O
old.aashton
Guest
Are barrysworld servers going to be made q2ace only ala savage and jolt......
Just asking cause i aint seen it come up yet
Just asking cause i aint seen it come up yet
S
ShockingAlberto
Guest
- Thread starter
- #2
Please, NO!
I appeal to BW, or whoever makes the descision(dime?), no Q2ACE!!
Why? Because their software is very limited - Linux users are excluded, and because the software is certainly not in the spirit of the GPL.
I can't play Ra2 on Jolt now, which is bad enough, but to be excluded on from playing Q2 alltogether is a joke.
I appeal to BW, or whoever makes the descision(dime?), no Q2ACE!!
Why? Because their software is very limited - Linux users are excluded, and because the software is certainly not in the spirit of the GPL.
I can't play Ra2 on Jolt now, which is bad enough, but to be excluded on from playing Q2 alltogether is a joke.
D
Deathwatch
Guest
- Thread starter
- #3
How do they make servers Q2Ace only? I thought Q2Ace was client side only?
S
ShockingAlberto
Guest
- Thread starter
- #4
Dunno, Jolt have done it to their RA2 server though. I know since i was given a link by the server, and then kicked. I think it's a pluggin to their Q2Admin mathingy.
D
Deathwatch
Guest
- Thread starter
- #5
Not plugin, probably just modified something in Q2Admin. It most likely watches for a specific response by a client.
I think it's a good thing people are working on this, and I know it isn't the easiest thing to do, especially with all the different systems people got.
This is a nice way to solve things, however I do not think this would be the way to go at this time due to the lack of support for the other OS's (mac, linux, NT(?)), and there are other projects as well, such as:
BeefQuake
Quake2MaX
NoCheat
In my opinion, I think the only real solution would be a client and a server which can check each other, and would be fully compatible with all Q2 mods.
Perhaps the Q2Ace or other anti-cheat projects could release a form of 'plugin' for the graphic enhancing projects, allowing them to add anti-cheat features to their mod. But, I do not know if this is feasible.
I am sure that there'll be something good coming out of this all.
I think it's a good thing people are working on this, and I know it isn't the easiest thing to do, especially with all the different systems people got.
This is a nice way to solve things, however I do not think this would be the way to go at this time due to the lack of support for the other OS's (mac, linux, NT(?)), and there are other projects as well, such as:
BeefQuake
Quake2MaX
NoCheat
In my opinion, I think the only real solution would be a client and a server which can check each other, and would be fully compatible with all Q2 mods.
Perhaps the Q2Ace or other anti-cheat projects could release a form of 'plugin' for the graphic enhancing projects, allowing them to add anti-cheat features to their mod. But, I do not know if this is feasible.
I am sure that there'll be something good coming out of this all.
O
old.$pa^rky!
Guest
- Thread starter
- #6
Why is shocking alberto only person complaining about Q2ace ?
I dont know any 1 else saying they dont want it implemented on all servers. This is like the best thing to happen to anit cheat for a long time.
Shocking alberto get ur walls back and perhaps u will like Q2ace
I dont know any 1 else saying they dont want it implemented on all servers. This is like the best thing to happen to anit cheat for a long time.
Shocking alberto get ur walls back and perhaps u will like Q2ace
D
Deathwatch
Guest
- Thread starter
- #7
$sp^rky - it is a good step in the direction of providing a good, all round anti-cheat protection, but it needs some more work, and especially support for other mods.
Also, not sure if I'm correct on this, but it still would allow bots/proxies on the server, but it'd only show that the person is connecting through a proxy?
There is nothing wrong with clients using Q2Ace at all, but I do not think BW should start forcing people to use it at this time.
Also, not sure if I'm correct on this, but it still would allow bots/proxies on the server, but it'd only show that the person is connecting through a proxy?
There is nothing wrong with clients using Q2Ace at all, but I do not think BW should start forcing people to use it at this time.
S
ShockingAlberto
Guest
- Thread starter
- #8
Sparky: I dislike Q2Ace, because it forces you to run their binaries. This is a problem for me, since i run Linux, hence i cannot play on Q2Ace only servers.
I also believe that the project isn't really in the spirit of the GPL. You must email MrB to obtain the source, and a closed source DLL is included. I considered asking someone on what the name of a notorious cheater was, and then emailing MrB as him, asking for the source.
However, since i'm not a programmer, i have no real desire to have the source, so i've done this, nor just asked for it. The thought of merging the Q2Ace specific code into relnev's tree has run through my mind, but i believe Q2Ace uses the Windows APIs itself, and of course i'd be lacking the closed source DLL...
Do not acuse me of being a cheater. I rarely play Q2, and i am now unable to play it on certain servers.
I also believe that the project isn't really in the spirit of the GPL. You must email MrB to obtain the source, and a closed source DLL is included. I considered asking someone on what the name of a notorious cheater was, and then emailing MrB as him, asking for the source.
However, since i'm not a programmer, i have no real desire to have the source, so i've done this, nor just asked for it. The thought of merging the Q2Ace specific code into relnev's tree has run through my mind, but i believe Q2Ace uses the Windows APIs itself, and of course i'd be lacking the closed source DLL...
Do not acuse me of being a cheater. I rarely play Q2, and i am now unable to play it on certain servers.
O
old.[MOD]Psycho
Guest
- Thread starter
- #9
Q2ace is gay, I hate it, it can go and die.
I don't cheat, never have done, never will do, quite easy to tell this by the fact I'm crap. Q2ace has been hacked, will be hacked again and be totally pointless just like every other bit of anti cheat software which pops up. If someone wants to cheat, there's no way you can stop them, if they're determined enough, they'll find a way.
I don't cheat, never have done, never will do, quite easy to tell this by the fact I'm crap. Q2ace has been hacked, will be hacked again and be totally pointless just like every other bit of anti cheat software which pops up. If someone wants to cheat, there's no way you can stop them, if they're determined enough, they'll find a way.
D
Deathwatch
Guest
- Thread starter
- #10
Alberto - just play on BW only
I do support the GPL, and I think its a good thing the Q2 source got released under the GPL, but it also causes a problem. All the current anti-cheat methods are suddenly easy to bypass. You can also make the greatest of anti-cheat server and client combinations, but when you have to release the source, any cheater could modify the source and gain access.
To stop them from getting the source, you could:
- keep the source closed (breaking gpl)
- only give the source on request. You know who got the source then. Problem is, you'll have to keep the source for 3 years if I recall and people can pretend they are someone else or pass the source on.
- use a program to obscure the anti-cheat part of the source (breaks gpl)
- Use an external library and only call its main function. The library shouldn't be required to compile (and run?) the application. The source has to be released. (so you could ask q2ace for all their source, which should include the calls to the library for example). Problem is, the GPL contradicts itself on the external library bit. (one point it says it'd fall under the gpl and somewhere else it says that it will technically not fall under the gpl in the case of only calling the main function and waiting for a reply)
The library option is the way to make a Q2 client which has anti-cheat methods. (better would be proxies, but proxies can be annoying)
Unfortunately, it also gives problems, as you'll have to rely on them for any updates or features, and support for other mods.
I do not know how hard it'd be in linux to use external libraries, as I am not a linux coder (or fan for that matter), but I guess there should be a way to do this. But what about Mac? Or Amiga? Those players still want to keep playing too.
About hacks - its true, everything can be hacked (there is no multiplayer fps that cant be hacked imo), but if you don't try to stop cheats, the servers will be flooded with people cheating in every possible way, and that's undesirable. If you make cheating a very hard thing, it will discourage people from using them. The anti-cheat tools combined with admins should stop most cheating.
I do support the GPL, and I think its a good thing the Q2 source got released under the GPL, but it also causes a problem. All the current anti-cheat methods are suddenly easy to bypass. You can also make the greatest of anti-cheat server and client combinations, but when you have to release the source, any cheater could modify the source and gain access.
To stop them from getting the source, you could:
- keep the source closed (breaking gpl)
- only give the source on request. You know who got the source then. Problem is, you'll have to keep the source for 3 years if I recall and people can pretend they are someone else or pass the source on.
- use a program to obscure the anti-cheat part of the source (breaks gpl)
- Use an external library and only call its main function. The library shouldn't be required to compile (and run?) the application. The source has to be released. (so you could ask q2ace for all their source, which should include the calls to the library for example). Problem is, the GPL contradicts itself on the external library bit. (one point it says it'd fall under the gpl and somewhere else it says that it will technically not fall under the gpl in the case of only calling the main function and waiting for a reply)
The library option is the way to make a Q2 client which has anti-cheat methods. (better would be proxies, but proxies can be annoying)
Unfortunately, it also gives problems, as you'll have to rely on them for any updates or features, and support for other mods.
I do not know how hard it'd be in linux to use external libraries, as I am not a linux coder (or fan for that matter), but I guess there should be a way to do this. But what about Mac? Or Amiga? Those players still want to keep playing too.
About hacks - its true, everything can be hacked (there is no multiplayer fps that cant be hacked imo), but if you don't try to stop cheats, the servers will be flooded with people cheating in every possible way, and that's undesirable. If you make cheating a very hard thing, it will discourage people from using them. The anti-cheat tools combined with admins should stop most cheating.
M
Mr B
Guest
- Thread starter
- #11
We are entirely WITHIN the spirit of the GPL, with our blessing from JC himself (it was one of his suggestions as to how to implement anti-cheating features whilst remaining within the guidelines laid down by the GPL).
Linux users account for less than 1% of the Q2 clients (yes I can actually back that up with figures).
Why not complain to ALL other software manufacturers for not producing linux binaries, you'll find it's VERY rare for a producer to give out a Linux binary client as standard. And if you haven't got access to a Win32 box or at least dual booting one, then that's your tough luck.
If someone is connecting via a bot/proxy, then the p_auth responses will be different (part of the p_auth is based on the IP the .exe is connected to).
You are also forced to run iD's binaries, what's the difference? If you run Linux then I take it that when you want to play new games you are screwed?
That's fine, the authentication and other security routines are not given out as part of the source.
Nice to be appreciated.
Version 1.09 was hacked yes, hence we are on version 1.10
If we are hacked, we simply remove and/or change whatever method was used and re-release.
Not if we don't give them enough time...if needs be we can release the auth .dll 10 minutes before the games are due to start...the best hacking resources we have now take over 2 hours to break the latest version (1.11 in alpha testing atm) and even then only works with an in-memory patch, they have been unable to produce a file-based version as yet (and that's after a week of trying).
If you want to complain, complain to the server admins who are using the modified version of q2admin to auto-detect and kick non - Q2ACE users.
We are simply providing a product, you don't have to buy/use it.
Thanks for the appreciation of all the hard work we are doing by the way...makes it all worthwhile.
sheesh
B
S
ShockingAlberto
Guest
- Thread starter
- #12
B - I don't expect games to have Linux binaries, however Quake2 does, hence i play it.
I don't resent Q2Ace for any reason other than it excludes me from playing on certain servers.
I'm no coder, but i would think it would be fairly easy to keep the Q2Ace code non-OS dependant.
I don't resent Q2Ace for any reason other than it excludes me from playing on certain servers.
I'm no coder, but i would think it would be fairly easy to keep the Q2Ace code non-OS dependant.
M
Mr B
Guest
- Thread starter
- #13
There are some specific Win32 API calls that are made, in order to help maintain the security.
I dare say that once it has been stable for a while that we will consider getting a Linux guru in and coding - but until then :/
B
I dare say that once it has been stable for a while that we will consider getting a Linux guru in and coding - but until then :/
B
D
Deathwatch
Guest
- Thread starter
- #14
Glad to hear that the external DLL thing has backing from JC, and that solves the GPL issue people might have.
I'm not attacking or defending Q2Ace at this time. I don't have enough experience with it (have tried it and noticed it wasn't that great for aq2 at this time - NoCheat is better for it at this time)
It's good that you can change/update the auth dll, which is very good, however I see a problem with getting everybody to update it right away.
Alberto: making a platform independant program isn't easy (not counting java), unless you'd refrain from using anything platform dependant functions/etc or make workarounds for these problems. (yes I am a coder btw)
I'm not attacking or defending Q2Ace at this time. I don't have enough experience with it (have tried it and noticed it wasn't that great for aq2 at this time - NoCheat is better for it at this time)
It's good that you can change/update the auth dll, which is very good, however I see a problem with getting everybody to update it right away.
Alberto: making a platform independant program isn't easy (not counting java), unless you'd refrain from using anything platform dependant functions/etc or make workarounds for these problems. (yes I am a coder btw)