So I was reading this post

[demonstar55]

there are already server-side detection of some hacks (MQ2Warp, etc) but they do generate false positives, and yes, there are hacks to circumvent the detections :/

best bet would be to improve on the current detection systems and add any other detections that can be done reliably

The current system just logs to the hackers table in the DB

And the current MQ2Warp detection makes more false positives for SoF (the time between loc updates is longer than Titanium or something)

[3z3ki3l]

Originally Posted by demonstar55

there are already server-side detection of some hacks (MQ2Warp, etc) but they do generate false positives, and yes, there are hacks to circumvent the detections :/

best bet would be to improve on the current detection systems and add any other detections that can be done reliably

The current system just logs to the hackers table in the DB

And the current MQ2Warp detection makes more false positives for SoF (the time between loc updates is longer than Titanium or something)

MQ is not "detectable" in the right hands because it can run completely passively depending on which features you sacrifice. Detection methods are redundant as fuck and the huge margin of error allows the other lesser known hacks to run freely -- VZTZ pushed these anti-hacking methods as far as they could and the problems only snowballed (if you didn't notice).

Its funny because I had the same discussion with Null (most recent joke dev on VZTZ) and after alot of pining I came to the conclusion the only "real" solution would be a piece of software that coordinates with the server to make sure nothing is toying with the client. To which he brought up the "failure" of the Bane of Life software... so I checked it out and the fucking thing hadn't even been compiled yet, much less failed.

Ultimately I can't chalk this up to anything but some serious penis envy and total technical ignorance to the issues at hand. All of which is perpetuated and displayed here in this and related threads.

[demonstar55]

Originally Posted by 3z3ki3l

MQ is not "detectable" in the right hands because it can run completely passively depending on which features you sacrifice. Detection methods are redundant as fuck and the huge margin of error allows the other lesser known hacks to run freely -- VZTZ pushed these anti-hacking methods as far as they could and the problems only snowballed (if you didn't notice).

Its funny because I had the same discussion with Null (most recent joke dev on VZTZ) and after alot of pining I came to the conclusion the only "real" solution would be a piece of software that coordinates with the server to make sure nothing is toying with the client. To which he brought up the "failure" of the Bane of Life software... so I checked it out and the fucking thing hadn't even been compiled yet, much less failed.

Ultimately I can't chalk this up to anything but some serious penis envy and total technical ignorance to the issues at hand. All of which is perpetuated and displayed here in this and related threads.

I understand that, just say the best bet to stop MQ2 active hacks at least would be better detection methods, but not sure if we've reached the limit yet

[3z3ki3l]

Originally Posted by demonstar55

I understand that, just say the best bet to stop MQ2 active hacks at least would be better detection methods, but not sure if we've reached the limit yet

Check out Yeor's server: www.baneoflife.com. The "Client Manager" is what you should read into -- it successfully detects anything latching into the client and will instaban the user (by more than IP) with NO margin for error.

That's where the cock envy I spoke of entered the picture.

[blackdragonsdg]

Originally Posted by 3z3ki3l

Check out Yeor's server: www.baneoflife.com. The "Client Manager" is what you should read into -- it successfully detects anything latching into the client and will instaban the user (by more than IP) with NO margin for error.

That is an interesting way to hinder or stop cheaters.

[demonstar55]

Originally Posted by 3z3ki3l

Check out Yeor's server: www.baneoflife.com. The "Client Manager" is what you should read into -- it successfully detects anything latching into the client and will instaban the user (by more than IP) with NO margin for error.

That's where the cock envy I spoke of entered the picture.

and if they're not running the client manager? juts kick and yell at them to use it?

[3z3ki3l]

Originally Posted by demonstar55

and if they're not running the client manager? juts kick and yell at them to use it?

They literally cannot play without running the client manager. They cannot start the client without it and it is synced with the server... if the client manager stops the server will kick you.

[Leere]

That client manager is a complete failure of concept. It's an external add-on linking to the server with its own protocol. The server has no way of telling it apart from something imitating that protocol and sending that everything is just fine.

Face it, any kind of client-side protection is at best an attempt at making it too much of an effort to circumvent, and you've as good as lost that battle to begin with by needing to provide access to the client software in the first place.

The only way to make something like that work is to have OS support for segregated data where nothing can access your memory space or even physical data files. About the only way to currently even attempt something like that is to basically install the equivalent of a virus.

[KingMort]

True but it would stop a good deal of people... Maybe not the good ones but at least some.. and Some is better than None..

I like the idea

[3z3ki3l]

Originally Posted by Leere

That client manager is a complete failure of concept. It's an external add-on linking to the server with its own protocol. The server has no way of telling it apart from something imitating that protocol and sending that everything is just fine.

Face it, any kind of client-side protection is at best an attempt at making it too much of an effort to circumvent, and you've as good as lost that battle to begin with by needing to provide access to the client software in the first place.

The only way to make something like that work is to have OS support for segregated data where nothing can access your memory space or even physical data files. About the only way to currently even attempt something like that is to basically install the equivalent of a virus.

Wrong, wrong and wrong. Beta starts shortly, maybe you should register. And learn something.

[Yeormom]

Best way to stop hacking is to use Simple Client! Who's with me?

[Shokazullu]

Originally Posted by Leere

That client manager is a complete failure of concept. It's an external add-on linking to the server with its own protocol. The server has no way of telling it apart from something imitating that protocol and sending that everything is just fine.

Face it, any kind of client-side protection is at best an attempt at making it too much of an effort to circumvent, and you've as good as lost that battle to begin with by needing to provide access to the client software in the first place.

The only way to make something like that work is to have OS support for segregated data where nothing can access your memory space or even physical data files. About the only way to currently even attempt something like that is to basically install the equivalent of a virus.

Anything is hackable if you have the knowledge and time to do it. I can guarantee you that this will curb 95% or more of the eqemu hackers. All most of them know how to do is run MQ. If any of the few that would even have a chance of defeating the client manager decided to post a guide on how to defeat it. Yeorwned would have it fixed asap. IMO one of the best approaches to curbing hacking I have seen so far.

This is Paaco btw, someone fix my eqemu forum account :( I can't log into it or recover the password.

[KingMort]

If there is anything I can do over at Raid Addicts let me know..

May be a great place to test this out ? Anyway let me know

OH Also you may look into N-Protect they claim to be the Leader in online game security..

[SupaFreak76]

As far as I know the SoF expansion pack doesn't have a working MQ.. I may be wrong but /shrug just a thought

[leslamarch]

Originally Posted by SupaFreak76

As far as I know the SoF expansion pack doesn't have a working MQ.. I may be wrong but /shrug just a thought

Your wrong, I wish you had been right though. Like Paco said:

Anything is hackable if you have the knowledge and time to do it.

I think they have had MQ working on SOF since Trev started the bulk of the work for getting that client to work.