PDA

View Full Version : UTAN to be integrated into UT:XMP


Zur
21st Oct 2004, 08:12 PM
Read more about this here :

http://www.unrealadmin.org/forums/showthread.php?p=44674

zombiewoof
21st Oct 2004, 09:45 PM
interesting.

Panthera
21st Oct 2004, 09:57 PM
Read more about this here :

http://www.unrealadmin.org/forums/showthread.php?p=44674
Doesn't sound very favorable.

Dandeloreon1984
21st Oct 2004, 10:08 PM
it is fairly favorable, in practice :D it will prevent people/groups, like TKL.

IndianPsycho
21st Oct 2004, 10:52 PM
Doesn't sound very favorable.

How's globally banning cheaters not very favorable?

washuu
21st Oct 2004, 11:25 PM
A cheater is a cheater, and should be treated like one. If they want to play again they better cough up 40 bucks for another ut2k4 cd-key. Second offenders should get IP and cd-key ban.

Dandeloreon1984
22nd Oct 2004, 01:26 AM
A cheater is a cheater, and should be treated like one. If they want to play again they better cough up 40 bucks for another ut2k4 cd-key. Second offenders should get IP and cd-key ban.

Umm, ip bans won't work on those who live in cities like los angelus... ip addresses change on those locations, and it will cause large issues ;), but cd key ban after cd key ban will work, along with bans on warez cd keys :D

Air7725
22nd Oct 2004, 05:44 AM
I think the main reason for this is to stop lamers Ie TKL. Think we'll let epic deal with most of the cheaters

RaptoR
22nd Oct 2004, 06:19 AM
Umm, ip bans won't work on those who live in cities like los angelus... ip addresses change on those locations, and it will cause large issues ;), but cd key ban after cd key ban will work, along with bans on warez cd keys :D
We're not talking about IP bans, but GUID bans. If your GUID is banned, you need to get yourself another CD key before you can play again.

Air7725
22nd Oct 2004, 06:47 AM
We're not talking about IP bans, but GUID bans. If your GUID is banned, you need to get yourself another CD key before you can play again.

Whats with the gman avatar? Dont say you've gone all hl2 on us ;)

GotBeer?
22nd Oct 2004, 10:56 AM
Originally Posted by Limited
UTAN: UTXMP is only admin'd by the developers of UTXMP, it will contain no server side configuration. To use the standard UTAN on UTXMP servers will simply mean installing the server actor as before. UTXMP will have its own global ban list which is not linked to the current UTAN ban list, this cannot be disabled/deactivated/removed. The current UTAN admins are not admining the ban appeals, that is being left to the UTXMP developers.
So that means FMI will be running UTAN? Um...I love you guys? :)

Dandeloreon1984
22nd Oct 2004, 12:17 PM
We're not talking about IP bans, but GUID bans. If your GUID is banned, you need to get yourself another CD key before you can play again.
I support guid bans, i was saying that ip bans will cause problems ;) so guid after guid ban should be great :D after all, it is fairly costly to haft to continually rebuy 2k4 to play online ;).

Naib
22nd Oct 2004, 01:44 PM
Nice one FMI :)

Just the knowledge that there is a gobal ban system stops a lot of the problems. TKL would never have done what they did knowing they could be banned from all xmp servers.

Panthera
22nd Oct 2004, 03:40 PM
it is fairly favorable, in practice :D it will prevent people/groups, like TKL.
If UTAN put the control in the hands of the person running the server then I don't see a problem, but having play restricted by those that make the mod is another matter.

dutch_gecko
22nd Oct 2004, 04:22 PM
If UTAN put the control in the hands of the person running the server then I don't see a problem, but having play restricted by those that make the mod is another matter.
If a server admin wanted to ban someone temporarily as a warning, it's important that they can do this without banning that person from everything. Bear in mind that if I had a grudge against someone and all server admins had access to UTAN, then I could start a server, invite that person, and BAN HIM FOREVER MUAHAHAHA. That's why only the mod creators have a global ban.
If you encounter problematic players, I'm sure you could inform FMI ;)

Orv
23rd Oct 2004, 07:28 AM
it is fairly favorable, in practice :D it will prevent people/groups, like TKL.

Pardon my apparent ignorance, but what precisely is UTAN, and what are people/groups like TKL?
I'm gathering that UTAN is some type of global banning software... but how does it work?


--Orv

IndianPsycho
23rd Oct 2004, 07:34 AM
Basically there's this "black list" of GUIDs on a server somewhere, which is maintained by us. This lists contains mostly proven cheaters. Now, whenever a person tries to connect to a UTXMP server, the server first checks if the connecting person is on "the list". If he is, he'll be unable to connect.
With the "standalone" version of UTAN, server admins were able to turn this on/off, however in UTXMP this has been built in to core files and cannot be disabled.

fireball
23rd Oct 2004, 09:28 AM
What does one have to do to get on this list? Proven aimbot or just map exploiting?

Naib
23rd Oct 2004, 10:13 AM
What does one have to do to get on this list?

1: Moaning about the hud
2: Repeatedly asking when the mod is going to be out
3: Anyone that makes a map that has more then 4 artis

and of course:

4: Anyone that makes a mod that involves gas trurrets

;)

[GDC]Faust
23rd Oct 2004, 10:24 AM
Ok, It'll be Gas-mines, then :P

Air7725
23rd Oct 2004, 10:33 AM
1: Moaning about the hud

3: Anyone that makes a map that has more then 4 artis

;)

:tup:

fireball
23rd Oct 2004, 10:41 AM
4: Anyone that makes a mod that involves gas trurrets
;)
Smoke turrets!
(AKA "holy **** my framerate!)

Killinya
23rd Oct 2004, 12:22 PM
If a server admin wanted to ban someone temporarily as a warning, it's important that they can do this without banning that person from everything. Bear in mind that if I had a grudge against someone and all server admins had access to UTAN, then I could start a server, invite that person, and BAN HIM FOREVER MUAHAHAHA. That's why only the mod creators have a global ban.
If you encounter problematic players, I'm sure you could inform FMI ;)

Keep in mind that server admins can choose to use standard UTAN also, so all the global 2k4 bans would be possible(made by the crickety's and Limited's). Then Administrators of a server using UTAN can add server bans to the servers they control (Ex: BBF currently has 2 2k4 servers with its own ban list).

So, with the capability built in, you will have 3 levels of UTAN bans (xmp Global, 2k4 Global, and admin owned) in addition to the kick/ban functionality built into 2k4.

TKL will be buying alot of CD's/Keys... :lol:

Jackal
23rd Oct 2004, 02:32 PM
so why can't they just start up a server, and ban everyone. random people, unban them selves what not.

Panthera
23rd Oct 2004, 09:09 PM
With the "standalone" version of UTAN, server admins were able to turn this on/off, however in UTXMP this has been built in to core files and cannot be disabled.
Thus my complaint - call me a control freak but I personally don't like others having control over who plays on my server. I'm aware that this can be countered by the argument that I don't have to run a UTXMP server, but that's besides the point. :)

Bleeder
24th Oct 2004, 02:28 AM
I forget, but wasn't there something more to it than a CD-key / GUID ban? There are still working (yet tough to find) keygens for certain patch-levels of UT2K4, so wouldn't that still be a problem? I'm just saying, the people you want to ban are the people who can usually find these things (keygens/hax/etc), so I think the system is going to need to be smarter than that, somehow.

Air7725
24th Oct 2004, 02:31 AM
I forget, but wasn't there something more to it than a CD-key / GUID ban? There are still working (yet tough to find) keygens for certain patch-levels of UT2K4, so wouldn't that still be a problem? I'm just saying, the people you want to ban are the people who can usually find these things (keygens/hax/etc), so I think the system is going to need to be smarter than that, somehow.

Keygens wont work online. You need a Vaild key to playonline and for a key to be vaild it needs to be on the master server. The key only become vaild once its been brought/shiped

Bleeder
24th Oct 2004, 02:44 AM
Keygens wont work online. You need a Vaild key to playonline and for a key to be vaild it needs to be on the master server. The key only become vaild once its been brought/shiped
That is a bit like people who said "there are no hax in u2xmp". Don't tell me this is going to be another "denial" thing like, for example, the u2xmp shotgun "firetime" hax (until someone finally posted videos of it).

IndianPsycho
24th Oct 2004, 02:55 AM
It's not a denial thing, it's a fact. Every legal CD Key for 2K4 ever made is stored somewhere on a server. If your CD Key is not on that list, you can't get in the server, simple as that.
Sure there are "hacked" servers which don't check your cd key, but that's besides the point here.

Bleeder
24th Oct 2004, 03:05 AM
Ugh, I am -not- talking about the gens that randomly generate keys. I guess I should say key lists instead of gens. There are new, valid keys found daily thanks to people who run "idiot-box" PC setups with no firewall, file/printer sharing enabled, simple/blank Administrator password, etc. That is the crap I'm talking about.

Sadly, I think UTAN is about as good as it's going to get. I don't know what else can really be done.

dutch_gecko
24th Oct 2004, 03:30 AM
Even if someone finds a valid key to exploit, AFIK you can only have one instance of any key online at a time.

Jackal
24th Oct 2004, 08:15 AM
yes, one key can only be online at any one time.

WolfmanK
24th Oct 2004, 09:56 AM
My 2 cents...

GG FMI!!!!

Cheaters suck

less cheaters = more gooder

dutch_gecko
24th Oct 2004, 02:20 PM
My 2 cents...

GG FMI!!!!

Cheaters suck

less cheaters = more gooder
Excellently worded :tup:

[Lithium]
24th Oct 2004, 02:32 PM
This is a really bad idea. If I run a server I should have the authority to determine wether or not you can play on it, not some list on some server that is out of my control. We all talk about how banning cheaters will be so great, but who gets to decide who is cheating and with what "proof". Not only that but there are many other ways I can see FMI using this "feature" which are not cool.

IndianPsycho
24th Oct 2004, 02:38 PM
Epic can also globally ban people from all UT2K4 servers. You have no control whatsoever about that. Not only that but there are many other ways I can see Epic using this "feature" which are not cool.

How's it different?

[Lithium]
24th Oct 2004, 02:49 PM
Well if Epic already bans cheaters why would you need to? My main concern is who decides who is cheating and how? Bottom line is someone decides who gets to play who is other than the guy who bought a CD key.

Xaero
24th Oct 2004, 03:19 PM
I personally think this is a good thing. You guys express concern over abuse of the ban system, but honestly, FMI wouldn't ban someone without SOLID proof (demos), likely multiple reports of this person, etc. Its part of the mod...if someone cheats, FMI doesnt want them around, I don't why this is a problem.

[Lithium]
24th Oct 2004, 03:36 PM
They could always leave the decision of banning unwanted players in the hands of the server admins which is where it should be.

Captain Kewl
24th Oct 2004, 03:39 PM
It is.

Pro^Kp
24th Oct 2004, 03:43 PM
I personally think this is a good thing. You guys express concern over abuse of the ban system, but honestly, FMI wouldn't ban someone without SOLID proof (demos), likely multiple reports of this person, etc. Its part of the mod...if someone cheats, FMI doesnt want them around, I don't why this is a problem.

So what your saying is that FMI can log in to any server as admin and Globaly ban anyone they want?

either that or someone whows then a demo and FMI magically know there guid.

and also.

1 last thing. if someone does abuse this system for whatever reason and however reason, and someone does get wrongly banned only FMI can unban them and getting hold of one of the FMI guys is hard at the best of times.

Killinya
24th Oct 2004, 03:55 PM
So what your saying is that FMI can log in to any server as admin and Globaly ban anyone they want?

either that or someone whows then a demo and FMI magically know there guid.

and also.

1 last thing. if someone does abuse this system for whatever reason and however reason, and someone does get wrongly banned only FMI can unban them and getting hold of one of the FMI guys is hard at the best of times.

No, FMI will not log onto ur server anymore than Atari does. Only FMI can do this global ban, only they can "undo" it.

IF standard UTAN is also loaded, then those rules apply.
See link for more "standard UTAN" info
http://www.unrealadmin.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6205

Again, based on experience with Standard utan (BBF uses it), Abuse is not an issue at a global level. At a individual server level, how is it different than what we can do today with our u2xmp servers?

IndianPsycho
24th Oct 2004, 04:18 PM
So what your saying is that FMI can log in to any server as admin and Globaly ban anyone they want?

either that or someone whows then a demo and FMI magically know there guid.


It's still up to server admins; if a demorec is made, which clearly shows that a player is cheating, the server admin will have to provide the GUID. If he refuses to do so, then that's that.

1 last thing. if someone does abuse this system for whatever reason and however reason, and someone does get wrongly banned only FMI can unban them and getting hold of one of the FMI guys is hard at the best of times.

Only FMI can globally ban.

Xaero
24th Oct 2004, 04:20 PM
"Big Brother" is going to ban you.

WolfmanK
24th Oct 2004, 04:44 PM
Lithium is clearly a cheater.... ;)

serioulsy dood.. I understand your concern but its not like that. BBF has been running UTAN on its ONS and ASSULT servers for months now... it works fine and no one logs into our server but us. It a means of tracking cheaters before they become an issue on your server. I belive you can use it as a preventative or not, but [BBF]Killinya knows more about that, than I do.

Zur
24th Oct 2004, 06:43 PM
']Well if Epic already bans cheaters why would you need to?

Epic have other things to do and, despite Dr. Sin being portrayed as keeping track of bans, I think his job description means he has other more important tasks.

[Lithium]
24th Oct 2004, 07:15 PM
I only believe that the server admin should have the final say in wether or not a player is banned on their server. From what I understand the decision is FMI's first then the server admins which is wrong.

Xaero
24th Oct 2004, 07:31 PM
Ok...

a TKL clown joins your server with no admin around....he's vote kicked off. 5 minutes later he rejoins the server using the name of a more respected player and keeps up the same *******ry. still, no admins around, vote kicked...he decides to move on. He comes back at a later time still aliased as another player, this time the admin is around, bans him. The player that was aliased joins the server some time later, the admin gets pissed, bans him. (thinking he had to ban the same player twice). So now you have this player, and possibly his/her clan mad at you for banning without a reason. Based on your reaction here, I can't see you changing your position on the banning.

With the UTAN enable, FMI finds this TKL joker and simply bans his GUID from UT:XMP right out. No mess, no fuss.

Sounds far-fetched, right? No. Its happened, and happened multiple times.

FMI would be stupid to NOT include such a system in UT:XMP after seeing what just a handful of kids without enough adult supervision will/can do. Your saying its better to just ignore the past and not learn from what has already happened?

[Lithium]
24th Oct 2004, 07:43 PM
I'm saying there should be the choice. Besides that wont happen any more because you can now ban based on GUID, simply ban the culpret and thats it game over for him. Having to ban people by IP in U2XMP was the problem.

Panthera
24th Oct 2004, 08:42 PM
I understand your concern but its not like that. BBF has been running UTAN on its ONS and ASSULT servers for months now... it works fine and no one logs into our server but us. It a means of tracking cheaters before they become an issue on your server.
The difference here is that BBF has the option of enabling UTAN or not. UTXMP will not have the option to disable it.

Killinya
24th Oct 2004, 09:03 PM
The difference here is that BBF has the option of enabling UTAN or not. UTXMP will not have the option to disable it.

Atari can ban peaps too... it has nothing to do with UTAN... and u cant disable that either...

Freakish
25th Oct 2004, 12:06 AM
After reading all of this I'm still unclear on UTAN with UTXMP - can it or can it not be disabled? I don't want anybody banning people from my servers but my own admins; I don't mind Epic doing so because a)I trust Dr. Sin and b)they're official.

I think the UTAN integration is a great idea, but there has to be a way to turn it off. :)

Panthera
25th Oct 2004, 02:18 AM
After reading all of this I'm still unclear on UTAN with UTXMP - can it or can it not be disabled? I don't want anybody banning people from my servers but my own admins; I don't mind Epic doing so because a)I trust Dr. Sin and b)they're official.

I think the UTAN integration is a great idea, but there has to be a way to turn it off. :)

See IndanPsycho's post on the first page....

"With the "standalone" version of UTAN, server admins were able to turn this on/off, however in UTXMP this has been built in to core files and cannot be disabled."

Naib
25th Oct 2004, 04:57 AM
As long as it is only used as a last resort, and with very good proof, then it's a good idea. I don't think FMI would abuse it, as that would kill off the game

IMO the fact it can't be turned off makes it a lot better deterrent.

Jackal
25th Oct 2004, 09:41 AM
i just think that you guys who dissagree with it might be using some HAX? i don't cheat, never have, never will. so im all for it.

i hate spawning and getting sniped in the head, and when 4 of us spawn, and the same guy head shots us all in 1 second, that really pisses me off. i have nothing to worry about, when i get my UTXMP server up and running, i would rather FMI clean shiot up than me. i have better things to do. they made the game, they can keep it clean.

why would you want cheaters on your server anyway's? i asked Wes to close off MyU, cuz of noone was ever on it, and all the lamers usually on it, which MyU servers are great. so why waste a good server for cheaters? cheaters make people leave. i don't want that on my server. why do you people?

MrAzazel
25th Oct 2004, 02:13 PM
Think of UTAN for UTXMP as 2 things:

1) The integrated version allows FreeMonkey to have a similar system to what Epic can do, which is globally ban someone from there game (UT XMP)

2) The core UTAN functionality is aimed at people running multiple servers.
It allows you to ban a player on 1 server and that then gets passed on to all your other servers instantly.

If you run say 10 UT2004 servers and 3 UTXMP servers, by using the integrated UTAN you will only ban players on the 3 XMP servers.
If you use the full version of UTAN, the ban will apply to both the UT2004 and UTXMP servers.

Hope that helps out :)

dutch_gecko
25th Oct 2004, 02:47 PM
:notworthy: :fluffle:
May I also express my thanks to the UnrealAdmin team for doing such a good job. :fluffle:

Killinya
25th Oct 2004, 04:06 PM
:notworthy: :fluffle:
May I also express my thanks to the UnrealAdmin team for doing such a good job. :fluffle:

+1

Panthera
25th Oct 2004, 05:54 PM
i just think that you guys who dissagree with it might be using some HAX? i don't cheat, never have, never will. so im all for it.
And if I disagree with all my civil liberties being taken away by my government it must be because I'm a terrorist?

Freakish
27th Oct 2004, 02:11 AM
See IndanPsycho's post on the first page....

"With the "standalone" version of UTAN, server admins were able to turn this on/off, however in UTXMP this has been built in to core files and cannot be disabled."

That's what I thought - I was confused because of posts 39 (http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showpost.php?p=1648920&postcount=39)/40 (http://forums.beyondunreal.com/showpost.php?p=1648922&postcount=40).

I'm not saying that I want cheaters on my server(s), just that I want MY admins to be the ones deciding who stays and who goes. I don't trust everyone else to ban as carefully as we do, and I have no idea how FMI is going to decide exactly what evidence they need to setup bans, etc - is it good enough to have a screenie of the player using derogatory language? Or do they have to be botting, as shown in..a demo of what length?

Dr. Sin already deals with this stuff and he's much closer to the underlying tech than FMI will ever be - I don't see the point in duplicating functionality he's already helping provide in an official capacity.

Can anyone give a good reason as to why there should NOT be a way to disable the UTAN global ban processing? At worst, turning it off may let in a few cheaters - players (assuming they even notice) will blame lazy server admins and not FMI. A simple global ban list toggle can't be hard to implement. It's admirable to want to be able to say that everyone is having the best possible cheat-free UTXMP gameplay, but has FMI thought through how they're going to deal with taking on the responsibility of regulating gameplay - setup some sort of process for accumulating proof and letting admins know who's been banned and why?

I don't mind UTAN being built in - it could be helpful with a local ban list being propogated between several servers adminned by any one person (great feature!), but I'm very wary of letting anyone outside of Epic judge who gets to play on my server(s).

I'm totally stoked for UTXMP - I loved U2XMP, but this forced UTANnage is making me want to just be a player and not an admin.

To clarify one thing - so we can still install the full (non-integrated) version of UTAN? Will that deactivate the embedded version (ie install and config the full version to not use the global list), or will the embedded version always work in some capacity?

IndianPsycho
27th Oct 2004, 08:25 AM
Dr. Sin already deals with this stuff and he's much closer to the underlying tech than FMI will ever be

FMI is much closer to the "underlying UTXMP tech" than Epic will ever be.

I don't trust everyone else to ban as carefully as we do, and I have no idea how FMI is going to decide exactly what evidence they need to setup bans, etc - is it good enough to have a screenie of the player using derogatory language? Or do they have to be botting, as shown in..a demo of what length?

A demorec which makes it absolutely clear a player is cheating, such as a 1st person demorec of a player whose crosshair is literally snapping from one player to the other in a nano second. If there's any doubt about whether a submitted cheater is actually cheating, he/she will not be globally banned. The plan is to set up some sort of mailing list for server admins to let them know which players have been globally banned (along with the "proof").

And, as said before, a demorec of a cheater does not give us their GUID; the server admin of the server where the demorec was taken would have to provide us with that.

We don't plan on globally banning anyone for using "derogatory language" and such.

---

The main reason for integrating UTAN with UTXMP, is that U2XMP is of late literally filled with blatant cheaters. In U2XMP however, the best thing that was available was a IP ban, which is generally useless, and didn't help to fight the problem at all. We're hoping that migrating to UT2004 will increase the XMP playerbase, but that will also inevitably mean an increase in the "cheaterbase".
We just want to have this conrol in our own hands rather than in Dr. SiNs, simply because we feel we would be able to deal with it much faster than Dr. SiN ever could; aside from actually having a full time job, he has to administer the UT2004 GUID bans - do you really think he'll be able to invest much time into administering the GUID bans for one out of a thousand 2K4 MODs? We don't.
Not only that, it's a given fact that we have a much better and deeper understanding of the UT:XMP mod's mechanics/limits then Dr. SiN has or ever will have, and so will be better able to decide who is cheating and who is not.

Killinya
27th Oct 2004, 09:55 AM
:tup: IndianPsyhco!

Freakish
27th Oct 2004, 10:48 PM
FMI is much closer to the "underlying UTXMP tech" than Epic will ever be.



A demorec which makes it absolutely clear a player is cheating, such as a 1st person demorec of a player whose crosshair is literally snapping from one player to the other in a nano second. If there's any doubt about whether a submitted cheater is actually cheating, he/she will not be globally banned. The plan is to set up some sort of mailing list for server admins to let them know which players have been globally banned (along with the "proof").

And, as said before, a demorec of a cheater does not give us their GUID; the server admin of the server where the demorec was taken would have to provide us with that.

We don't plan on globally banning anyone for using "derogatory language" and such.

---

The main reason for integrating UTAN with UTXMP, is that U2XMP is of late literally filled with blatant cheaters. In U2XMP however, the best thing that was available was a IP ban, which is generally useless, and didn't help to fight the problem at all. We're hoping that migrating to UT2004 will increase the XMP playerbase, but that will also inevitably mean an increase in the "cheaterbase".
We just want to have this conrol in our own hands rather than in Dr. SiNs, simply because we feel we would be able to deal with it much faster than Dr. SiN ever could; aside from actually having a full time job, he has to administer the UT2004 GUID bans - do you really think he'll be able to invest much time into administering the GUID bans for one out of a thousand 2K4 MODs? We don't.
Not only that, it's a given fact that we have a much better and deeper understanding of the UT:XMP mod's mechanics/limits then Dr. SiN has or ever will have, and so will be better able to decide who is cheating and who is not.


Thanks..that clears up a lot of the concerns I had. It sounds like you guys have thought this through pretty well. I wasn't aware that U2XMP had degenerated that badly...I stopped playing long ago when servers began disappearing and then the master server went down.

*still can't wait to ranger again* :D

Limited
28th Oct 2004, 10:39 AM
To clarify one thing - so we can still install the full (non-integrated) version of UTAN? Will that deactivate the embedded version (ie install and config the full version to not use the global list), or will the embedded version always work in some capacity?You can install the normal non-intergrated UTAN as if it was a normal server, it will however have no effect over the intergrated one, that will always function.

[GDC]Faust
28th Oct 2004, 10:49 AM
Just that I get it right when we want to get rid of TKL-guys, we would have to install UTAN seperately and use our own list?

Suits me.