Will Epic guarantee the elimination of cheating in 2k7?
- Thread starter UBL
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
The reason why there are so few cheaters on UT2004 is the unexpected help we got from Epic ... and a cheat coder. Even before Epic started throwing legal threats at cheat distributors the best cheats were no longer available for free. Cheaters tried to hide their gems from us "antis" making it harder for the average player to stumble over a download for that crap. However, HelioS then did something really fortunate for us: he required people to pay money for his cheats.-AEnubis- said:
The combination of the lack of public native headers, the (almost) entirely locked-down UnrealScript environment (it's almost impossible to load custom code without being detected by Anti TCC or SafeGame), Epic sueing cheater websites, UTAN (and the masterserver) kicking known cheaters off the servers and cheat coders keeping almost all their stuff to themselves is responsible for the incredibly low percentage of cheaters sightings in UT2004.
Well, maybe cheat coders also got a bit bored because Anti TCC isn't being developed anymore and they avoid SafeGame servers due to its supposed laggyness. (Admit it, Cruicky! This was your plan from the beginning.
)Don't tell the cheaters, but now that they are scared away SafeGame's performance improves with each version.
Last edited:
UBL said:
Well, it's been an interesting one at any rate... solid argumentation without a too terribly much in the way of flames... nice guest- star appearance by Wormbo... all in all pretty good fare for a UT forum.
Well, aside from Wormbo I think most people in this thread are just knowledgeable end- users. You might have better luck at an admin's forum or maybe ProUnreal in that regard.
I did have one thought, dunno how feasible...
Maybe they could make an optional setting in UTComp that was super fascist about control bindings... as in it had a whitelist that it would recognize, and all other bindings would simply be ignored/ deleted from the user.ini. Further, among the deprecated commands would be those for opening the console and quick console... you'd set it up once just prior to the match and that would be all you'd get.
The reasoning there is that a botter who can't toggle his cheat on or off is pretty much a sitting duck for an anti- cheat app.
Really, though, the best possible solution is simply to have most if not all matches admined by an experienced referree. That's hard to achieve, I guess, but probably well worth it.
Beyond that I'm probably pretty well useless to you.
shadow_dragon
is ironing his panties!
thatcher said:
As i said, the developer has a responsibility to release the product as secure as they can in the first place. It is their obligation not to include any glaring holes that purposely and intentionally allow misuse,cheating or hacking. Windows should have no security holes ideally. Microsoft were responsible for giving you a product not for fixing problems other people make for you. (Most people use third party security for a reason BTW)
Same goes for epic, as long as they don't leave a hole that is designed specifically to let cheats past their protection ad they make some effort in the original product then i believe that is fair. Theyc annot be expected to clear up OUR spilt milk. They make patches to fix bugs that they make, THAT is fair but fixing problems other people make is above the call of duty i believe.
That, I think, is the whole concern about UT2k7; when released, the cheat developers are likely to give it some attention. Whilst development of anti-cheat software is down to 3rd party developers, there is no guarantee of continued updates.Wormbo said:
Regarding vulnerabilities found after releasing a product, your opinion on what responsibilities a developer has is so far from my own that I guess we will never agree with each other about it. (The bit about people using 3rd party software [to secure Windows] made me laugh, for what its worth.shadow_dragon said:
)I don't think cheating will be eliminated, the issue is quite a diverse one.
The best defence against cheaters is a vigilant and active admin.
Things like Anti TCC are okay, but cheaters will ALWAYS find a way around it (and Anti TCC is plain annoying for the rest of us when it kicks for having a bloody custom announcer pack).
The best defence against cheaters is a vigilant and active admin.
Things like Anti TCC are okay, but cheaters will ALWAYS find a way around it (and Anti TCC is plain annoying for the rest of us when it kicks for having a bloody custom announcer pack).
Well, even there, sounds like Epic is doing more then even I know to fight cheating, and I seem to be more aware the most here, so it furthers my point. Just becaue we can't see it, doesn't mean it's not happeneing. I know, when I play on servers, I don't have frequent problems with it, and I see AntiTCC running, so credit to who it is acredited too, but I've been sure there is more going on behind the scenes then most know.
That sounded to me, like the main concern of the thread starter, how much effort Epic themselves is putting into it. The answer is more the you think.
Wouldn't work that way. From what I understand, helios, and zellius load into the serverinfo class, and they can't exactly be "turned off." If AntiTCC knows that bot, it's got before it's turned on. After activation, there are no key binds that toggle features, the bot acts as like a dx hook, like using TS shortcuts in game, and detects keypresses, which you configure in a sperate file, which can be renamed to make that chase pointless. Searching for text strings is mostly pointless.
One of the bots, I believe, requires a certain weird action just to survive a map change. The native security is actually not that bad.
That sounded to me, like the main concern of the thread starter, how much effort Epic themselves is putting into it. The answer is more the you think.
[Apoc]Discord said:
Wouldn't work that way. From what I understand, helios, and zellius load into the serverinfo class, and they can't exactly be "turned off." If AntiTCC knows that bot, it's got before it's turned on. After activation, there are no key binds that toggle features, the bot acts as like a dx hook, like using TS shortcuts in game, and detects keypresses, which you configure in a sperate file, which can be renamed to make that chase pointless. Searching for text strings is mostly pointless.
One of the bots, I believe, requires a certain weird action just to survive a map change. The native security is actually not that bad.
I still reckon that UBL is demanding the impossible.
Just look at any real world security like your bicycle, car and house.
Unless it is a custom-built item there is no way the default 'security' will stop anyone except the unprepared burglars.
If you want your car/house to be really secure you will have to rely on third-party items (extra alarms) and paying for private security patrols (...).
Those same security-measures also require the users to use their brains (ie : don't leave the key to your fortress in your door ...)
Games are not going to be any different. And unless the distribution-model changes (ie : games become pay-to-play) it is unrealistic to expect companies like Epic to do anything at all after release. There simply is no profit for them if they need to continually update their software during its lifetime (they'd be loosing money).
The only thing Epic can possibly do is replace their MD5-checksums with something that's a little more secure ... ( source )
Anything else will require hardware that's secure by default (ie 'trusted computing' and all that needlessly intrusive garbage).
// tie it to a MAC address with self update.
Should a server attempt to ban me based on my MAC then I simply change the MAC and tell my ISP that I've got a new network-card ... I'd be up and running within one hour.
You could of course disable any MAC-address spoofing, but then you'd prevent people from running (hardware)firewalls for their own security.
In other words : any security is a double-edged sword that kills both cheaters as well as innocent victims.
Just look at any real world security like your bicycle, car and house.
Unless it is a custom-built item there is no way the default 'security' will stop anyone except the unprepared burglars.
If you want your car/house to be really secure you will have to rely on third-party items (extra alarms) and paying for private security patrols (...).
Those same security-measures also require the users to use their brains (ie : don't leave the key to your fortress in your door ...)
Games are not going to be any different. And unless the distribution-model changes (ie : games become pay-to-play) it is unrealistic to expect companies like Epic to do anything at all after release. There simply is no profit for them if they need to continually update their software during its lifetime (they'd be loosing money).
The only thing Epic can possibly do is replace their MD5-checksums with something that's a little more secure ... ( source )
Anything else will require hardware that's secure by default (ie 'trusted computing' and all that needlessly intrusive garbage).
// tie it to a MAC address with self update.
Should a server attempt to ban me based on my MAC then I simply change the MAC and tell my ISP that I've got a new network-card ... I'd be up and running within one hour.
You could of course disable any MAC-address spoofing, but then you'd prevent people from running (hardware)firewalls for their own security.
In other words : any security is a double-edged sword that kills both cheaters as well as innocent victims.
Last edited:
Not exactly. If Epic, as an example then, decided to not patch UT2k3, how many people do you think would have bought UT2k4? Customers (in the modern software culture) put up with buggy releases of new software with the understanding that bugs will be fixed during an ongoing process. Take Microsoft or a thousand other companies as further examples: its a common business model to enable revenue to flow into a project before its fully ready.JaFO said:
You also need to bear in mind that the Unreal engine is licensed to other games manufacturers who will also demand continued support.
To say there is no profit in being a responsible developer is plain wrong.
There's fixing bugs/leaks for a recently released game (UT2k3) and there's supporting outdated software (You won't receive any security updates for Win98).
And then there's Tribes:Vengeance which didn't even get updates/fixes *because* too few units were sold ...
And then there's Tribes:Vengeance which didn't even get updates/fixes *because* too few units were sold ...
After another month, you will not get regular patches for Win2000 either. (Only one more cumulative patch pack later in the year, as I understand it.)
Not familiar with the Tribes story at all but I bet its developers had already given up on having a commercially successful follow-up release and they had no contractual obligation from licensing the code to other developers.
I personally wouldn't expect Epic to be patching UT2k3 any more. (I wouldn't know if they are because I uninstalled it after putting UT2k4 on my desktop.) If UT2k7 is a quality product, it wouldn't matter to me if UT2k4 development was withdrawn after the full version of 2k7 is out.
My expectation of any developer would be that they support the current version of a series, with props for working on older versions. You originally said: "There simply is no profit for them if they need to continually update their software during its lifetime" - and I totally disagree with that.
Sometimes, less is a whole lot more.
The trouble is, features like custom announcers and others are easier for marketing departments to get people excited about than the promise of life being made hard for cheaters.
Not familiar with the Tribes story at all but I bet its developers had already given up on having a commercially successful follow-up release and they had no contractual obligation from licensing the code to other developers.
I personally wouldn't expect Epic to be patching UT2k3 any more. (I wouldn't know if they are because I uninstalled it after putting UT2k4 on my desktop.) If UT2k7 is a quality product, it wouldn't matter to me if UT2k4 development was withdrawn after the full version of 2k7 is out.
My expectation of any developer would be that they support the current version of a series, with props for working on older versions. You originally said: "There simply is no profit for them if they need to continually update their software during its lifetime" - and I totally disagree with that.
If you define security as a feature in the same way you might define allowing custom announcers as a feature, then you have to pick between them when they are incompatible. This is probably at the root of insecurities in UT - sexier features have been enabled at the cost of security. (Just like Internet Explorer is a security disaster because MS want websites to be able to install their software on your machine via ActiveX when that software can easily be malicious.)gades said:
Sometimes, less is a whole lot more.
The trouble is, features like custom announcers and others are easier for marketing departments to get people excited about than the promise of life being made hard for cheaters.
Last edited:
The fact that even MS doesn't support their old products (even though they earn enough money and have enough resources) should be enough. They've killed support for Win98, NT and 2k not because the products themselves are old, but because they want people to buy their new products. They've effectively killed their "old" products because there wasn't any profit in fixing them anymore.
It's the same with any technology. Products are made to become obsolete.
Software is just one of those products that can only become obsolete as soon as you withdraw support.
It's the same with any technology. Products are made to become obsolete.
Software is just one of those products that can only become obsolete as soon as you withdraw support.
Fact: No game can guarentee the elimination of cheating in it!
What I just said is all that needs to be said about this subject. End of discussion.
What I just said is all that needs to be said about this subject. End of discussion.
I dont know if i dare post this
Maybe, the MMORPG and BF2/HL2 road is an option?
An account that is more "tied" to your RL (tm) person be it email or (gasp) CC number.
Also BF2 will have 2 types of servers run by the community as i understand it.
One Ranked and one Unranked server.
I guess the Ranked server will be much stricter to what settings you can set and therefore (maybe?) making it easier to protect from cheats.
Of course we "unrealers" are used to our "freedom" since the beginning and it would be difficult for Epic to change this i guess.
Maybe, the MMORPG and BF2/HL2 road is an option?
An account that is more "tied" to your RL (tm) person be it email or (gasp) CC number.
Also BF2 will have 2 types of servers run by the community as i understand it.
One Ranked and one Unranked server.
I guess the Ranked server will be much stricter to what settings you can set and therefore (maybe?) making it easier to protect from cheats.
Of course we "unrealers" are used to our "freedom" since the beginning and it would be difficult for Epic to change this i guess.
Random Acts of Kindness
Disclaimer: My connection's been toasted for a while, hence my very late response and complete non-knowlege of the rest of this thread besides the fact that UBL lost my interest the second he dissed Scotland...
OK, the numbers of posts I have, the ammount of time I've been here doesn't count for much. I'm some well-respected bastion of the community (here or anywhere else), I'm just some random guy who's hung around for a while, nothing more
As for what players can do, I'm not talking about anything terribly complex. Simply taking the time to report cheats if and when they see themm and server admins doing as much as they can realistically do to see that the reported cheats get banned. I'm not talking about much, I'm just hoping players/admins will lend a hand when it comes to keeping things ticking along.
So if you see a cheat on a server, don't just quit and join another server, take down the server/date/time/player name with screenshots or preferably a quick first person spec demo (uploaded to webspace), then mail the details to the server admin. If not, check out the server/site IRC channel, a lot of major hosting companies have an IRC channel with admins on there most of the time, get their attendtion and give them the details, if you're fast enough you can get the cheat nailed while he's still on the server.
"It's better to light a candle than to curse the darkness" as some wise guy once said
I agree entirely. There should be a far better attitude from Epic regarding anticheat support. My thoughts are that players should lend a hand as well as full and active support from Epic, not instead of.
Disclaimer: My connection's been toasted for a while, hence my very late response and complete non-knowlege of the rest of this thread besides the fact that UBL lost my interest the second he dissed Scotland...
thatcher said:
OK, the numbers of posts I have, the ammount of time I've been here doesn't count for much. I'm some well-respected bastion of the community (here or anywhere else), I'm just some random guy who's hung around for a while, nothing more
As for what players can do, I'm not talking about anything terribly complex. Simply taking the time to report cheats if and when they see themm and server admins doing as much as they can realistically do to see that the reported cheats get banned. I'm not talking about much, I'm just hoping players/admins will lend a hand when it comes to keeping things ticking along.
So if you see a cheat on a server, don't just quit and join another server, take down the server/date/time/player name with screenshots or preferably a quick first person spec demo (uploaded to webspace), then mail the details to the server admin. If not, check out the server/site IRC channel, a lot of major hosting companies have an IRC channel with admins on there most of the time, get their attendtion and give them the details, if you're fast enough you can get the cheat nailed while he's still on the server.
"It's better to light a candle than to curse the darkness" as some wise guy once said
ReTox said:
I agree entirely. There should be a far better attitude from Epic regarding anticheat support. My thoughts are that players should lend a hand as well as full and active support from Epic, not instead of.
Cheaters hack the game. Thus there is little Epic can do to prevent this.
If they did try, it would be like taking VitaminC instead of asprin when you have a headache.
If they did try, it would be like taking VitaminC instead of asprin when you have a headache.
Selerox said:My thoughts are that players should lend a hand as well as full and active support from Epic, not instead of.
Quoted for truth. Not that I feel Epic isn't doing enough, but I definately agree with this statement.