.com.unity Forums - So how 'bout those Mets?

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- Dominions 2: The Ascension Wars (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=55)

- - So how 'bout those Mets? (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=20226)

Re: Mumbling about MP security

Quote:

If he modified gem inventories to do stuff with it, then the game presumably isn't too fanatical about checking this, or the server itself was somehow compromised or worked-around.

No it was the turn file itself. As near as can be figured the .trn had a gem number, the gems were added, and then they were "money laundered" into other things before returning the .2h to the server. There were checks but even the checks that were put into the game caused complaints from players when they reported "cheats" which werent really cheating players. That may have slowed down adding additional checks.

Re: Mumbling about MP security

Quote:

...One thing Im worrie about is that now that Illwinter has shown they can dismantle a turn file to get answers Im afraid they will be swamped by requests every time any player feels another player did something shady. As often as we see Posts to that affect here which get answered as possibilitys that the player hadnt considered, you can see how busy that might be.

This also worries me. I'm thinking of having my server make a a complete .tar.bz2 image of the game directory every turn.Then a master password, and independent part (NOT ME!!!) and the backup history could determine any cheating for sure.

What do you think?

Re: Mumbling about MP security

yah that would work wonders even if only to scare off certain potential cheaters. all that really happened here was that IIRC was that the existence of a master password allowed norfleets lies and the extend of his cheating to be exposed. a turn by turn history would might also, however, have provided valuable clues as to what precisely he was manipulating.

Re: Mumbling about MP security

Quote:

If for no other reason, it would be simple enough to implement and would at least make everyone feel better. If you need a "neutral server" we can setup an auto-ftp between your server and mine. Or you could put the tar's in a directory and just schedule a remote sync using some sort of mirror software.

Re: Mumbling about MP security

Quote:

What was apparently done was that the turn file was edited to have extra gems. Those gems had to be converted to something else or used in forge commands or turned into gold and used to make troops in that same turn before turning in a 2h. The game does have checks for such things but the variations make for alot of "thinking" needed by the game. The game sent him a turn with XX gems in each Category, and received back a 2h file of commands to do things. To take into account the original amounts, plus new gem income, plus all of the things that can be done with it in order to decide "oops too much" is pretty hairy. Especially when you try to reverse logic the troop queue to the gold to the fire gems made from the astral gems which were made from the death gems just as one example. NOT IMPOSSIBLE before someone jumps my case about it, just hairy and time consuming to get it put in.

Hmmm, frankly I still want to jump you case about it Gandalf, since I don't see the server-side gem tracking to be such a huge problem to implement, but I'll let it pass. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif Otherwise we would become involved into discussions what constitutes to be "hairy" and what doesn't. And most likely end up agreeing on sciencific terms such as "hairy but with big bald patches", or "balding but still retaining some hair". http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/laugh.gif

Re: Mumbling about MP security

Quote:

My answers are not Johans. He is already looking at it.

Part of the problem is that this is a forum full of programmers to whom nothing is impossible. And Im more hacker to whom no absolute security is considered possible. But I should stop arguing the points to allow for placebos if nothing else. (insert truly evil smiley here)

Re: Mumbling about MP security

Quote:

My answers are not Johans. He is already looking at it.

Good to hear this.

Quote:

Part of the problem is that this is a forum full of programmers to whom nothing is impossible. And Im more hacker to whom no absolute security is considered possible. But I should stop arguing the points to allow for placebos if nothing else. (insert truly evil smiley here)

Heh. Between hackers and programers, all interested at the same goal, some good security ideas could be developed... http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Re: Mumbling about MP security

Quote:

Absolute security may not be possible, but, as described above, client hacks can be eliminated by simply passing the client a partial copy of the game state, with the client only returning a list of orders to the server. Then it doesn't matter what you do to the client, the server processes the orders against the true game state. If you screw around with the client or the information passed to the client, then you'll only be hurting yourself as your orders won't map properly to the true game state.

A cheap safeguard, if only in reverse...

Quote:

Yeah, my feelings, too. Hunting for an actual cheat (on a subtle scale, not norfleetscale) would be like searching for a straw in a haystack...

No need for the neutral server. If my server is comprismised, or if I'm dishonest, nothing will change that. I'll try to make an implementation tomorrow or Sunday, but no promises... but now I really have to sleep http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

Re: Mumbling about MP security

Quote:

Yeap, that's what I had in mind as well. I said earlier when I quoted "the client is in the hands of the enemy" mantra, all importent tasks should be performed only by the server, and the server should keep in mind state of the previous turn (or even several turns, for additional security checks). Than, *as long as server is not compromised*, such sustem is practically impossible to hack from the client side, with hex edit or anything else. And I am sure Mose (as well as other people with good technical knowledge who may decide to run public servers for the Dom2 community in the future) can protect well his server from being hacked directly, that would become nesseserly to do in order to hack various Dom2 hosts that are being run on his computer. In any case such hack would be much more complex and difficult to pull of, that the current mostly client-centered system, and IMHO very unlikely to be developed at all. Remeber, after all the probability of new hack being developed is directly proportinal to the size of the players community. And unlike Blizzard's MP games, Dom2 have 1000 times smaller audience, therefore the apperance of very complex server based hacks, that would also require server's security to be breached in order for them to work, IMHO extremely unlikely.