home home

downloads files

forum forum

docs docs

wiki wiki

faq faq

Cube & Cube 2 FORUM

Considering shutting down master server...

by eihrul on 09/18/2006 02:59, 114 messages, last message: 10/21/2006 04:37, 88851 views, last view: 02/01/2023 12:51

Well, today I've seen the biggest display of immaturity I've ever seen. People running around, connecting to servers as soon as they saw someone else connect, crashing other clients, banning them, etc.

If this is what it has come to, we'll just shut down the master server. People only seem to want to abuse the service we're graciously providing for free, and fuck it up for everyone else.

If that's the case, if that's what some of you guys really want, fine, we'll just shut down the service since it's basically unusable to anyone as is.

Go to first 20 messagesGo to previous 20 messages    Board Index   

#95: ..

by Pointed on 09/30/2006 12:53


Tnx for hack

Tnx for this situation...

Tnx for master server


... and fuck.

reply to this message

#96: ..

by chead on 09/30/2006 14:37

Hacks are internet/network pranks.

reply to this message

#97: ...

by Unsigned on 09/30/2006 22:22

I understand that the developers shut down the master server because they felt it was being abused by individuals who modified and rebuilt their code, their actions were completely justifiable in that sense. However, is it not true that the number of people who legitimately used the master server outweigh the number of cheaters? There will never be a multiplayer game that is free of cheating, even commercial games such as CounterStrike and Call of Duty see that. Those companies still release their games though, don't they? It should be the developers goal to implement a feature that combats cheating, and while stopping EVERYONE from playing may accomplish that, surely you can agree that it's not the most practical solution? I hope the master server comes back up soon.

reply to this message

#98: Re: ..

by Passa on 09/30/2006 23:56, refers to #93

How the hell did you find that out?

reply to this message

#99: Re: ..

by eihrul on 10/01/2006 00:08, refers to #98

He didn't.

reply to this message

#100: Re: ..

by Passa on 10/01/2006 01:11, refers to #99


On a positive note, Defcon is sexeh :-)

reply to this message

#101: Re: This Subject

by CrazyTB on 10/01/2006 01:51, refers to #65

> The "Crash Hack" is caused by sending many hit packets
> to the server, with a negative damage being dealt.

Things sent over network must always be checked. If not in server, in clients.

Not checking is like not thinking if you should do something someone else told you to do. So, if someone says "hit hard your head on wall", you do it, even if that might kill you. This analogy can be applied to network data.

After this is done, we can add code to server (or client) to check if someone is taking damage correctly, if has the correct ammo quantity.

reply to this message

#102: Why?

by Shorebang on 10/01/2006 02:22

I understand you dislike having so many hackers in your most excellent of engines. But, why not just code a simple banlist?

reply to this message

#103: Re: Why?

by eihrul on 10/01/2006 03:43, refers to #102

Step away from the computer. Look in the dictionary for the definition of "simple". Reflect on its meaning and how it relates to your proposed solution. When you think you've figured it out, repeat from beginning.

reply to this message

#104: I reall..

by Jung on 10/01/2006 03:48

I really have no idea how shutting down the server will stop cheating or teach anyone a lesson. It will simply kill the game. There's not even a message that says "Master's been shut down because of cheaters." People will just figure the game doesn't work. Hell, most users can't even figure out how to change their name. How will they figure out how to get on IRC?

reply to this message

#105: banished

by Cida on 10/01/2006 04:08

I wish I acquaint than it is to the one my son as of 7anos he used to be getting into the manner edicao. I AND the one my husband we adore this game AND ja we take providencia for it to This nao aconteca mais.Por favor believes well into at the.I am a woman AND never adopt this one he situates.

reply to this message

#106: Re: I reall..

by eihrul on 10/01/2006 04:22, refers to #104

The point is not to stop cheating. The point is, for the moment, it is better to have players complaining about not being able to find people to play with, than have them complaining about random crashes.

The master server will be up again soon maybe, but we're still working on stuff at the moment.

reply to this message

#107: ..

by Stakhanov on 10/03/2006 02:20

I think it will take a while to have less people complaining about the master server , than complaining about cheaters. Once there are though , persistant cheaters may count for a larger percent of the playing base.

reply to this message

#108: the masterserver...

by Aardappel_ on 10/03/2006 02:21

is coming back, for the time being, while we work on better identity features.

reply to this message

#109: ?

by Death (CLL) on 10/03/2006 03:05

A few questions?

One what is the IRC.... not to sound like a noob or anything i mean i have been with cube and sauer sense the begining and i have started to make maps with other players and what not.

Also what will shuting down the master server do. Except postpone the playing of Sauer online till enough complaint messages come in. Sure if it is for a little while till the master server is fixed, people would complain. But not for a long time (More then a month)... if shuting it down for a while is neccessary then some how create a temporary server or something.

I also beleive that shuting down the master server will not stop hackers.
If someone can hack the game they for sure can get on the IRC.

P.S. what is with the math problem?

reply to this message

#110: Re: ?

by SleepwalkR on 10/04/2006 13:41, refers to #109

The math problem is to help fend off spam bots.

reply to this message

#111: ..

by Ridiculous on 10/04/2006 22:30

How on this ginormous orbitting rock, we call Earth, can you possibly say that some one hacked code written in an OO language?! If you think you can do any real hacking in OO, then sorry, but you're a blithering idiot. If you change one little thing in a function, any other function which depended on something you changed won't work. That's why real programmers write in C. You can't have problems like that if you can't recycle code, now can you. Changing constants isn't hacking, it's retarded.

In other words: When you choose convenience over functionality, this is what you get.

I appreciate all the work the developers put into the game and I recognize that hard work, but damn. Quit your whining, you have more important things to worry about. In the time you've all spent crying about "hackers" destroying the game, you could've easily written at least a halfway decent physics engine and

Now, if everyone would either stop crying or put forth a reasonable solution, that'd be magnificent!

My suggestion: Stop focusing on higher level stuff and start worrying about memory manipulation. Write code which uses the length and relative location in memory of certain variables to determine if the game has been hacked or not and either use a protected checksum (better idea) or a conditional in connect function (disgusting idea) to enable or disable multiplayer.

reply to this message

#112: ..

by maximillion_x on 10/08/2006 15:03

why not support punkbuster?

reply to this message

#113: ..

by Wolfgang on 10/12/2006 14:01

Because it is commercial and works only for closed source games.

reply to this message

#114: Re: ..

by ADINSX on 10/21/2006 04:37, refers to #111

While changing constants isn\'t hacking in any sense, you should realize that changing a constant isn\'t going to get you a crash hack. When I created the crash hack (which I appoligized for the one day I used it), I had to actually rewrite more code than you probably realize. It isn\'t like I typed in \"bool crashhack = 1;\"

I noticed flaw, and I took advantage of it. Was it wrong? Most definitely. Was it done in 5 minutes? Most deffinitely not.

\"My suggestion: Stop focusing on higher level stuff and start worrying about memory manipulation. Write code which uses the length and relative location in memory of certain variables to determine if the game has been hacked or not and either use a protected checksum (better idea) or a conditional in connect function (disgusting idea) to enable or disable multiplayer.\"

That would be easy to circumvent.

For example, if the code is organized as such:

1: Generate value based on current position in memory.

That is step one, and already there is a problem. If someone obtains the value that is obtained by the current position in memory after the variable had been created, then it does nothing to the integrity of the data. Therefore, all a person has to do is obtain this value, and make it so the variable always equals said value (whichever variable is storing the position in memory of the original variable). After that, a person is free to edit any portion of the game, even before the memory location is obtained.

And because the person is always going to generate the exactly appropriate value, any checksum or hash is not going to make any difference in the verification of the legitimacy of the data.

I know I worded what I said poorly, but I had a hard time putting what I wanted to say to words without making it sound confusing.

Or did I read incorrectly what you said?

reply to this message

Go to first 20 messagesGo to previous 20 messages    Board Index   

Unvalidated accounts can only reply to the 'Permanent Threads' section!

content by Aardappel & eihrul © 2001-2023
website by SleepwalkR © 2001-2023
49094958 visitors requested 65916062 pages
page created in 0.034 seconds using 10 queries
hosted by Boost Digital