|
Pages: [1]
|
  |
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Anti-Cheat (Read 148 times)
|
|
RacerX
Guest
|
 |
Anti-Cheat
« on: April 23, 2003, 03:17:24 PM »
|
|
Hey guys, just wondering if any anti-cheat plugins or software are being considered to ease the work of the admins.
|
|
 Logged
|
|
|
|
MysteryMachine
Guest
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #1 on: April 23, 2003, 04:12:34 PM »
|
|
Getting people on the server was our priority up to now. We have some software installed, but up to now not much has been done to make our server the leading edge in plugins like it was in the past. I'm planning on changing that this weekend.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RacerX
Guest
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #2 on: April 23, 2003, 04:24:26 PM »
|
|
Nice I figured you would be, and i agree that getting our base back with some new faces is defintely first.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
G0t_NuBbed?
CSR Regular
Karma: +12/-4
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 56
 
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2003, 12:43:14 PM »
|
|
Is Cheating Death still in development? I remebered there was a lapse and discussion that the dev. was going to stop work on it?
Given the data I've heard its the most reliable anti-cheat software. The reality is its a PITA for the client side aspects of it but its much more affective than HLG or PB ever was..
Anyhow know?
Scoobafied
|
|
Logged
|
Llamafication is good for the soul.
|
|
|
MysteryMachine
Guest
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #4 on: April 25, 2003, 01:10:01 PM »
|
|
Its done, but isn't that the one you have to get the clients to run software for?
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
G0t_NuBbed?
CSR Regular
Karma: +12/-4
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 56
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #5 on: April 25, 2003, 07:26:16 PM »
|
|
CD can be run in two or three modes.
You can make CD client side a requirement which to be honest is the best level of protection you can have. Its easier to get around HLG based on the way it looks for things; its not so easy with CD. CD also makes it very difficult to use driver hacks so it can address client side; issues that would never have the oppritunity to be picked up by something server-side (such as HLG).
Don't get me wrong; Im a huge supporter and fan of HLG but at the end of the day if I had to pick the "best" anti cheat client it would probably be CD based soley on the fact that some client side hacks are simply not detectable by HLG.
So.. CD to be more effective than HLG would have to have a CD required setting to it meaning the client would have to be present. I've seen servers use a hybrid that changes players who are not running the CD client to "[NO-CD] Name" and then allows normarl names for those using the client. The advantage to this could be to help pick up on suspected players; then ask them (or force them) to use the client when connecting to CSR.
Like I said; more research would be required since I've been out of the loop on this kinda stuff for so long but I think you might still find CD to be the better over-all approach. I know it certainly was before the re-load but we never proceeded for the simple fact that it required a client and that made it a PITA 
Peace,
Scoobs
|
|
Logged
|
Llamafication is good for the soul.
|
|
|
RacerX
Guest
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #6 on: April 25, 2003, 08:33:56 PM »
|
|
I know for instance on KORT that CD is required to play there. I can't tell you how well it works, but from a client standpoint I hardly notice it and I like the fact that as soon as its started it does an auto-update. Less work on my part. My only complaint is that if CD is running on my computer it will not allow me to connect to a server not running CD.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Holy Grail
Guest
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #7 on: April 26, 2003, 01:03:54 AM »
|
|
Also, if the [NO-CD] players hit a certain K:D Ratio, they automatically get booted
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Porter
[Wumpa]
Board Admin
Karma: +176/--88
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3910
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #8 on: April 26, 2003, 11:12:35 AM »
|
|
Also, if the [NO-CD] players hit a certain K:D Ratio, they automatically get booted
|
|
Guilty until proven innocent huh? Sound like fun software. 
|
|
Logged
|
[Wumpa] Porter
--Silent, professional, lethal... sometimes.
|
|
|
G0t_NuBbed?
CSR Regular
Karma: +12/-4
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 56
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #9 on: April 26, 2003, 12:10:52 PM »
|
|
Also, if the [NO-CD] players hit a certain K:D Ratio, they automatically get booted
|
|
That is a matter of configutation. Like all Add-ons and apps for CS you have config files you can tweak to your pleasing. This is one of the options you could choose or use or ignore.
The fact of the mater is having that setting up would probably hurt the players of CSR more than help. The way I would see it being useful is instances like we had on the first server. We had suspected people who we spend hours watching; CD would be one of those "look, we feel there is at least a potential that you use hacks, we'd like to help disprove that. In order to do so we'd appreicate if you would download CD and load it into your system next time you connect to the server".
Its realy a means of elimination for suspected hackers; you don't have to make the CD client a requirement; you can merely ask those who are suspect to connect using the client to help rule them out as problem users.
So; in anycase its something out there for consideration, it certainly doesnt solve all problems but it might make short work of the "diagnostic" time invovled with catching hackers; it would also help eliminate inconsistancies or false acusations.
Last I checked the only downside was the lack of a Linux client for CD. This could have very well changed since I've last researched the topic but its somethign for consideration 
Peace,
Scoobs
|
|
Logged
|
Llamafication is good for the soul.
|
|
|
Porter
[Wumpa]
Board Admin
Karma: +176/--88
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3910
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #10 on: April 27, 2003, 10:05:44 AM »
|
|
I like the way you're suggesting using it Scoobs. Not required, but implemented as a powerful tool to disprove (or prove) hackers/cheaters through suggesting its use to suspects. And configured in way that it does little to anyone in-game with or without the client as long as nothing substantial can be detected. Good anti-cheat software should be neither seen OR heard. 
I figured the boot on KpD was configurable, and I guess I can see the impetus behind providing that feature, but man. To kick someone without the client for hitting a (i.e.) 2:1 KpD? I sure hope that's not the default configuration. 
|
|
Logged
|
[Wumpa] Porter
--Silent, professional, lethal... sometimes.
|
|
|
Ryo-Ohki
[Wumpa]
Board Admin
Karma: +30/-6
Offline
Posts: 187
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #11 on: April 27, 2003, 11:49:20 AM »
|
|
Just to get a general idea here, does this mean that people have lost faith in the Valve Anti Cheat auto updating program? I was under the impression that it was doing quite well. I ask because in order for Cheating Death to be installed, even in optional mode, VAC has to be disabled. Currently we are a Secure server with VAC running. So tell me have we lost faith in VAC?
|
| « Last Edit: April 27, 2003, 12:39:23 PM by Ryo-Ohki » |
Logged
|
"how does this work? where do my teeth go?" - a lepord cub trying to eat a turtle
-- panda cam
|
|
|
G0t_NuBbed?
CSR Regular
Karma: +12/-4
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 56
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #12 on: April 27, 2003, 12:23:17 PM »
|
|
I have not lost faith in VAC personaly.
I think that even VAC has to acknowledge the limitations of their product; and resign to the fact that a number of client side forms of cheating are possible (such as driver hacks) that could not otherwise be detected since VAC and HL would be in agreement that the game is running within the O/S as it was intended to.
I didn't realize it was an all or nothin deal which is pretty unfortunate because on the whole I'd say VAC is much more well rounded. Dunno I voted CD just to acknowledge that it detects things VAC will not be able to detect until it becomes a client side app.
Peace,
Scoobs
|
|
Logged
|
Llamafication is good for the soul.
|
|
|
Guardian_Tenshi
Global Moderator
Karma: +53/-26
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1114
  
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #13 on: April 27, 2003, 03:09:45 PM »
|
|
I think we are still much more "experimental" as to just throw the VAC system in the trash at this point ryo. However, I think it is worth looking into something like CD and determining exactly what it can and can't do for us. I whole-heartedly agree with porter that a good anti-cheat software should be seen and not heard. we (the active community who backs the server) want to know it is there, but not see or hear it when we play the game. Personally the few times i used CD, I thought that it was WAY to "noisy" of an anti-cheat software. It was in your face, and it never went away.
The [No-CD] tag was nothing but obnoxious to me (before i got CD that is). Not to mention me, being a very young player still, until very recently thought that tag was trying to accuse me of stealing counter-strike because i "didn't have a CD". I guess my point on the tag is, if you're gonna make people who don't have CD use that tag, why not make the people who do have CD use a tag that says [CD] and then see how you feel about it.
Also, if we could use it as a "tool" of eliminating hacker suspects, then I have a few questions. One: who's watching that person to make sure he/she still is signing on to the server with CD, and two: can we enforce those who don't comply to our request at all?
I suppose when it comes right down to it, i'm worried about anti-cheat software that doesn't exactly make sense to a clueless guy who just wants to play some quality CS like me. And frankly, I think that should be OUR goal.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Primer
CSR Expert
Karma: +66/-21
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 484
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #14 on: April 27, 2003, 09:46:51 PM »
|
|
| Also, if we could use it as a "tool" of eliminating hacker suspects, then I have a few questions. One: who's watching that person to make sure he/she still is signing on to the server with CD, and two: can we enforce those who don't comply to our request at all? |
|
a). Everyone is watching. If they in fact are not connecting with CD after bieng told to, it will come up on the screen that they are not cleared, and thier name would be changed to [No-CD] or whatever. If they did connect with CD, thier name wouldn't get changed and it would say they were authorized. (If I remember correctly from the CD servers I've played on, anyway)
And b). To enforce would be a kick/ban. (Or whatever the admin team decides on, I guess each case could be different.) But from my understanding, this is what they are talking about:
If the player wasn't using CD and were suspected to be hacking, the admin could ask them to re-connect with CD running, and it would auth them, erasing any doubts they might have about him hacking. If they signed back on without it running, or refused to use CD, they must have something to hide right? Riiiight.... Then the admin could take action.
It's not really that difficult a thing for the average CS player to have to deal with, (even if I made it sound complicated with my crappy explanation.)
I totally back CD on this one. I hope we get it in some form or another here.
Anyhow, sleep = good.
Peace.
|
|
|
|
Guardian_Tenshi
Global Moderator
Karma: +53/-26
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1114
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #15 on: April 28, 2003, 12:42:57 AM »
|
|
do we really want everyone running around with a tag [no-CD]? I personally hate that tag, and find it demeaning. And i really don't like the idea of running another program client side. Not to mention the technical problems I think it can create.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Porter
[Wumpa]
Board Admin
Karma: +176/--88
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3910
|
|
Re:Anti-Cheat
« Reply #16 on: April 29, 2003, 11:31:14 AM »
|
|
| I whole-heartedly agree with porter that a good anti-cheat software should be seen and not heard. we (the active community who backs the server) want to know it is there, but not see or hear it when we play the game. |
|
Just to clarify, I said I prefer AC software to be neither seen nor heard. I don't want it to spit out all sorts of messages while I'm playing, of course, because this is plain old annoying; but I also don't even want the average cheater to even know they're being checked. Putting someone's guard up, even a cheater's, is generally less conducive to finding the truth than checking something silently first.
This is why I like VAC. Nothing to configure, nothing to control, it just does it's job. Certainly, it's not as powerful as a client-side app can be, but then that's what they made CD for to begin with.... I'm still torn. I would rather not have it at all-- not even in Recommended Mode, but then there are potential benefits too.
I would say that this is a decision the Admin Team will have to make, and should appropriately be left to them, since they are our front-line in defense against cheating. If they can't keep up with cheaters using VAC as their only tool, and they decide they need CD to help, then they will have my 100% support. If they never need the extra protection CD provides, I will still support them 100%... but it'll probably be more like 105%.
In the end, no one here has more right to decide this matter than Ribs and his admins.
|
|
Logged
|
[Wumpa] Porter
--Silent, professional, lethal... sometimes.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
|
|
|
|
|
CSReloaded Forums | Powered by YaBB SE
© 2001-2003, YaBB SE Dev Team. All Rights Reserved. |
|
|
