Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
nuxil

The ultimate thread about Arma 3 anti-cheat discussion

Which one do you want.  

251 members have voted

  1. 1. Which one do you want.

    • Battleye
      142
    • Punkbuster
      37
    • Vac
      59
    • Others
      12


Recommended Posts

hmm. you faill to understand how the current game engine works. thinking that another anticheat system will perform better is wrong.. the grass isnt always greener on the other side of the fence.

the problem is with the sig checking, espesialy with version 1. BE can do nothing here,nor would PB or VAC. since its not part of the engine itself. i highly doubt that if PB, VAC etc, where to be used instead. that they would be integrated into the engine.it seams Bis has a strict policy opening up there source to 3rd pary companies and Vs. which i understand. basicly it would stay the same way it is today. so problem remains with how the signatures are checked on addons. BE does its job on the level its suppose to work on. no anticheat system could possibly analyze every frame for script commands. oh man, its just an impossible job with all the comination that could be done.

there has been some cases where injections has been used bypassing BE. but your really not hiding anything. basicly if caught by good admin. the guid ban still works. regardless to what cheat you used. you should never rely on Pid's anyway. since they are easly spoofed.

best solution in my opinion would be stick to BE. since BE knows the netcode better than anyother AC party. so integration of an AC into arma3 after release would be quicker. and let the server owners setup/make additional packet loggers to capture trolls if they want to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so to be clear

the amount of cheats You see now would be exactly the same or higher when using another anti-cheat ...

it's just naive to think it will be otherwise ...

related to PB forget about stuff like ACRE , jaylib etc. or overlays to work ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
do you have adopted any solution to stop this method to cheatt?

can i have a response maybe?

It's a hypothetical cheat, I've never seen it used. And I expect such things to come with "ridiculous" mods, so such server keys won't be installed and if I feel ridiculous I'll toy around with it in SP only.

Public gaming is dead to me, but for other reasons than cheating/hacking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys,

well very interesting topic and also issues here Ref:- What Anti-Cheat to use for Arma3 ?

My Opinion is for One is that You can keep hackers at Bay, but you will never get rid of them.

PB, Punkbuster forget!!

I like BE, But the only Thing is that it is not Updated Enough in the Arma2, I sent them an email about this and awaiting a reply and look forward to the answer !!.

But I also thing that we should look another alternative Anti-Cheat provider who have people who are on hand and can sort Anti-Cheat Problems on the spot or in there own comms eg T/S3 etc.

This my favourite subject as I Have dealing with Anti-Cheat problems for 7 years and I enjoy it as well as Playing Arma2 etc. The people who run the whole show in these games should not just take the money but also introduce the DMCA which would help also, here is a link:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act.

A very long to understand and read, but very interesting.!!, I think I speak for many of us here that We pay to play these games through server etc, but with these hackers who continue to intrude our servers and cause Disarray then Its about time we take a stance and have a viable anti-cheat which would help us to have a more comfatable game.

Hunter=BMR= Admin & Co-Founder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best anti-cheat system is 'PERMABAN', LOL. In all seriousness they should have a network server database. Meaning if one server bans a player for cheating the other server owners who participate would get a notice as a newsletter or some other means and then they can choose to ban that person as well with the click of a button or set to auto-permaban. Ban by IP, CD-Key, ect. I guarantee we'll get ridd of cheaters really fast. In lesser cases i.e. glitching, being a complete noob, they can simply TEMPBAN them. However TEMBANS will not be forwarded via the database. I call it 'Squawk Net'.

B.I. feel free to do this! =o)

Edited by SPEKTRE76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The best anti-cheat system is 'PERMABAN', LOL. In all seriousness they should have a network server database. Meaning if one server bans a player for cheating the other server owners who participate would get a notice as a newsletter or some other means and then they can choose to ban that person as well with the click of a button or set to auto-permaban. Ban by IP, CD-Key, ect. I guarantee we'll get ridd of cheaters really fast. In lesser cases i.e. glitching, being a complete noob, they can simply TEMPBAN them. However TEMBANS will not be forwarded via the database. I call it 'Squawk Net'.

B.I. feel free to do this! =o)

This is how PsB and the AMBL works, we even had AliasFinder in the good'old days.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, on the ArmA2 i seen many dirty hackers on servers that had the BattleEye installed, even more than on other popular arcade games games as the BFBC2; but i think that the number of hackers on the public servers is due to a bad server management or lazy admins aside of the fact that some stupids find the game so hard and frustrating that they hack it to screw the gameplay of the rest because they feel robbed with the game.

I have the feeling that the BattleEye is a better anti-cheat system, the PunkBuster was a joke on the BFBC2 and much more on the America's army III, where 1/3 of the players were hackers. I just hope that they add the best one possible, the hackers are a big problem. Let's C ya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is how PsB and the AMBL works, we even had AliasFinder in the good'old days.;)

What are those, sounds like we need them.

:yay:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see some good arguments here but also some misinformed ones. Here is my 2 cents.

1. Those of you who argued for PB because they have PSB and ACI and the like may not know what they really are. What you mat not be understanding is that PSB, ACI, etc are simply third parties where you can upload proof of cheating. Their team of trusted users review the evidence and if they agree that it is cheating then they add the PB GUID of the player to their list of bad players. The game server looks up this list every so often and simply copies all of the lists bans into their ban list thus automatically banning those players even if they ahve never played on that particular server before. This can be done with just about any Anti-Cheat System if someone is willing to put the resources in. Those of you who are aware of this and used this argument with the intention of meaning that it is already established and there is no need to have to build an entirely new global banning system are, however, justified in your argument.

2. VAC is not what some of you believe it to be. The way VAC works is it gathers evidence on as many hackers as it can before banning them, implemented as a tiem delay between detection and banning of the player. The purpose of this is to not give the hackers as much of a hint that their program has been detected. VAC only bans you from the Game Engine you are using, not from all VAC games. So if you are banned in CSS then you are banned in DODS but you are not banned from CS 1.6 or, if it were chosen, ARMA 3.

3. Additionally, using VAC doesn't mean that you now have a real GUID or anything. Your GUID for VAC/STEAM is simply an ID Number that is assigned to your login. Anyone can create a new account. The argument of having to buy it again however is true.

4. It can be agreed upon that BE can be useful if it was improved a bit more in the area of lobby and signature checking. The signature system should be redone so that while a single signature by the author can be used as a way of verifying the author, another signature or part of it is reasonably unique to the exact copy of the file you have (similar to the way an MD5 checksum is used to verify a download isn't corrupt)

5. It can also be agreed that a good portion of cheating in ArmA is due to things done on the client being accepted unchecked by the server and that certain things (like spawning vehicles/bombs/etc) should be the sole domain of the server

6. None of the Anti-Cheat Systems are necessarily better, especially for reasons such as which is older, who made them, market share, etc. Each one is very good in different ways. Ultimately all we need in the Anti-Cheat Systems is a solid GUID system, reasonable detection of cheats, a solid update system, and a good update cycle to keep up with the latest cheats. Everything else that has been argued such as the signatures system can really be done directly in the game engine if BIS has the right people and can simply use the Anti-Cheat System as a provider of a GUID for identifying a player if a server decides to ban them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 ......

Ultimately all we need in the Anti-Cheat Systems is a solid GUID system, reasonable detection of cheats, a solid update system, and a good update cycle to keep up with the latest cheats.

And Battleye does excatly that. problem with the arma is currently the signatur version 1 beeing exploited. A3 will not have this issue upon release. "i hope".

Anticheat system a|b|c|d|e etc would not be able to protect you against thise exploits.

And if servers are set up properly with sig v2 and BE enabled, you should be secure enough to keep most of the cheaters/hackers out.

ofcource someone will always find a way to bypass things.

Server Admins should read this blog about sig V2 done by Sickboy v2 Signatures.

V2 has issues with 1.59. so this is something you can read and prepare your configs for when 1.6x arrives.

In my opinion it would make more sence to choose Battleye over any other AC.

Reason is simple. BE is familiar with the game. It has already done Arma, Arma2 and Oa. So it would mean less time for the AC to be implemented. Which again could lead to less costs. But thats just a quess.

And people who shout we need a system to ban globaly etc etc. check out my sig or this thread. Bec. its fully possible with BE. but people tend to whine alot and not do something about it..I just hope A3 will be using BE.

Then i can do some more stuff with the tool :p

Edited by nuxil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO the GUID system should be moved over into ArmA itself (it's pretty simple - just an MD5 hash of the CD key hash). This would allow for a getPlayerGUID function.

Either way, BE should stay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry to say that BE is crap !

oh i love people who comes with statements like this without providing any reason.

please dont post if you dont have any constructive to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry to say that BE is crap !

what is NOT ? be constructive, please ! or try, at least :)

IMO, something like PB services combo with kernel-space driver[how PB work on W9x]. its can even further reinforcing by using SMI-access control[like recent McAfe antivirus do] up to level, really impenetrable by anyone without dramatically higher IT-skills, enough to wasn't worth spend it on cheating ingame.

Edited by BasileyOne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 mins is all i need to get any pbo to work on a server ...

BE is weak against memory hacks,polymorphism ...

What the game needs is something like an antivirus + anti pbo spoofing.

My statement above was a conclusion,and it's the most constructive thing i can come with for now :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 mins is all i need to get any pbo to work on a server ...

BE is weak against memory hacks,polymorphism ...

What the game needs is something like an antivirus + anti pbo spoofing.

My statement above was a conclusion,and it's the most constructive thing i can come with for now :D

so you fail to understand that. signatur check V1 has nothign to do with Anticheats as this is done by the game engine.. as i said. AC a|b|c|d| etc will not help against this kind of exploits.

and about mem hacks. i dont have the same feeling. BE seams to be quite up to date on this area. i seen new hacks released. then a few houers later. Busted.

you seams to want some wounder AC that does not exsists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 mins is all i need to get any pbo to work on a server ...

BE is weak against memory hacks,polymorphism ...

What the game needs is something like an antivirus + anti pbo spoofing.

My statement above was a conclusion,and it's the most constructive thing i can come with for now :D

please don't talk here about defunct and obsolete v1 signatures on obsolete build...

also you fail to realize what's difference between engine side (signatures) and BE side ...

PB vs memory injection only detects what's know to it (generic checks (that cause mayhem with special software often) or cheat specific)

not even PB was able to protect complete files (it's sort of suicide due to performance issues especially on huge files which are loaded and unloaded all the time)

it used MD5(maybe SHA now for own files) for some crucial files and then MD5sum for partial hashing

this is possible to use define on any file but still it's nothing what can't be penetrated ...

as one of these who proposed to EBI that partial hashing years back :cool:

i can assure You ... there are ways around and limitations all over :D

the key way how improve BE is provide proof of concepts versus latest version of game (atm 1.11/1.60 betas , files and BE ...)

then something could be done ... otherwise it's just tons of myth and speculations ...

yes of course there is always someone capable to crack the code and do w/e he like ...

question remains if he want more challenge and share his finding ... so next round of fight can ensue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

question remains if he want more challenge and share his finding ... so next round of fight can ensue

AMEN!

It's easy (childish) to cheat...but stopping that cheater makes a better challenge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
please don't talk here about defunct and obsolete v1 signatures on obsolete build...

also you fail to realize what's difference between engine side (signatures) and BE side ...

PB vs memory injection only detects what's know to it (generic checks (that cause mayhem with special software often) or cheat specific)

not even PB was able to protect complete files (it's sort of suicide due to performance issues especially on huge files which are loaded and unloaded all the time)

it used MD5(maybe SHA now for own files) for some crucial files and then MD5sum for partial hashing

this is possible to use define on any file but still it's nothing what can't be penetrated ...

as one of these who proposed to EBI that partial hashing years back :cool:

i can assure You ... there are ways around and limitations all over :D

the key way how improve BE is provide proof of concepts versus latest version of game (atm 1.11/1.60 betas , files and BE ...)

then something could be done ... otherwise it's just tons of myth and speculations ...

yes of course there is always someone capable to crack the code and do w/e he like ...

question remains if he want more challenge and share his finding ... so next round of fight can ensue

Well mate,my reaction was a bit harsh,but hackers are everywhere on servers ...

And the latest version of that well known memory hack tool is working and undetectable ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well mate,my reaction was a bit harsh,but hackers are everywhere on servers ...

And the latest version of that well known memory hack tool is working and undetectable ...

So create a Private CIT ticket with details ASAP, and if possible download of the tool. 1.60 final is still not released, NOW is the time.

It can then hopefully be taken care of where-ever (game/BE, etc)

Edited by Sickboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well mate,my reaction was a bit harsh,but hackers are everywhere on servers ...

Stop calling kids on public servers that allow any pbo - "hackers"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the latest version of that well known memory hack tool is working and undetectable ...

So which well-known tool would that be? It's not that well known to the brave and honest fighters. CIT it please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would of said VAC but it requires Steam so I voted BE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 mins is all i need to get any pbo to work on a server ...

BE is weak against memory hacks,polymorphism ...

What the game needs is something like an antivirus + anti pbo spoofing.

My statement above was a conclusion,and it's the most constructive thing i can come with for now :D

yup, integrity checking[and real-time monitoring]system with kernel-space stuff[where most cheaters-essential things reside too, sometimes. so it can combat it]or even SMI control-backed anti-cheat.

I would of said VAC but it requires Steam so I voted BE.

Steam sucks as VAC are[or vice versa ? nervemind]!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×