So I’m wondering if Garry has any plans against these people cheating, or if we plan on leaving them be for another year. I’m hoping there is a better way of preventing cheaters rather than using QAC that picks up nothing, any suggestions? I often run into esp and speed hackers.
lmao no. If you want to be “safe” you gotta use an lua anticheat. Most suck and are easily bypassable.
Actually if you got the source of an anticheat you can also make an bypass yourself.
Theres no fix for cheaters.
There is, it’s called server administrators.
You can say server administrators but some hackers are really good at hiding it.
You can say anticheats but some hackers are really good at bypassing it.
“I’m hoping there is a better way of preventing cheaters rather than using QAC that picks up nothing”
I feel like a bad advertising bot, oh well
I gave it a try, but the whole adaptive thing was a pain especially as the server is in development.
Well then you should’ve tried adaptating a path or keyword like addons/mydevaddon/ instead of adaptating every single thing from a always dev’d on addon :v
That would have come useful in the readme.txt
It’s been in there since 6.whatever, but near the bottom
“And yes, you can adapt paths/parts of strings like addons/pac3/ or e.g. | hkA | urltex_download even though it’s a bit less secure -> it works.”
I just noticed that somehow this topic is marked as “solved” but it’s not locked?
Pretty sure you can mark it as solved and then unmark it as solved and the tag will stay.
Or create the thread with the prefix set as “Solved”.
I don’t recall pressing solved but it’s there for some reason
Anti-cheats is a concern that nearly any game with a big enough player base deals with. There is no absolutely perfect anti cheat aside for administration or personal opinion. As the anti cheats advance, so do the hacks that go with it. You cannot ask for more. With that said, every update changes the so called ‘addresses’ that hacks use to overwrite certain core mechanics within the games dlls. You can have Lua anti cheats which to some degree work, however if it’s easy for a player to overwrite binary data I’m sure it’s not difficult to keep your Lua injections private (or local).
Usually, Lua anti cheats rely on the hackers mistakes. Since there’s such an abondance of different hacks, I can say for sure that not every hack can be detected even with administration. If someone is that devoted to making a hack, unique to one person, there’s nothing ‘clear-cut’ that can stop him/her. So now you know.
Even if you only e.g. create a local table you can be detected.
The reason isn’t “hackers mistakes”, but rather Lua in itself.
I don’t think administration or personal opinion is a good tool to find out if someone is cheating, at all.
It’s easy for them to make mistakes and falsely ban people, or to not ban people when someone isn’t “obviously hacking”.
The hacks in GMod have advanced lately however, not the lua ones.
The memory address doesn’t matter to lua cheats/anticheats, at all, since they don’t need to hook anything ( even if many people use a shity bypass rip-off from Oubhack ) .
Binary data is useless for cheating with lua, and it isn’t an easy task to keep your “Lua injections” private, even if you keep it local it can be detected.
I haven’t seen a single AC that relys on “hackers mistakes”, only ones that abuse their mistakes optionally. ( Except if you call every single way of being detected a mistake ).
I figure a cheat has two ‘goals’:
- Give you an unfair advantage over players not using your cheat
- To be undetectable (or the user will be banned and that’s no good)
I’ve written my own personal anticheat that does OK (not as good as yours), but if a hack gets detected it’s useless, so in my mind anything a hack writer does that makes them easier to be detected is a mistake.
I didn’t notice hackers this much back when sv_scriptenforcer was being used, now you can download hacks off of Workshop and every preb does it
SE was useful for it’s time, but while it’d cut down on cheaters it wouldn’t eliminate them if you implemented it now.