Author Topic: Would scanning memory for cheats be an invasion of privacy? (Read 6990 times)

lekky · « **Reply #20 on:** June 01, 2006, 06:50:15 PM »

Quote from: KnacK on May 16, 2006, 07:46:10 AM

FIles in the DP folder silly, not your goatse folder

but thats where i hide my porn

Termin8oR · « **Reply #21 on:** June 13, 2006, 11:16:40 PM »

I wouldnt care if you scanned my computer. this is one true way to find those hackers.
Just give a LARGE BOLD WARNING SAYING "SCANNING MEMORY FOR CHEATING DEVICE(S)"
Thats just an Idea. and make it as soon as you load paintball2.exe it scans before you can select an option of the game.

Just my opinion

Qoo · « **Reply #22 on:** June 14, 2006, 08:19:37 AM »

Well paintball is already good because I can just open and play within a few seconds and don't have to sit through steam/punkbuster validation. That kind of stuff is just annoying.

jitspoe · « **Reply #23 on:** June 14, 2006, 01:09:32 PM »

Validation would be done in the background and shouldn't have a noticeable impact on game play.

supertanker · « **Reply #24 on:** June 14, 2006, 07:43:40 PM »

I still don't really like the idea of scanning my memory...I mean, doesn't PC stand for Personal Computer?

Plus, my really weird anti-spyware utility doesn't allow other programs to do memory scans...(Not mentioned so that i don't attract hackers)...

Plus, my computer can barely handel paintball on its own. Might not be 'noticable' for a fairly high end Celeron or something, but not on a really old pIII with about 25 megs of ram free :/

JOE · « **Reply #25 on:** June 16, 2006, 02:32:49 AM »

this is probubly a bit late, but why not just put it in the ELUA and just scan the paintball files

meat · « **Reply #26 on:** June 16, 2006, 07:44:32 AM »

I like this idea Jitspoe, I don't think it would be a violation of privacy accept, like others mentions it should be made known via the EULA. Also, will this prevent people from claiming that I or someone else is hacking, when in fact that is not true? My idea is that, if their computer is scanned, nothing is detected, could we put a little green light on the scoreboard or something silly like that? The reason I bring this up, is because for the first time in....a very long time....I played some pball and not 20 minutes into playing I was being accused of being a hacker.... I know this is something that is probably impossible to get rid of, but I figured it's worth a shot.

**Upon further reading about Build 16, I'm now an idiot, I didnt realise global ban existed**

XtremeBain · « **Reply #27 on:** June 17, 2006, 12:19:25 PM »

Quote from: JOE on June 16, 2006, 02:32:49 AM

this is probubly a bit late, but why not just put it in the ELUA and just scan the paintball files

Because GL Cheats can be hooked from anywhere, not just the gl driver native to paintball. But these hooks will appear memory regardless of where they're coming from.

SkateR · « **Reply #28 on:** June 17, 2006, 11:09:13 PM »

Why dont you just have a server side screen shot thingy. I think that would be the best and the easiest?

Eiii · « **Reply #29 on:** June 17, 2006, 11:48:00 PM »

You can't get a screen of an aimbot, and wallhacks could be turned on and off.

Smokey · « **Reply #30 on:** June 18, 2006, 12:19:23 AM »

well, random intervals own then.

IronFist · « **Reply #31 on:** June 22, 2006, 12:14:08 AM »

Post removed

jitspoe · « **Reply #32 on:** June 22, 2006, 01:01:14 PM »

NoCheat isn't exactly external, and punkbuster would cost money, may not be GPL compatible, and is popular enough that there are plenty of anti-punkbuster cheats around.

IronFist · « **Reply #33 on:** June 22, 2006, 04:41:26 PM »

Post removed

SkateR · « **Reply #34 on:** June 26, 2006, 02:43:38 PM »

Most wallhacks cant be turned on/off for dp? Even if they can, you wont know when its taking a screenshot so you still have a chance of getting caught..and i really dont think anyone uses aimbots anymore rofl.

TinMan · « **Reply #35 on:** June 26, 2006, 02:58:52 PM »

that Snaz-Bot still works well.

supertanker · « **Reply #36 on:** June 27, 2006, 09:55:00 PM »

I think server-side would be best, the server should look for anything anamolous, log them, and ban or kick people based on how many times it was detected.

As for screenshots, it had better not send them online, it would kill diaup users. (Such as myself)

I think an external prog would be best approach, so people trying to test Paintball (such as map makers, like myself) wouldn't have to be inconvieniecved) and could turn it off. It would be easy enough to make servers test for this program...

You could make it closed source but free. Shogo, for example, has an Anti-Cheat client. Its optional, but you need it to play on public servers. But if you just want to test (Say, make a map) you can remove it.

I'm not really opposed to this. I just beleive that people should have the choice to have it or not, at the expense of being able to play on public servers. Because to me, anything else is an invasion of privacy.

TinMan · « **Reply #37 on:** June 27, 2006, 10:16:22 PM »

Whatever you do, keep the actual client OpenSource and GPL, make all the anti-cheat stuff external.

jitspoe · « **Reply #38 on:** June 28, 2006, 11:39:59 AM »

Making a map would not trigger any kind of cheat detection, unless, of course, you wanted to test how it played with a wallhack enabled or something...

supertanker · « **Reply #39 on:** July 02, 2006, 10:12:30 PM »

Quote from: jitspoe on June 28, 2006, 11:39:59 AM

Making a map would not trigger any kind of cheat detection, unless, of course, you wanted to test how it played with a wallhack enabled or something...

Yes, I want to play with a Wallhack against the oh-so-skilled BOTS, who make their presense known well enough even if you can't see them.

But yes, keep the client OpenSource and GPL.

I should never had gotten hooked on Linux...