[sneaK]

Originally Posted by Fragkiller Other than that, anti-airstuck is uhm again, you cant just ban people who randomly stuck in air maybe cause of a lag or something else. And I guess you must meet a realy dumb cheater if he uses it more than 5x during few minutes..

You're thinking a little too narrowly. As OSWO has posted right below you, instead of blanket banning possible airstuck users, just block the ability to do it. Logging is also a very helpful tool, with after-the-fact bans.

Originally Posted by OSWO Sceptical on releasing other AC's since they're easily vulnerable to being patched.

Originally Posted by oaaron99 The problem with trying to make an anticheat on a site like am is that you need to release the code to the public. At this point any half decent cheat coder can figure out ways to bypass the detection methods.

That's the trouble with anti-cheats, it's always a game of cat-and-mouse with cheat developers. If you were to make an anticheat publicly accessible, with closed source, it wouldn't really matter. Sourcemod plugins are easily decompiled anyways. This would be in violation of the SM license as well, obviously. So it comes down to making the anticheat public or not. Even if you shared the anticheat with "trusted communities" the amount of hands it passes through makes it easily leakable.

Originally Posted by MrDanne It would be a dream having a cheat free CS GO, but I think it is not very likely until Valve do anything about it. Looks pretty clear that they do not want to stop cheats, it is a good business for them when people must buy new game several times. I think we need some kind of client side application to have a chance against this. Punkbuster was a good idea but of course you could find a way around that one too. But regarding SMAC, it is sad kigen and the SMAC developers couldn't come to an agreement so the development could officially get going. Guess that won't happen. blackhawk74, are you willing to share your smac version maybe? Could PM me or so

I can confidently say we'll never have a cheat free CS:GO, but I think my original goal would be catching as many cheaters, as effectively as possible.

A client-side anticheat isn't currently something I'm thinking about, I'm thinking practically for community servers, such as SMAC. Unfortunately there's only so much a server-side anticheat can do, obviously.

It truly is a shame. As I've state above, the tweaks I've done really aren't too significant - minor hard value tweaks, for example aimbot minimum deviation, number of autotrigger detections, added default cvars to check for, etc. If you open up the source you'll see what hard values to tinker with.

Originally Posted by Benoist3012 Scrapping smac, and starting from something new would be better, I've been working on my own anti-cheat, and I won't share it to public as well, because public source anti-cheats kills the whole point of it.

I spoke with GoD-Tony regarding this, and he agreed with your sentiment. Essentially an entire rewrite would be needed to create a new, effective and up-to-date anticheat.

This is the trouble though, now each community is forced to develop their own anticheat, when a much faster, and effective remedy to cheaters would be several communities & devs working together. The side effect would be more access to the code, and cheats getting around it, however any sort of newly discovered bypass could be discussed and squashed quickly.

[headline]

Originally Posted by blackhawk74 -snip-

A public anti-cheat which is moderately effective is still a good baseline for plenty of server operators to rely on. No one creates an anticheat without the understanding that people will get around it. As new methods of cheating arise, having a baseline platform in which everyone can contribute to and expand on will be the most effective. Those who want their private anticheats will still create their own if needed.

[Franc1sco]

Originally Posted by oaaron99 The problem with trying to make an anticheat on a site like am is that you need to release the code to the public. At this point any half decent cheat coder can figure out ways to bypass the detection methods. Anyway that's just my opinion

No if the anticheats is a Metamod:Source plugin since it can be closed source.

[blaacky]

If you want help with detecting strafe hacks you can add me on Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/blaackyy/
I've been improving mine lately and it detects quite a lot of stuff and I have some more ideas as well that I need to implement.

[africanspacejesus]

Originally Posted by Franc1sco No if the anticheats is a Metamod:Source plugin since it can be closed source.

Maybe we should get some of the best scripters from this site to make a very high quality new anti-cheat system coded in Metamod. This system could then be sold via the forums for a constant reasonable price. This would support the developers and these forums. Depending on the quality, it would be very highly requested. The whole system and purchasing would be regulated by moderators on here.

[headline]

Originally Posted by africanspacejesus Maybe we should get some of the best scripters from this site to make a very high quality new anti-cheat system coded in Metamod. This system could then be sold via the forums for a constant reasonable price. This would support the developers and these forums. Depending on the quality, it would be very highly requested. The whole system and purchasing would be regulated by moderators on here.

This would very much so go against the spirit of AlliedModders

[africanspacejesus]

Originally Posted by Headline This would very much so go against the spirit of AlliedModders

Just an idea. I thought that the developers should be paid because some of the very best may only do it if they are to be paid. I'm open to other suggestions.

[psychonic]

Regarding open source versus closed source anti-cheat, you should be coding against general cheat behavior rather than against specific cheats. If you're relying on "security by obscurity", you're setting yourself up for failure.

[sneaK]

Originally Posted by psychonic Regarding open source versus closed source anti-cheat, you should be coding against general cheat behavior rather than against specific cheats. If you're relying on "security by obscurity", you're setting yourself up for failure.

I couldn't agree with this more. In fact, there are several up-to-date cheats that are open source and very public, for example, that could be reverse engineered, just like any server-sided anticheat.

I think in the coming weeks I'm going to start working on some basic things that I can do and start posting them up, however fully understanding how some systems work and how to counter them may be a bit tough for me since I don't really come from a programming background. Anyone else is more than welcome to come forward with their own ideas and work.

I'll probably start on the following first:
Anti-airstuck (implement Oswo's post)
Anti-show spectators
Anti-fake lag (maybe)
Anti-anti flash & smoke

I'd really love to make this a public, collaborative movement to allow us community server owners help defeat cheaters, since this is definitely becoming a huge, growing problem.

[Chdata]

The anti-cheater's problem is figuring out how to stop cheats.

The cheater's problem is figuring out how to get around anti-cheats.

Both people are doing the same thing, against each other.

However at some point, you can reach a limit where one can't beat the other.

The limit where an anti-cheat can never stop a cheater is if the cheater makes a bot that mimics the human eye and hand and literally aims in a way that's a mix between humans and robot, reaction times incorporated.

That's not realistic for a cheater to make of course, it's more likely to be something that spoofs the angle they aim at or something.

The anti-cheater would then try to detect these awkward spoofs or something.

Now the cheater has to avoid doing that or find another way to do it.

The cycle continues.