOTE=BayLife;44587261]Who the fuck uses an anti-cheat and expects it to be 100% reliable?[/QUOTE]

I expect to have an anti cheat that at the very minimum the scrubby 5 year olds can bypass it.

[raymond4000]

one of my servers keeps banning people for this - Received UNSYNCED cvar (mat_fullbright = 1)

Not sure if I can whitelist this command then or not. Does anyone know?

Thanks!

[SaintSin6]

Look inside the sv_qac.lua / config file.

Search the file for mat_fullbright around line 240 you'll see

[lua]
local ctd = {
"sv_cheats",
"sv_allowcslua",
"mat_fullbright",
"mat_proxy",
"mat_wireframe",
"host_timescale"
}[/lua]

Just remove the command from the blacklist

[thelastpenguin]

Quac does actually have a few cases where it can have false positives... I've forgotten exactly what they were since it's been a while since I took a look at the source but I remember noting a few to myself when I was playing around with it.

Also you really shouldn't be instantly perma banning when cheaters are detected.
If you guys wanna checkout a simplified recode of QAC I made which is optimized and strips away stuff like the file stealer etc you can find it at [url]https://github.com/thelastpenguin/pAntiCheat[/url] .
it should be noted that there is stub code for a convar checker but it's not finished yet.

It does essentially the exact same thing only in a manor that is alot less likely to break stuff and generally more optimized.

[BayLife]

[QUOTE=thelastpenguin;44686244]Quac does actually have a few cases where it can have false positives... I've forgotten exactly what they were since it's been a while since I took a look at the source but I remember noting a few to myself when I was playing around with it.

Also you really shouldn't be instantly perma banning when cheaters are detected.
If you guys wanna checkout a simplified recode of QAC I made which is optimized and strips away stuff like the file stealer etc you can find it at [url]https://github.com/thelastpenguin/pAntiCheat[/url] .
it should be noted that there is stub code for a convar checker but it's not finished yet.

It does essentially the exact same thing only in a manor that is alot less likely to break stuff and generally more optimized.[/QUOTE]
It's a lot easier to bypass, though.

[lua]_, hook.Add = debug.getupvalue(hook.Add, 2)[/lua]

Now I have the original hook.Add.

[zerothefallen]

[QUOTE=thelastpenguin;44686244]Quac does actually have a few cases where it can have false positives... I've forgotten exactly what they were since it's been a while since I took a look at the source but I remember noting a few to myself when I was playing around with it.

Also you really shouldn't be instantly perma banning when cheaters are detected.
If you guys wanna checkout a simplified recode of QAC I made which is optimized and strips away stuff like the file stealer etc you can find it at [url]https://github.com/thelastpenguin/pAntiCheat[/url] .
it should be noted that there is stub code for a convar checker but it's not finished yet.

It does essentially the exact same thing only in a manor that is alot less likely to break stuff and generally more optimized.[/QUOTE]

I have not been able to find any instances of false positives that are caused by the coding itself.

As an example, before the recent update, file.Read cant read shit with special characters in it, so of course. The #1 gmod addon "darkrp keypad + wire" or whatever caused false positive bans continuously. There is nothing I can do to get around that beforehand (and trust me, I've tried), therefore, I had to make a special note in the read_me.txt to clear special characters (such as defined, + [ ] etc you get the point)

The source detection is very simply, yet very easy to bypass. It will get the debug.getinfo short_src and check if it exists on the the server. That is all. This should not cause any false detections because why would it return "doesnt exist!" on the server? I personally have not been able to run into any false positives myself. If you can out-line why or how it happens, I can fix it.

Also relating to mat_fullbright false bans -- The map is forcing it on (whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy)

I removed mat_fullbright from later versions, If it's still in there, just remove it out of sv_qac.

[editline]30th April 2014[/editline]

yeah willox im looking at u with your + in the name u fag

[Leystryku]

[QUOTE=BayLife;44687097]It's a lot easier to bypass, though.

[lua]_, hook.Add = debug.getupvalue(hook.Add, 2)[/lua]

Now I have the original hook.Add.[/QUOTE]

And ironically, that's just one of the many ways to get around this great AntiCheat.
It's not bad that it was released though, it shows you how you should exactly not do stuff.

[QUOTE=zerothefallen;44689306]I have not been able to find any instances of false positives that are caused by the coding itself.

As an example, before the recent update, file.Read cant read shit with special characters in it, so of course. The #1 gmod addon "darkrp keypad + wire" or whatever caused false positive bans continuously. There is nothing I can do to get around that beforehand (and trust me, I've tried), therefore, I had to make a special note in the read_me.txt to clear special characters (such as defined, + [ ] etc you get the point)

The source detection is very simply, yet very easy to bypass. It will get the debug.getinfo short_src and check if it exists on the the server. That is all. This should not cause any false detections because why would it return "doesnt exist!" on the server? I personally have not been able to run into any false positives myself. If you can out-line why or how it happens, I can fix it.

Also relating to mat_fullbright false bans -- The map is forcing it on (whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy)

I removed mat_fullbright from later versions, If it's still in there, just remove it out of sv_qac.

[editline]30th April 2014[/editline]

yeah willox im looking at u with your + in the name u fag[/QUOTE]

If the level has no lights at all, then mat_fullbright is automatically set to 1.
Would be dumb to play in a black map, wouldn't it ?

	if ( host_state.worldmodel->brush.pShared->numworldlights == 0 )
	{
		ConDMsg( "Level unlit, setting 'mat_fullbright 1'\n" );
		mat_fullbright.SetValue( 1 );
	}

Also, just because he used a + in a file name doesn't mean he's dumb, it's the fault of you and your code if you can't work around that problem.
Coders often have to use workarounds, if they leak the ability to make one, then maybe they should gain it.

[zerothefallen]

[QUOTE=Leystryku;44689725]And ironically, that's just one of the many ways to get around this great AntiCheat.
It's not bad that it was released though, it shows you how you should exactly not do stuff.

If the level has no lights at all, then mat_fullbright is automatically set to 1.
Would be dumb to play in a black map, wouldn't it ?

	if ( host_state.worldmodel->brush.pShared->numworldlights == 0 )
	{
		ConDMsg( "Level unlit, setting 'mat_fullbright 1'\n" );
		mat_fullbright.SetValue( 1 );
	}

Also, just because he used a + in a file name doesn't mean he's dumb, it's the fault of you and your code if you can't work around that problem.
Coders often have to use workarounds, if they leak the ability to make one, then maybe they should gain it.[/QUOTE]

Well map makers should create lights, dont tell me it's smart to leave 0 lights :|

Also you cant work around it, it's not possible with just lua.

I'm not calling him dumb either, I was being sarcastic.

[Leystryku]

[QUOTE=zerothefallen;44689815]Well map makers should create lights, dont tell me it's smart to leave 0 lights :|

Also you cant work around it, it's not possible with just lua.

I'm not calling him dumb either, I was being sarcastic.[/QUOTE]

Not smart to do that, but if they want to - let them.
It is possible.

] lua_run local a,b = file.Find("hi/*.txt", "DATA") PrintTable(a)
> local a,b = file.Find("hi/*.txt", "DATA") PrintTable(a)...
1	=	my+awesome+file.txt
2	=	sex.txt

[zerothefallen]

[QUOTE=Leystryku;44689860]Not smart to do that, but if they want to - let them.
It is possible.

] lua_run local a,b = file.Find("hi/*.txt", "DATA") PrintTable(a)
> local a,b = file.Find("hi/*.txt", "DATA") PrintTable(a)...
1	=	my+awesome+file.txt
2	=	sex.txt

[/QUOTE]
No shit, it was fixed in the recent update. I was talking about before the update.

[Leystryku]

[QUOTE=zerothefallen;44689869]No shit, it was fixed in the recent update. I was talking about before the update.[/QUOTE]
But you just said it isn't possible with Lua ?

[zerothefallen]

[img]http://puu.sh/8u6TY.png[/img]

[editline]30th April 2014[/editline]

[QUOTE=Leystryku;44689880]But you just said it isn't possible with Lua ?[/QUOTE]

It wasnt, you needed to write a module.

[QUOTE=zerothefallen;44689306]
As an example, before the recent update[/QUOTE]

did you miss this in my original post??

[Leystryku]

[QUOTE=zerothefallen;44689888][img]http://puu.sh/8u6TY.png[/img]

[editline]30th April 2014[/editline]

It wasnt, you needed to write a module.

did you miss this in my original post??[/QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure you could've worked around it. If not, a module would've done it.
And even if it would've required a module, you would still be using lua, even if, in combination with C++.
It's not lua's fault if garry's mod has a problem with a function bound to it though.

[zerothefallen]

[QUOTE=Leystryku;44689910]I'm pretty sure you could've worked around it. If not, a module would've done it.
And even if it would've required a module, you would still be using lua, even if, in combination with C++.[/QUOTE]

I do not know even basic c++, let alone enough to edit the file functions to add to QAC. Plus, I have tried many different ways to get around it with pure lua. I still could not find a way.

[Icejjfish]

-snip

[SweetTea]

you should make a quack sound effect when someones banned

[zerothefallen]

[QUOTE=SweetTea;44903716]you should make a quack sound effect when someones banned[/QUOTE]

Done. Updated OP

[SweetTea]

[lua]
nr("QUACK_QUACK_MOTHER_FUCKER", function()
LocalPlayer():EmitSound("qac/quack.wav") -- RIP NIGGERS
end)
[/lua]

I <3 you man but thats a bit racist