[Dragonskin]

Originally Posted by El Diablo War3Evo Do you know the if it was "actual" false positive by using a hacking software, or did players complain and tell you they wasn't hacking? People whom use hacking software know exactly what to tell server owners to get out of being banned or targeted for the hacks they use. They get special information from the people whom sell the hacks on how to get out of being banned from community based servers and they have forums where they go and talk to each other. I've had one guy tell me he was caught by "spinning his mouse" which is also known as spinhack, but what really caught him was a different detection method. In a sense he was using the excuse that a majority of people whom use hacking software use in order to "get out of jail card". It tends to work against server owners time and time again, because they don't trust their anti-hack or anti-cheat software, and they don't want to lose player base. The topic I'm talking about on War3Evo community forums: https://war3evo.info/forums/index.php/topic,3424.0.html So, keep in mind. You might "think" they are false reports if your not confirming it with actual hacking software. For those of you that don't know War3Evo, we "ban" players a different way. We do not "ban" them from our servers, we just make it really hard for them to benefit from using their hacks on our servers...which annoys them. It also shows people our system works, and makes people think twice before using any kind of hack on our system. Once caught in our system, it's like a ban. They can't get out of it, they can continue to play, but they'll be nerfed to hell. We believe that banning a player makes it too easy on them to have them know they've been caught. We want them to figure it out for themselves that they have been caught, and it makes things so much easier on our admin. On a different topic... I'm running a private version of Anti-Hack right now on our WarCraft server, and the alpha version of the new Anti-Hack on our jailbreak server. As soon as I incorporate all the new features into the new Anti-Hack, I'll be moving it to our WarCraft server. The older Anti-Hack, uses a modified version of SMACS and integerates itself into War3Source. Question: Would your server be willing to share data collected from players that it has detected using hacking software to a central server that would share with all other servers using the same plugin? Question 2: Do you know how to crash a client from the server? If so, could you please private message me your findings. I would like to add it to the library of crash code for Anti-Hack to use against people whom use hacking software. (Just disconnecting a client is being too "nice" to people whom use hacking software)

no, i were playing on our clan server with people i know and they didn't cheat. the basic snap angle was 45 i turned it down to 10, and the false positives began. now it is 20-25 and it works okay...

1. I like the idea, it reminds me of Smacbans.
2. No, only experienced in setting up servers. But I can see if I can find anything about client crashing
3. Also can you make antihack work with sourcebans?

also is there any beta version to test?

[El Diablo War3Evo]

Originally Posted by Dragonskin no, i were playing on our clan server with people i know and they didn't cheat. the basic snap angle was 45 i turned it down to 10, and the false positives began. now it is 20-25 and it works okay... 1. I like the idea, it reminds me of Smacbans. 2. No, only experienced in setting up servers. But I can see if I can find anything about client crashing 3. Also can you make antihack work with sourcebans? also is there any beta version to test?

There is an Alpha, but I personally wouldn't run it on a production server yet.

https://github.com/War3Evo/Anti-Hack

I'm right now developing the "Develop" branch and bringing it up to speed. I hope within a week or two, I'll have something worth putting on a production server for testing.

SMAC already works with sourcebans and will be an optional feature for Anti-Hack.

SMAC was already IRC compatible, and will be a optional feature in Anti-Hack.

Everything you know about SMAC is being updated in Anti-Hack and improved upon.

One of the major improvements will be tracking players data in a database, so you can get a clearer understanding if the player is a false positive or not. Another improvement will be the flexibility of the engine. You'll no longer have to recompile it to change internal engine settings.

[Dragonskin]

Originally Posted by El Diablo War3Evo There is an Alpha, but I personally wouldn't run it on a production server yet. https://github.com/War3Evo/Anti-Hack I'm right now developing the "Develop" branch and bringing it up to speed. I hope within a week or two, I'll have something worth putting on a production server for testing. SMACS already works with sourcebans and will be an optional feature for Anti-Hack. SMACS was already IRC compatible, and will be a optional feature in Anti-Hack. Everything you know about SMACS is being updated in Anti-Hack and improved upon. One of the major improvements will be tracking players data in a database, so you can get a clearer understanding if the player is a false positive or not. Another improvement will be the flexibility of the engine. You'll no longer have to recompile it to change internal engine settings.

Thanks your doing a huge service for the communities

Do you like feedback if there is an issue or bug with the anti-hack?

[friagram]

Really there is no point here.
There are some heuristics you can use, sure to check if players are cheating, but really you can never be sure if they are using semi-decent cheat software.

The server knows inky what it can see, and it is so very very easy to lie to the server. Really, the only thing smac does well is check client cvars, but even that does not work great if he client has a hack that replies with fake values.

Best case scenario you can detect eye angle violations, or players tracking others rough solid geometry, but again, the server handles this badly. A high ping player/client with high packetloss will give you many false positives. Similarly, there are plenty of situations where you can track players through solid geometry (the ray doesn't hit directly when you test, the player has a video card that renders poorly and draws shadows through walls, or they use their ears and listen to footsteps).

In the end, the only anti-cheat software that is going to work well is something on the client, which can monitor for external programs, injections, proxies, etc --- this is why we have vac. Though, even vac has problems with false positives like when using mice/keyboards with hardware macro support, or using pen input (i've gotten false positives from vac/punkbuster on both).

[Dragonskin]

Originally Posted by friagram Really there is no point here. There are some heuristics you can use, sure to check if players are cheating, but really you can never be sure if they are using semi-decent cheat software. The server knows inky what it can see, and it is so very very easy to lie to the server. Really, the only thing smac does well is check client cvars, but even that does not work great if he client has a hack that replies with fake values. Best case scenario you can detect eye angle violations, or players tracking others rough solid geometry, but again, the server handles this badly. A high ping player/client with high packetloss will give you many false positives. Similarly, there are plenty of situations where you can track players through solid geometry (the ray doesn't hit directly when you test, the player has a video card that renders poorly and draws shadows through walls, or they use their ears and listen to footsteps). In the end, the only anti-cheat software that is going to work well is something on the client, which can monitor for external programs, injections, proxies, etc --- this is why we have vac. Though, even vac has problems with false positives like when using mice/keyboards with hardware macro support, or using pen input (i've gotten false positives from vac/punkbuster on both).

Since smac, no one has complained about cheaters. But lately it has been complaining because the smac hasn't really been updated in 2 years. There is a way every time, but it needs constant updating.

[Dragonskin]

Hey, antihack out yet?

[El Diablo War3Evo]

I'm sorry, I have had to remove Anti-Hack from the public domain. I've released too much code already, and a lot of the hackers are able to by-pass some of my code already. I have officially dropped it as I do not want to release any more of the code that they could use against our own servers. I'm currently having to redevelop new code to combat the new hacks because of some of my old code doesn't work against them any longer.

I think something like this would need to keep a tight seal on it between only certain official servers only.

I will release a private copy to server owners I trust. I will not charge anyone for this sourcecode, but I will do extensive research on the server owners before they become part of the trusted group that will have access to frequent updates to anti-hack.

I may host a global database of "hackers caught" by my system and the server owners will be able to use that global database to fend off new hackers.

I have not written a questionnaire just yet for server owners to answer before obtaining my private copy, but they can join my forums and leave me a message they are interested and a little information about themselves and the games they plan to use anti-hack on.

You can register on our forums using your steam account, or the old fashion method (which does require a bit of team fortress 2 knowledge -- keeps out spam bots.)

https://war3evo.info/forums/index.php

Let me know about your community, your servers, the games your servers use, etc. After I research your servers, and play a few games on them. I will then inform you if you can become part of our trusted ring of Anti-Hack servers.

Just know the main reason behind this is because, if we expose the code to the public, then they will be able to create something against it.

If I release the code to you, I am trusting you with the source-code. I won't be just releasing the SMX, but I will include the SP as is required by GNU GPL.

I want to later add a "global database" of hackers caught using this system and allow anyone in our trusted community of server owners access to this database by either web or using software to query it.

[turtsmcgurts]

Originally Posted by friagram Really, the only thing smac does well is check client cvars,

I'm not sure if you're specifically referencing the aimbot module or whatever else, but I would say their antiwallhack is the best they've done. There isn't a reliable way to bypass it. Currently people do a shitty workaround using sounds. Sounds relay to the client their origin, so if you can hear a footstep you can display where the player was temporarily.

Definitely worth it if you can put up with the occasional person warping into existence. (if it even works anymore)

[jpwanabe]

I am interested in this a bit. Care to add me so we can talk a bit?
http://steamcommunity.com/id/JP-sama

[Sarabveer]

pffft