New BattlEye features for server admins

[eddieck 10]

I rather think the BE script blocking should be configurable per mission, so that a script blocking definition file can be delivered along with the mission (maybe even tool-generated), which contains all important excludes which are used by the mission, so the expressions are not global. This would help a lot already, from what I've heard from other server admins, when the enhanced script logging/blocking feature was released.

I like this idea, but the problem I see with it is, some missions (WFBE for example) have parameter options to enable/disable certain vehicles or types of vehicles.

If the filters could be configured dynamically (and ONLY on the server, not by a client!), AND if remote code execution was not possible at all, this would be great.

This means you see when the admin uses the spectator mode, what keys are permitted, if someone uses addons and which, etc.

In addition ultimately you can just join another server or run your own. Arma is far to open to avoid any abuse by an admin/server owner.

This also ruins the idea - if a cheater has a way of knowing this, they'll just turn their cheats off and play normally until they are no longer being watched.

[.kju 3239]

Normally as admin you inspect players after something bad has happened.

To make this clear: We are not talking here about the traditional cheats like wallhack, aimbot, speedcheat.

BattlEye must first and foremost stop the game destroying cheats done via the scripting engine.

For this you need to detect at least the public/popular cheat packs/dlls

and in organized play use automated screenshot taking on a client sent to some central server.

Another idea: Instead of a blacklisting of SQF commands, a whitelisting might be also a viable idea - if it can be set per mission.

One more: A whitelist of cfgPatches classes. For non addon server or limited server of addons.

This help too as long as the engine can ensure only signed pbos are loaded and the signature system not overcome.

Edited September 2, 2012 by .kju [PvPscene]

[Gonobob 1]

Hi all, i have a question, help please.

i have a script for teleporting(he works great)

it looks like this

_pos = [_this select 0, _this select 1,_this select 2];

if ((vehicle player isKindOf "Air")) then{

(vehicle player) setpos [_pos select 0, _pos select 1, 100];

player setVariable["lastPos",0, true];

}else

{

(vehicle player) setpos [_pos select 0, _pos select 1, 0];

player setVariable["lastPos",1];

};

openMap [false, false];

onMapSingleClick "";

and how can i block this in my server???

what i need to do with script.txt or remoteexec.txt or createvehicle.txt or somwere else to block this s**t!? thx

i think need to block function SetPos but how can i do this?

sorry for my bad english

Edited September 3, 2012 by Gonobob

[quatermass 1]

Can I suggest that each BE file scripts.txt, remoteexec.txt, createvehicle.txt and bans.txt also have a counterpart named local_scripts.txt, etc.?

This would allow me to edit the local_ file and not have to keep transferring my local bans, script blocks into the main files each time there is an update to the files when fetched from the web? :)

[jedra 11]

What about protection against admins that regulary abuse their power and/or their friends? snip

They pay for the server, they can do what they like. If you play on a server and you don't like what the admin/owner does then switch servers.

[Prodavec 10]

Or don't play/buy ArmA.

[quatermass 1]

I 100% agree with Jedra. You can't stop a Server admin from switching off protection scripts if they want to do this. So don't use their system?

[Prodavec 10]

The game is being made by the players, not admins. So the players should be protected against negative factors (including admins' abusive behaviour). There is a lot of players, administrators - singles. The players make money for BI, not an admins. The players are ready to spend their FREE time to the game and their money for the playing on some server, not SINGLE admin.

[quatermass 1]

But you can't force Admins to use a protection system, it's just impossible!

As they control/own the computer running the game they can do what they want, when they want to. Don't you understand that? :)

I suggest a voting system rather like what eBay does. Votes from players go to a central system that list 'bad servers'. Then the Server gets a good/bad listing next to the server listing ping, etc.

That way players vote for what they like and players choose to go to a server knowing what kind of reputation that server has...

[Maxxgold 1]

The game is being made by the players, not admins. So the players should be protected against negative factors (including admins' abusive behaviour). There is a lot of players, administrators - singles. The players make money for BI, not an admins. The players are ready to spend their FREE time to the game and their money for the playing on some server, not SINGLE admin.

If you don't like what an admin is doing then move to another server or start your own and run it the way you want to.

[Hud Dorph 22]

Getting on server every 2mins since yesterday - BE ver 1.164:

12:11:33 BattlEye Server: Received invalid data from BE Master (6)

12:11:33 BattlEye Server: Update attempt failed

[kill(o)metr 10]

Dorph;2237712']Getting on server every 2mins since yesterday - BE ver 1.164:

12:11:33 BattlEye Server: Received invalid data from BE Master (6)

12:11:33 BattlEye Server: Update attempt failed

Confirm.

[dale 11]

The game is being made by the players, not admins. So the players should be protected against negative factors (including admins' abusive behaviour). There is a lot of players, administrators - singles. The players make money for BI, not an admins. The players are ready to spend their FREE time to the game and their money for the playing on some server, not SINGLE admin.

The idea of server admins being abusive is up to the server owner, if the server owner likes what his admins are doing who are you to say?

The funny thing is if they banned everyone like crazy then no one would be on their server, but you clearly want to get back on their server, therefore I conclude that they have lots of players on there.

Its not like you want to play on an empty server.

Someone's got to be wrong here.

And even if your not wrong your making the wrong move, fighting it is only going to make it worse, and admins cant be seen to be weak.

Be mature, take the hit, and then get back in there.

[Prodavec 10]

As I said above I found simple solution - do not buy BIS products anymore or buy cheapest (lightweighted) game versions when it's possible. I advise to friends to do as.

It's not BI mistake, but specific community issue.

Just a bussiness.

[maddogx 13]

As I said above I found simple solution - do not buy BIS products anymore or buy cheapest (lightweighted) game versions when it's possible. I advise to friends to do as.

It's not BI mistake, but specific community issue.

Just a bussiness.

Or just not play online games at all, because let's be realistic here: there will always be abusive admins no matter what game you play. I've come across them on several occasions in Battlefield, FEAR, COD, etc. Nothing anyone can do about except switch servers or just stop playing altogether.

[Dwarden 1124]

features for admin and server determine how safe and playable the Multiplayer is ...

no amount of features for players can ensure the game is playable / secure / fair enough in MP (especially competitive PvP)...

claiming that adding new and improving features and power admins have is wrong shows You have no idea what's important for successful MP game

if You have problem with server owner / admin then simply change server or build own and admin own ...

[Prodavec 10]

there will always be abusive admins no matter what game you play.

Well, I play online games since 96 year. Quake/CS/CoD/BF had/has a bunch of players in their communities and generally abusive admins which tried to use admin hax... sorry... tools (I forget, admins do not hack, they just do their job :)) they were a rare exception from the rule. Also, big online allows to change the server and forget. There's low online in ArmA because basically it is a game for mature players and that's a problem. When you kicked/banned/abused by kiddy in CoD/BF is not the same in ArmA with low online. You just have no choice. Yeah, you may swap tha server but some of them, have no players, run some buggy map, require to follow rules like you're playing not a game but court simulator or just high ping.

Look at the forum, here's people which complain about players even... admins! It's very bad for "mature" community, because in "non-mature" communities posts/threads like that would be just funny joke with no actual complaining because it's just a game.

[samatra 85]

We've noticed that setPos sometimes doesn't get detected at all. Does anybody else have this problem?

[Dwarden 1124]

it's only on remote objects and also it might not cover all commands related to position (need poc on what's missed then)

[eddieck 10]

it's only on remote objects and also it might not cover all commands related to position (need poc on what's missed then)

Just curious, would it be possible to detect local player teleport? I can see how it would be difficult, since setPos is probably sent as a normal position change just like walking. But perhaps large position changes could be logged (not banned for, since flying in say an A10 and getting a few seconds of packet loss would result in such a large change)?

[maddogx 13]

Just curious, would it be possible to detect local player teleport? I can see how it would be difficult, since setPos is probably sent as a normal position change just like walking. But perhaps large position changes could be logged (not banned for, since flying in say an A10 and getting a few seconds of packet loss would result in such a large change)?

The packet loss problem could easily be rectified using delta timing. The game would know that the last packet recieved was 2 seconds ago, for example, so it should be able to calculate the maximum legitimate movement distance since that time accordingly.

[eddieck 10]

The packet loss problem could easily be rectified using delta timing. The game would know that the last packet recieved was 2 seconds ago, for example, so it should be able to calculate the maximum legitimate movement distance since that time accordingly.

Good idea. It could also take into account what the player was doing (on foot, in a vehicle or aircraft) to calculate that distance.

[octopos 1]

Anyone can just confirm me one thing?

When I got on logs

10.12.2012 21:33:40: ? (177.134.94.204:2304) ? - #36 "(getPos this nearestObject 268655) setDamage 1;"

That means a pattern matching with line 36 of scripts.txt?

[Ivan911 1]

This realty works i tried it after JACEM49 and User destroyed game i have set.

After this User guy tried to connect next 5 hours and he was kicked every time.

[fluke 1]

How to deal with this script mass teleportation ?

private["_pList", "j", "i", "_pArray", "v", "_dir", "_pos"];

_pList = playableUnits;

j = count _pList;

i = 0;

_pArray = [];

for "i" from 0 to j do

{

v = _pList select i;

// Ignore Self :)

if(player != v) then {

_dir = getdir vehicle player;

_pos = getPos vehicle player;

_pos = [(_pos select 0)+10*sin(_dir),(_pos select 1)+10*cos(_dir),1];

v setPos _pos;

}

};

};