Aim assist/bot/hack detection idea based on parts of screenshots and comparisions.

[SkybuckFlying]

The game itself could receive secret/encrypted coordinates/region of screen that is to be sent back to server together with player's graphics settings.

 

The server then sends these parts of the user's screen to a special computer ment for detecting aim botters/assists/hacks.

 

The cheat/hack detector computer then uses the player's graphics settings to render how the screen on the user's computer should look like. Slight difference like a 1/10 of a percent so 0.1% or even lower would be allowed to compensate for slight graphics driver/hardware differences. Anything larger than that is suspicious.

 

The small area sent back would be random or of particular interest, for example the enemy ship that was just hit or fired at... to see if there are lead indicators there... sometimes when ship behind islands it could also be done to see if a see through hack is used.

 

This screen-shotting facility should be implemented at the lowest levels of directx so that it becomes somewhat hard to intercept and avoid it.

 

At the very least this would cause the cheater's computer to have twice the rendering power:

 

1. One time to render the real screen.

2. One time to render the hacked screen.

 

If the screenshotting facility is circumvented or disabled that means a deliberate attempt to avoid detection.

 

This hack detector and data would only be collected when stats are out of the ordinary so for example much higher win rates than normal... to avoid overloading this computer.

 

And it would only be done for 1 random frame during a battle.

 

Once appropriate actions are taken against cheaters the load on this hack detector computer will reduce.

[vartain]

Thank you for bringing humour to this forum, I personally think you should receive some form of reward for your contribution.

[Kevbar]

....and this children, is why drugs are bad. Just say "NO!"

[onya999]

Someone

 

Stop

 

Him

 

Posting

 

Oh and sorry about the double spacing, I was trying to make a point.

[Admiral_noodle]

...no. Skybuck you've missed the point. A client side cheat could easily get round your "idea" by simply lying to the code designed to detect cheats.

 

In addition client side cheats don't work like that anyway. They simply utilise information already sent to the client from the server...

 

I could go on but I won't. Simply put, idea will not work.

[SkybuckFlying]

How would it lie according to you ? I have already taken that into consideration but still enlighten us ! ;)

 

(I am not saying the method can't be circumvented, however it will cost them some performance... perhaps the idea can be modified so it becomes unreasonable expensive for them to try and fool it)

[simonmd]

The server then sends these parts of the user's screen to a special computer ment for detecting aim botters/assists/hacks.

 

The cheat/hack detector computer then uses the player's graphics settings to render how the screen on the user's computer should look like.

 

Aww, it gets sent back to a 'Special Computer'? Would that be in a special room operated by special people? 

 

Assuming for a moment this isnt a joke thread, whos going to pay for this facility, YOU? Gold and premiums are expensive enough as it is thanks very much, without Wargaming investing thousands on something that isnt even feasable. 

[TomaszuJerzy]

The only cheater/ assist i met in game is RNG. 100 shoots at cv with no fire and then after 3rd bomb run 2 fires just before my death. 50 he shoots st enemy dd for 10k and when hes 300hp left next 20 do 0 dmg.

[kfa]

To be honest i am starting to think that he is not retarded (as i was anticipating until recently) but the best forum troll i have ever seen and actually pretty clever.

[Oberendgegner]

To be honest i am starting to think that he is not retarded (as i was anticipating until recently) but the best forum troll i have ever seen and actually pretty clever.

 

Maybe both.... ?

 

On topic: How about a special Wargaming Police Department. Or a special Wargaming SWAT team. When you kill OP they will raid your home and take your computer to inspect it for hacks. Problem solved, case closed.

[aboomination]

I had a great gaming session with my buddies - we did really well and had good conversations. Now I read this. Fu.ck!

[Cosseria]

Getting back from the Giraglia 2016 and seeing the forum polluted by 6 iterations of SFF's spam, it was like opening the toilet door in the boat after a long night of stormy weather and seasick crews.

SFF, go vomit somewhere else.

[woppy101]

....and this children, is why drugs are bad. Just say "NO!"

 

you just won the Internet hahaha

[SkybuckFlying]

...no. Skybuck you've missed the point. A client side cheat could easily get round your "idea" by simply lying to the code designed to detect cheats.

 

In addition client side cheats don't work like that anyway. They simply utilise information already sent to the client from the server...

 

I could go on but I won't. Simply put, idea will not work.

 

Listen to what your "saying".

 

Nowadays entire games are "live streamed" to thousands and thousands of people at the same time !

 

Now the reverse needs to happen, take a tiny little piece of their screen and examine it.

 

How hard could it be ?!

 

And best of all, it doesn't even need to happen at the same time... it can just be cherry picking and at random... eventually all cheaters will be caught ! ;)

 

Perhaps you are just afraid that you will be caught ! HA-HA-HA ! =D

 

However people shouldn't be instantly banned, I can imagine people wanting to try stuff out to see if it's real, how it works, to see how much benefit it really gives etc, to form an oppinion on it... and perhaps even learn from it... I'd bet you $10 those aim assist users will have learned something from it !

 

Perhaps this game should include an aim assist/tutorial to teach players how to shoot, by example ! Kinda nice idea ! ;)

 

World of Planes had something like this if I remember correctly... yeah...

[Admiral_noodle]

...

 

Skybuck... All the cheats I know about use information already provided to the client by the server - just in ways not intended. (e.g. aim assist... used data the client does have and needs to know to properly render enemy ships. Aim assist made use of that to give you a lead...)

 

NONE of the cheats are anything to do with hacking the server information.

 

so...

 

"The game itself could receive secret/encrypted coordinates/region of screen that is to be sent back to server together with player's graphics settings."

 

 - what? What is this achieving? What is it even sending back? Screen scrapes??

 

"The small area sent back would be random or of particular interest, for example the enemy ship that was just hit or fired at... to see if there are lead indicators there... sometimes when ship behind islands it could also be done to see if a see through hack is used."

 

THERE IS NO SEE THROUGH HACK. If a ship isn't visible/detected the server simply *doesn't send* this information to the client.

 

Sorry but this is madness

 

...please don't let me reply again

[MaxxyNL]

Another daily SkyBuckFlying fail topic. 

 

[bushwacker001]

All this crying about hacks and cheats skybuck.....are you still selling bots, hacks and cheats for star trek online through your website these days?

 

 

 

note - He had his account terminated by Star Trek Online for using bots.

I can prove all of this by the way but can't post the links for obvious reasons.

[SerPurr]

Lying cheats? 

 

[Zed_Von_Toza]

...

 

Skybuck... All the cheats I know about use information already provided to the client by the server - just in ways not intended. (e.g. aim assist... used data the client does have and needs to know to properly render enemy ships. Aim assist made use of that to give you a lead...)

 

NONE of the cheats are anything to do with hacking the server information.

 

so...

 

"The game itself could receive secret/encrypted coordinates/region of screen that is to be sent back to server together with player's graphics settings."

 

 - what? What is this achieving? What is it even sending back? Screen scrapes??

 

"The small area sent back would be random or of particular interest, for example the enemy ship that was just hit or fired at... to see if there are lead indicators there... sometimes when ship behind islands it could also be done to see if a see through hack is used."

 

THERE IS NO SEE THROUGH HACK. If a ship isn't visible/detected the server simply *doesn't send* this information to the client.

 

Sorry but this is madness

 

...please don't let me reply again

 

 

I've worked in Software Development for over 25 years, and this is the way I think the game works.

 

All information and data is processed in the game client. All the server does is set up the battle and then coordinate communications between all the clients involved.

 

I'm in a battle I hit W my client tells the server. The server then tells everybody else in the battle I've done it. They can then process where they think I am and render me or spot me as required. Add on top my client sends an update every now and then to confirm my position and state. That is timestamped. All clients in the battle get that and then act on it.

 

The reason you see ships suddenly move or jitter, is because one of those updates was a bit late.

 

All the server does in act as a communications portal to pass messages between all the clients involved. Have a look at node,js, it can be used for similar purposes.

 

When we enable replays, all we are doing is writing all the updates we send to the server and receive from it in a file. When we want we use the client to replay the battle, because the messages and data and ship stats etc change post update, that's why you can only play a replay on the version of the client that made it. 

[Admiral_noodle]

@Zed. Mostly. But afaik the server is the authoritative source. Only the server knows everything - and can disregard data it doesn't like from clients.

 

It also only tells the client what it needs to know. If you can't see a ship on the minimap and it's not detected by your team. The client does not know where it is. Only the server does (oh and the other client)

 

In addition I think damage and hits are decided by the server then sent to the client.

 

So most claimed hacks are impossible. Client side cheats do exist (and are being clamped down on).

[Zed_Von_Toza]

@Zed. Mostly. But afaik the server is the authoritative source. Only the server knows everything - and can disregard data it doesn't like from clients.

 

It also only tells the client what it needs to know. If you can't see a ship on the minimap and it's not detected by your team. The client does not know where it is. Only the server does (oh and the other client)

 

In addition I think damage and hits are decided by the server then sent to the client.

 

So most claimed hacks are impossible. Client side cheats do exist (and are being clamped down on)

 

 ​Yup server is king, but damage and hits are, I think, decided by the client who gets hit. RNG will have been processed by the client who fired the shots, telling the server shells on this vector. I get the info in my client render shells etc and because of the game engine physics know where the shells will fall and when. If my ship incepts the shells, my client game engine processes the hits and issues damage which is passed back to the server, for it to pass off to all other connected clients.

Also your client does know the position of everything in game friendly or otherwise, given the number of battles played at any given time WG simply could not afford the computing resources needed to do that work. Let the clients do it and just pass out status updates.

[Admiral_noodle]

I think damage and hits are server side because with desync you can be sunk with HP apparently remaining. This suggests hits and damage are calculated by the server. It's also "safer".

 

If the client decided if you were hit and damaged that would be much easier to hack - and you'd have reports of invulnerable ships...

[Zed_Von_Toza]

@Admiral First bit makes sense, Second bit on ease of hack, I don't think it would be easy, you would have to hack the game engine itself, and that would be really easy for WG to spot instantly. Any hack that exists (if they exist) will pray on the code and technology wrapped around the engine. The stuff that feeds data into and out of the engine and renders the display etc.

[Admiral_noodle]

Possibly. But then there such things as memory hacks. How would the server know it's being lied to by a hacked client?

Anyway it's still clear to me that most of the complex calcs are done on server side. Client just records user input and renders what it's told to. That also makes sense in minimising network traffic, and also minimising impact on cpu - thus allowing the client PC to concentrate on graphics and smoothness.

Compare to sim games for example which murder my PC. Wows doesn't really trouble my cpu.

 

(16 years of software development here. )

[Phlogistoned]

I actually think SkyBuckflying has a point. Screenshotting critical parts of the game's screen at certain moments,and sending those to the server for processing could reveal if the user's screen contains any cheat elements.

 

However, that too would turn into just an extra hurdle, since the screenshotting code runa on the client.