Cheat and cheat prevention discussion

[PuNkErS 0]

thx bis

[Gadger 0]

w00t, nice BIS!

Quote[/b] ][iEF] PuNkErS

Might wanna change that Mauro before Beckbond see's

[Waterman 0]

w00t, nice BIS!  

Quote[/b] ][iEF] PuNkErS

 

Might wanna change that Mauro before Beckbond see's    

LOL

Also look out for the famous 6787 ID... dunno how many people I've seen use it. Add it to your ban list and you will get rid of cheaters and pirated ofp using players.

[Norris 0]

Also look out for the famous 6787 ID... dunno how many people I've seen use it. Add it to your ban list and you will get rid of cheaters and pirated ofp using players.

Well that way you'd get rid of many non-cheating players. I really wouldn't advise banning IDs, especially 'public' ones - as you said many people are using them and it would be a bit 'racist' to say they all cheat, wouldn't it?

[Gadger 0]

Also look out for the famous 6787 ID... dunno how many people I've seen use it.  Add it to your ban list and you will get rid of cheaters and pirated ofp using players.  

Well that way you'd get rid of many non-cheating players. I really wouldn't advise banning IDs, especially 'public' ones - as you said many people are using them and it would be a bit 'racist' to say they all cheat, wouldn't it?

No, but they all didn't buy the game so ban them anyhow.

[Norris 0]

No, but they all didn't buy the game so ban them anyhow.

Well that's just stupid, honestly. There's nothing you would gain by banning them, but you could easily have lots of fun playing with them. The more the merrier.

[Gadger 0]

No, but they all didn't buy the game so ban them anyhow.

Well that's just stupid, honestly. There's nothing you would gain by banning them, but you could easily have lots of fun playing with them. The more the merrier.

I'd gain the satisfaction of banning a worthless prick who's techincally stealing.

[Norris 0]

No, but they all didn't buy the game so ban them anyhow.

Well that's just stupid, honestly. There's nothing you would gain by banning them, but you could easily have lots of fun playing with them. The more the merrier.

I'd gain the satisfaction of banning a worthless prick who's techincally stealing.

Well in that case you'd cause a very big collateral damage, technically. But as I said it's your own decision. If you want to drop down to their level then go right ahead. Just don't forget you could be having fun instead of holding and nurturing some irrelevant grudges.

[Gadger 0]

No, but they all didn't buy the game so ban them anyhow.

Well that's just stupid, honestly. There's nothing you would gain by banning them, but you could easily have lots of fun playing with them. The more the merrier.

I'd gain the satisfaction of banning a worthless prick who's techincally stealing.

Well in that case you'd cause a very big collateral damage, technically. But as I said it's your own decision. If you want to drop down to their level then go right ahead. Just don't forget you could be having fun instead of holding and nurturing some irrelevant grudges.

How is it irrelevant? It's banning warez users, they wan't to play, they buy the game simple as. I'd say the majority of OFP servers have this number in there banlist anyhow, I know mine does already.

It isn't a grudge, its keeping OFP cheat and warez free. If somebody can't be arsed to shell out ten bucks for a great game they don't deserve to play it.

[joltan 0]

Nowadays OFP is dead cheap even if bought new (GOTY for 15 Euros and less), so if they don't even want to pay that little money they don't deserve to play. There's a great demo out that is good enough to test wether they like the game or not.

[benu 1]

I actually have written a script that gets me all the warez ids from my server logs and bans them. I have some ids that were used by more than 250 different nicks. I guess i lose players that way, but only the "non-dedicated" ones. And those are more likely to disrupt a game anyway.

[sicilian 0]

Stop discussing here plz...

It's layed out. The main problem which causes this so called "super cheat" is the flashpoint.exe!

Nothing more!

Nothing more to explain.

(BI watch your mails)

[backwoods 0]

Its no supercheat, just people using Maphacks. Now they edit the mpmissioncache setting with a hex tool in flashpointresistance.exe to bypass file checks. Same cheats as before, just different ways to get around them.

[RN Malboeuf 12]

Well that's just stupid, honestly. There's nothing you would gain by banning them, but you could easily have lots of fun playing with them. The more the merrier.

bull shit, by banning them you show you support this game

guys that dont buy the game can rot in MP Limbo for all we care

I remember 2 squds a few years ago asking us to let a member with 6787 play in official matches

we told them to go to hell too

heh

[Norris 0]

Well that's just stupid, honestly. There's nothing you would gain by banning them, but you could easily have lots of fun playing with them. The more the merrier.

bull shit, by banning them you show you support this game

guys that dont buy the game can rot in MP Limbo for all we care

I remember 2 squds a few years ago asking us to let a member with 6787 play in official matches

we told them to go to hell too

heh

It's one thing having your own opinion... but you're just being an ass. A suck-ass if I'm more correct. Your post has to be the most... ok, I'll stop here as this is getting nowhere, really.

[sicilian 0]

Its no supercheat, just people using Maphacks.  Now they edit the mpmissioncache setting with a hex tool in flashpointresistance.exe to bypass file checks.  Same cheats as before, just different ways to get around them.

Thats not the truth!

A maphack is completly a different thing!

You're right when you say they changed the exe but not as you think the mpmissioncache!

We need a way to verify the exe!

Perhaps it could send it's handle id or it's own checksum to the server. Or other way round... the server requests the checksum if you start to connecting to a server.

[Norris 0]

Perhaps it could send it's handle id or it's own checksum to the server. Or other way round... the server requests the checksum if you start to connecting to a server.

Good idea, but it could be bypassed by simply sending the cheksum of original '.exe'. One would think it would already be implemented if it were that easy, I'm afraid.

[kegetys 2]

I'd imagine that checking the actual internal loaded mission file during the briefing would work for any edited missions (ie. #debug checkfile mpmissions\__cur_mp.intro\mission.sqm, replace intro with the whatever island the mission is on.)

[sicilian 0]

Good idea, but it could be bypassed by simply sending the cheksum of original '.exe'.   One would think it would already be implemented if it were that easy, I'm afraid.

It's not that easy I know. I've explained more detailed in another thread or mail I think.

e.g. using algorithms that "randomly"(better to say use 1 of 100 possibilities. That would be enough to secure the data.) encrypt the data which will be sent to the server. That way it's very hard to find out the right way to change the values.

Then send a second data packet which contains a fixed encrypted value to determine the server knows which of the 100 possiblities it should take to decrypt the packets.

^^ only one way and only one idea...

But the executable is and will stay the spinning point!

@Kegetys

It's not neccessary to check missions cause nobody can use them! It is NOT realized with a modified mission as I try to explain before!!!

[PuNkErS 0]

Quote[/b] ]Might wanna change that Mauro before Beckbond see's    

opssssss

i forgot to change the tag lol

[sicilian 0]

opssssss

i forgot to change the tag lol

 

Is this regarding to a serious problem? I don't think so.

[DanAK47 1]

The way I have seen sets off checkfiles with modified config - cfg/ .

You would think lots of people would notice this, but in a crowded server with people chatting and joining, the message can get scrolled off screen pretty fast. Or someone could just join an empty server and wait for people to come in. Then there would be no way to know they had a modified file.

[sicilian 0]

The way I have seen sets off checkfiles with modified config - cfg/ .

You would think lots of people would notice this, but in a crowded server with people chatting and joining, the message can get scrolled off screen pretty fast. Or someone could just join an empty server and wait for people to come in. Then there would be no way to know they had a modified file.

It is always the task of the admin! If he wants to hold clean his server he has to observe the chatbox carefully...

And you can also scroll back(pageup/down) to former messages if you couldn't read it because it was to fast.

[DanAK47 1]

Yes, but why scroll up when you didn't notice it in the first place?

Modified configs need to show up red or with the player ID in #userinfo. They are too easy to miss when lots of people are talking.

[NKVD 0]

looks like the solution to most cheats (not all of them) would be to be able to check for modified .exe file

for instance, server patch 1.97 could:

a) detect whether user is running beta or fina 1.96 - if none of both it would display filename and message that it is modified with recomendation to kick that player

b) would display each user's missioncache folder if modified from server's one (or original OFP)...

c) somehow would scan fast res/ofp folder for unknown dirs

I think most of these are very possible to do...and please, don't think of me as someone that tells someone what to do..I just think that it will be better to start thinking of anti-cheat system before OFP-2 comes out because I think multiplayer is the major fun element in this game.