MQWarp/MQZone/MQGate Detector Discussion

[TheLieka]

Originally Posted by fault

gate DID trigger it, My cleric got hit with the punishments after he gated from one end of gunthak (fort) to the beach where I forgot I bound when doing the temp quest.

Gate did not trigger it. Zoning into Gunthak, a non-classic zone without source zonepoints in the database triggered it.

Dax

[Seksor]

I'm glad to see this initiative moving forward. I have a suspicion that there aren't many coders out there waiting to unleash new cheats for eqemu. Meaning, if the current cheats become obsolete, there won't, for time at least, be new cheats available. From what I understand the cheats that are available are old binaries that get passed around between users. For example, pre-built MQ2 installations that include warping and zoning functionalities. My next suspicion is that if these mq builds suddenly stopped working, most "polyboxers" would lack both the resolve to code workarounds and the money pay someone else to do it for them. When I played PEQ I felt like the majority of cheaters were using these hand-me-down binaries, and I'd love to see that age pass.

I don't play eq(emu) any more, but I still read up on the community. I love you guys. Seriously. Keep up the good work.

[Angelox]

I sort of knew it would come to this - I figure who ever multiboxes, also has multi forum accounts and friends that multi-box with multi forum accounts. So, you got 10 people whining over the same change, and it probably is the same guy!
You can pretty much control a game server like this too, and is why these fixes are urgent.
Something like this happened in the SOE EQ forums, where guilds would get together and bitch/bash everyone over anything they didn't like. It got so out of hand, one day I went to browse the forums, they were gone! hehe!
The forums came back, but when they did, the requirements changed, and all that crap was stopped.
It ain't gonna happen in these forums though

[cavedude]

Originally Posted by fault

CD there were more then 5 the hedge event triggered it on my entire party of 6 as well as other full parties as posted on PEQ.

I said 5 unique cases, not players. All together, about 40 players or so were effected. (including legitimate cheaters) A pair of players looked to be caught in a loop at one point, that's why I decided to pull the code. However, there was only one instance of the hedge event in the log table, and only 2 full groups were logged overall. If a third group claims they triggered the detector, they are lying. The logs don't lie.

We didn't get any log notifications for MQ2Gate, they were all MQ2Warp. But, could it be since he used Gate in his bind zone, that could have triggered the warp detector? I know Wild not too long ago changed how zoning works... does the detector take those alterations in account in this case? Perhaps it didn't realize he zoned, and so the gate registered as a false positive warp?

I do have a question, what is your code looking for exactly in zone_points? To use the example above, Gunthak does have 5 entries in zone_points, which represents the 5 zone-in points, pok, stonebrunt, dulak, and nadox x2. If you can offer suggestions, I'll have no problem updating PEQ's points to accommodate.

[Gonner]

I am all for this code being put in but I remember when it was on PEQ and it was horible. I play one toon, sometimes 2, and don't use MQ2 or WinEQ.

For the time it was implimented I was unable to really do anything. Now I am not saying it was just the code, could of been other factors but ever sense the code was placed in and even up to current PEQ has been unstable. Zone crashes, disconnects, random zone transport (like try zoning into FoB from Cabilis and ending up in Butcherblock), world server lost.

I am all for stopping warping, and other *cheats* but not at the cost of normal playablility.

[Angelox]

Originally Posted by Gonner

I am all for this code being put in but I remember when it was on PEQ and it was horible. I play one toon, sometimes 2, and don't use MQ2 or WinEQ.

For the time it was implimented I was unable to really do anything. Now I am not saying it was just the code, could of been other factors but ever sense the code was placed in and even up to current PEQ has been unstable. Zone crashes, disconnects, random zone transport (like try zoning into FoB from Cabilis and ending up in Butcherblock), world server lost.

I am all for stopping warping, and other *cheats* but not at the cost of normal playablility.

Primary goal of PEQ is to apply/test all reasonable code presented to them. You as a player are helping by posting bugs, or things you notice while playing, so they can get corrected. You will always be seeing problems, so long as they are always adding new code, but you also will see they get fixed.
There's no stopping or changing this policy, as someone has to test everything, and PEQ is that someone.

[fault]

are you taking into account selo/selo horse/run3 in that? as well as the COh bug? that will set off this quit a bit untill COH is fixed.


COH bug = if you COH someone and they don;t /camp before zoning, the next zone they do zones them into the center of the zone, since the person isnt zoning in on an actual zone point, poof it triggers this code.(this bug has been posted on the PEQ forums.

[Angelox]

I moved your updates and unlocked thread (incase you have more), Thanks again for your help!

[TheLieka]

Thanks Angelox. =)

Originally Posted by fault

are you taking into account selo/selo horse/run3 in that?

It's up to the ServerOp to decide what velocity they want to allow, as I just posted.

Originally Posted by fault

as well as the COh bug? that will set off this quit a bit untill COH is fixed.


COH bug = if you COH someone and they don;t /camp before zoning, the next zone they do zones them into the center of the zone, since the person isnt zoning in on an actual zone point, poof it triggers this code.(this bug has been posted on the PEQ forums.

There is no code that I can think of that should trigger this. Also, when I said that CoH wasn't covered before, I was mistaken. CoH does create an exemption on the server; not as a spell, but when it calls the MovePC (used by GMSummon, and others) function, it places the exempt on the player in the same way as a spell exemption.

Try out the code, if you actually experience issues, then feel free to post about them, and I'll see what I can do to help you with you issue.

Dax

[fault]

I am not talking about COH the spell.

you said in an earlier post, zones for which you have no zonepoint data on *like gunthak* would trigger the anti-cheat because it isnt taking it into accoutn and thinks the person is cheating.


So you have the bug where if you get cohed and dont /camp before you zone into a new zone, you zone into the zone dead center, where there is no zonepoint, therefore making the code believe you just used a cheat such as /warp or /zone in which case triggers the anti-cheat

See where Im getting at?

[TheLieka]

No, the bug where CoH puts you at the zone's safespot triggers neither the warp detector, nor the zone/gate detectors.

Dax

[TheLieka]

I just read the Gunthak thing that I think you were bringing back up, and I believe I misunderstood your question / statement before (or just explained it wrong due to exhaustion or stupidity).

I think that all of the detections are getting blurred here:
There are 2 distinct types: Zoning and Warping. Look for the broadcast message when you trigger it and make sure that you're talking about the right one (as their detection methods are completely separate).

Warping detects based on the client's movement over time, so if you travel across the zone faster than should be possible - it will hit you.

Zoning detects based on the `zone_points` table for (major key word coming up) "UNSOLICITED" zone requests. If you gate, the server zones you as part of the spell effect. If you are inter-zone #summoned by a GM, then the server zones you as part of that command. These things do not set off the /MQZone detection.

What DOES get checked are requests that originate from the client. These requests happen naturally too, so that's why we have to see if the client zone request is valid. The best way to do that is to see if there's a zonepoint near the client when it's sending that zone request. We check that with the x, y, and z columns on the`zone_points` table in the database.

Example:

Legitimate Zone Request:

• Fault is running through the tunnel in East Commonlands to meet up with his guild, he hits the North Ro zone point line.
• Fault's client sends a zone request to the server.
• The server checks Fault's last player position update location (his x, y, and z in East Commonlands) for the closest zone point in the table for East Commonlands.
• The server sees that based on Fault's location of

  (y, x, z = -2444, -62.5, 3.8)

  in the East Commons, the closest zone point is:
  

  (id, zone, number, y, x, z, heading, target_y, target_x, target_z, target_heading, zoneinst, target_zone_id)
  575, 'ecommons', 1, -2462, -105, 3.13, 0, 2604, 2903, 3.13, 999, 0, 34

• The server checks the distance between Fault and the zonepoint (sqrt(-2444 - -2462)^2 + (-62.5 - -105)^2). This answer is 2130.25.
• Since the distance between fault and the zoneline is less than 4000, the server determines that the zone request is valid, and processes it.

Illegitimate Zone Request:

• Fault is running through the tunnel in East Commonlands to meet up with his guild, is running late, so decides to use Macroquest /zone from the other side of the zone, near Nektulos forest.
• Fault's client sends a zone request to the server.
• The server checks Fault's last player position update location (his x, y, and z in East Commonlands) for the closest zone point in the table for East Commonlands.
• The server sees that based on Fault's location of

  (y, x, z = -726, 736, 51)

  in the East Commons, the closest zone point is:
  

  (id, zone, number, y, x, z, heading, target_y, target_x, target_z, target_heading, zoneinst, target_zone_id)
  575, 'ecommons', 1, -2462, -105, 3.13, 0, 2604, 2903, 3.13, 999, 0, 34

• The server checks the distance between Fault and the zonepoint ( (-726 - -2462)^2 + (736 - -105)^2 ). This answer is 3720977
• Since the distance between fault and the zoneline is more than 4000, the server determines that the zone request is invalid, cancels the zone request, and responds to the player in the method that the ServerOp has specified in his rules (any combination of logging or stunning, reduced mana and hps, debuffing, or just a simple Worldwide emote).

So when you're saying does this code handle this, or that, it's helpful if you can specify which feature you've had issues with in the past.

Now, with that said, I feel like I've been a pretty good sport with humoring you. If you genuinely care about these things, and actually want the answers, then by all means, I'll continue fielding your questions, but if you're just a sore-assed player that's pissed off, because you're afraid of losing your ability to /zone or /warp (as you're coming across in your posts), then save us both the time, and pretend that the code doesn't exist. I'm not telling anyone that the have to put this on their servers. I'm simply trying to assist ServerOps by helping them to become empowered when dealing with these script kiddies (let's not over glorify these people by calling them hackers). If you're opposed to ServerOps having the option to prevent the use of Macroquest on their servers, then clearly you're at the wrong show.

Basically: If you're interested in helping debug the code, the I welcome it, but if you're just posting shit like this in an attempt to derail the code, save us both the time.

Thanks,
Dax

[TheLieka]

My edit timer ran out - in the first example:

The server checks the distance between Fault and the zonepoint (sqrt(-2444 - -2462)^2 + (-62.5 - -105)^2). This answer is 2130.25.

should be:

The server checks the distance between Fault and the zonepoint ((-2444 - -2462)^2 + (-62.5 - -105)^2). This answer is 2130.25.

There is no sqrt in that formula.

Dax

[Angelox]

Originally Posted by TheLieka

I just read the Gunthak thing that I think you were bringing back up, and I believe I misunderstood your question / statement before (or just explained it wrong due to exhaustion or stupidity).


Basically: If you're interested in helping debug the code, the I welcome it, but if you're just posting shit like this in an attempt to derail the code, save us both the time.

Thanks,
Dax

Remember, I LIKE you and anyone else working to better this project - You are helping this project greatly and I don't need you getting upset and quiting over someone giving you the run-around.
So if someone pisses you off, they will go before you do. We are not going to let these forums get out of control anymore, as its alienates us from the project when it does.

Originally Posted by Angelox

Remember, I LIKE you and anyone else working to better this project - You are helping this project greatly and I don't need you getting upset and quiting over someone giving you the run-around.
So if someone pisses you off, they will go before you do. We are not going to let these forums get out of control anymore, as its alienates us from the project when it does.

what he said!

This is a great thing, people hacking on a free server that someone took the time to build is pure crap. This is one of the greatest submissions to EQEmu I have seen, and most people feel that way.

Just remember the more script kiddies that complain the better it is!