• Few questions about cheaters.cfg
    184 replies, posted
  • Avatar of Winsanity
  • This thread reminds me of the shitstorm caused by switching Garrysmod.org to torrents way back, and all the complaints and questions it brought.
  • Avatar of DarthTealc
  • [QUOTE=Drakehawke;35731537][IMG]http://puu.sh/rLZI[/IMG][/QUOTE] Ah good. So cheats in single player and in non-SE multiplayer are okay, but not in SE-protected multiplayer. I'm cool with that. What about when Scriptenforcer fails to run even though sv_scriptenforcer = 1? On our servers our anticheat occasionally picks up loads of people (everyone who is playing at the time) because SE isn't running until the map changes, even though we always have it turned on (we don't ban people for SE failing to run). Are we safe in those cases?
  • Avatar of roxi
  • But wont this just make pure DLL based hacks. And yes "Vac" is suppose to pick DLL hacks but lets face it. It never does?
  • Avatar of ExplosiveCheese
  • But like it's been said before, if you don't hack, you have nothing to worry about. If you use SethHack, well screw you for ruining a good game.
  • Avatar of Hentie
  • [QUOTE=winsanity;35737642]This thread reminds me of the shitstorm caused by switching Garrysmod.org to torrents way back, and all the complaints and questions it brought.[/QUOTE] I kind of liked that idea :(
  • Avatar of shirly
  • So, if its not on my system now, and never will be, I have nothing to fear? Well, I will pass this on to a friend of mine that stopped using SH right after he got it, hes scared like a motherfucker right now, cause he only used it on his server.
  • Avatar of Lucky9Two
  • Thoughts from the blog post: [QUOTE] What about those of us who run military ops and are required to have NVG & FLIR for piloting? This kind of ruins the point of our equipment or even being able to run ops. I don't play multiplayer at all because there's no server I would want to play on because the ratio of good/bad servers is so unbalanced; the only one I do go to is a theater. What about toggle-crouch scripts? Client-side helping scripts? Would you get banned for those too? What's the point of making lua if you're not going to be allowed to use it? Speaking of which, what's the point even writing this? It's not like you're going to read it & post a response. Oh well I guess, I'll just put in my 2 cents & dash.[/QUOTE] Thoughts after reading this thread: Script enforcer is kept off on the two servers I go on so it shouldn't be a problem then. I'd suggest making an amendment to your post, but telling people on Facepunch what to do is extremely dangerous from my observations, so I'll just leave now.
  • Avatar of Drakehawke
  • [QUOTE=DarthTealc;35738100]Ah good. So cheats in single player and in non-SE multiplayer are okay, but not in SE-protected multiplayer. I'm cool with that. What about when Scriptenforcer fails to run even though sv_scriptenforcer = 1? On our servers our anticheat occasionally picks up loads of people (everyone who is playing at the time) because SE isn't running until the map changes, even though we always have it turned on (we don't ban people for SE failing to run). Are we safe in those cases?[/QUOTE] You need to put sv_scriptenforcer 1 in autoexec.cfg not server.cfg.
  • Avatar of HighVoltage
  • From what I've picked up by reading the thread is that only cheats that bypass Script Enforcer when its turned on will trigger the new system. So peoples fancy night vision, wallhacks/ESPs, and client-side helping scripts wont get them banned unless they also have a script to bypass Script Enforcer to allow them use them. So in other words, the little "cheat/hack" scripts don't trigger it, the scripts that bypass SE do.
  • [QUOTE=DarthTealc;35727302]What happens if someone includes hack code in a Workshop addon? Will everyone who uses it get banned? We can't check the code because .gm can't (officially) be extracted. What about single player? What about sandbox servers which don't use Scriptenforcer? I was once an admin of a (now dead) community where the sandbox server didn't use scriptenforcer, and I used a radar and x-ray addon to help me administrate. Would I get banned for that if I did the same thing today? What about addons which have functionality similar to common hacks? For example, a TTT server I currently help administrate has a detective item which allows the detective to see through walls and see what the players are holding. Would that cause all our players to be banned? Do people only get banned if they hack on scriptenforcer servers (aka bypass scriptenforcer)? Eg as long as you're not able to use the hack on the server, you're okay? In addition to banning people, why not remove pixelrender? Why not improve scriptenforcer (it sometimes doesn't block scripts until the map is changed)? Why not remove menu plugins? I know some of these have been done in Gmod 13, but it has been in beta for some 6 months. If you're willing to ship your banning feature, why not ship these other changes to help prevent hacking? Don't get me wrong - I have no problem banning users who are hacking in multiplayer. But if using any addon risks the user getting banned from all servers, nobody is going to trust using addons, nobody is going to risk coding something with similar functions to hacking tools (eg smartsnap snapping to props, similiar to aimbot), and people who aren't hackers will get banned.[/QUOTE] I heard that excuse from people who got banned from baconbot all the time.
  • Avatar of DarthTealc
  • What does that have to do with anything? Isn't baconbot the one VAC detects? I doubt baconbot users are going to care about the cheaters.cfg system when they're VAC banned.
  • Avatar of Th13teen
  • If garry believes that he can put out bans globally on people then it shouldn't give any false positives, and if one or two arrive (with proof) then perhaps he can do what valve did with the MW2 bans and give out a free copy of gmod to them (perhaps gmod9 :v:)
  • Avatar of Shane
  • Really excited to see how this pans out, been away from Garry's Mod for months and I am glad to see that lots of progress is being made toward the cheating! Good work Garry!
  • Avatar of El Jameo
  • Glad this is in place. I don't see why anyone would want others to have hacks running at all (except for making Machinima's or whatever, it's still useful there, but we can still use them in the sense of basic Lua hacks that don't try to bypass SE). This won't take all of them out, but it's more than a massive step forward. Have my hat Garry.
  • Avatar of Hentie
  • [QUOTE=DarthTealc;35743517]What does that have to do with anything? Isn't baconbot the one VAC detects? I doubt baconbot users are going to care about the cheaters.cfg system when they're VAC banned.[/QUOTE] I think he means that you sound like a cheater by making all these complaints. [b]What I got from this thread:[/b] If you make or use any lua cheats like aimbots or wallhacks, you're probably [b]not[/b] going to get banned. If you add any lua cheats to your server, [b]nobody[/b] will probably get banned. If you create or use any third party program/module that has the intention of bypassing scriptenforcer when a server has scriptenforcer on, and you run any script, even if it isn't a wallhacking or aimbotting script, then you will probably get banned. I say these with [i]probably[/i] because I'm not 100% sure.
  • Avatar of CrispexOps
  • To be honest, I really don't see the point. All you're really doing is going after SethHack which only alleviates about 10% of the problem. The major problem is Lua hacks and private ScriptEnforcer bypasses. There will never be a way to stop this or even significantly impact it.
  • Avatar of Hentie
  • [QUOTE=CrispexOps;35752109]To be honest, I really don't see the point. All you're really doing is going after SethHack which only alleviates about 10% of the problem. The major problem is Lua hacks and private ScriptEnforcer bypasses. There will never be a way to stop this or even significantly impact it.[/QUOTE] I thought it was SE Bypasses, not just SH :v:
  • Avatar of DarthTealc
  • If the system works by detecting when SE is bypassed, wouldn't it also detect private SE bypasses? That would cover Sethhack and any other hack which bypasses SE. [QUOTE=Hentie;35751974]I think he means that you sound like a cheater by making all these complaints.[/QUOTE] All these complaints are not complaints. They are questions to figure out if Garry's system has flaws which could result in innocent people being banned, so that Garry fixes the flaws before that happens. (If he knew about flaws but considered them features, [I]then [/I]I'd be complaining). If it only bans for bypassing Scriptenforcer, then the odds of being incorrectly banned are much lower than I was initially worried about.
  • Avatar of Hentie
  • Nothing to worry about then? Everyone can just go back to jacking off?
  • Avatar of alexgrist
  • [QUOTE=DarthTealc;35752305]If the system works by detecting when SE is bypassed, wouldn't it also detect private SE bypasses? That would cover Sethhack and any other hack which bypasses SE. All these complaints are not complaints. They are questions to figure out if Garry's system has flaws which could result in innocent people being banned, so that Garry fixes the flaws before that happens. (If he knew about flaws but considered them features, [I]then [/I]I'd be complaining). If it only bans for bypassing Scriptenforcer, then the odds of being incorrectly banned are much lower than I was initially worried about.[/QUOTE] You're looking for flaws in a system that garry is intentionally keeping secret, nobody innocent has been banned yet so why not wait until that time before complaining.
  • Avatar of SiPlus
  • Garry, if there will be thousands of bans, won't GMod shut down at all because of crash at launch due to unloadability of the CFG? Maybe holding ban list (togglable with serverside cvar) on garrysmod.com would be better.
  • [QUOTE=Alex_grist;35754453]You're looking for flaws in a system that garry is intentionally keeping secret, nobody innocent has been banned yet so why not wait until that time before complaining.[/QUOTE] I was wrongly banned, he removed me from the cfg now, but banid puts you in a diff file, so I am still banned on a load of servers :(
  • Avatar of Wizard of Ass
  • [QUOTE=dingusnin;35754668]I was wrongly banned, he removed me from the cfg now, but banid puts you in a diff file, so I am still banned on a load of servers :([/QUOTE] Did he really unban you, that's a shame? Thought multihack was enough proof to keep you in...
  • Avatar of garry
  • [QUOTE=CrispexOps;35752109]To be honest, I really don't see the point. All you're really doing is going after SethHack which only alleviates about 10% of the problem. The major problem is Lua hacks and private ScriptEnforcer bypasses. There will never be a way to stop this or even significantly impact it.[/QUOTE] Not with that attitude [editline]29th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=SiPlus;35754596]Garry, if there will be thousands of bans, won't GMod shut down at all because of crash at launch due to unloadability of the CFG? Maybe holding ban list (togglable with serverside cvar) on garrysmod.com would be better.[/QUOTE] Why do you guys worry about these stupid things? Do you think I don't have a brain?
  • [quote]To detect cheats or hacks mentioned earlier we reserve the right to periodically scan your computer’s memory (when Garry’s Mod is running, and only as part of Garry’s Mod).[/quote] So I'm guessing that's how it works?
  • [QUOTE=Wizard of Ass;35754817]Did he really unban you, that's a shame? Thought multihack was enough proof to keep you in...[/QUOTE] That was on CSS, not gmod. I wonder why you think it's a shame... Good thing that Garry is in control, and not some brainless idiot.
  • Avatar of slayer3032
  • Hey garry, you do know that when you run a banid command whenever a writeid command is ran all of the current bans will be written to the ban config right? Anyone who would possibly want to remove the cheaters.cfg would essentially have to delete the config and all of their bans to get rid of them as they would be written to their ban config. Source's banning system is rather poor and doesn't have a whole lot of control with there not really being much of a timer with a server restart resetting the timer if it crashes or something along the lines of that. It also doesn't tell the client the reason they were banned nor the length remaining. This could be an ideal time to change that. The last time I used the built in ban commands in 2009 they were broken and if I didn't execute the banned user config it would clear all of my bans every time I started the server. Also, just because garry mentioned that if you want people to cheat then turn off SE doesn't mean that you won't get banned from everything just because you used SethHack on a non-SE server. You all seem to think that this system is serverside, if this was the case then it could be possible for an individual to spoof one of these bans to garry's servers. It would make the most sense for his anticheat to be purely clientside to prevent such a thing happening to ensure all of the bans are 100% accurate since it's the client telling the ban server it cheats rather than a client telling a 3rd party server to tell the ban server that it's cheating.