[/eVo/CRIMENY]

Will there be a preventative/flagging feature as part of the anti-cheat solution? Something which flags an unknown or unusual process is functioning alongside or even directly with UrT, and keeps a database to see if it appears more frequently? I'm thinking that unknown cheats (especially in other countries) won't be as easy to pick out for a non-native speaker (search terms in another language wouldn't be used unless they knew the language) or someone who doesn't use a search engine to scour alternate domains. If there can be a system to categorize known processes as safe (judging by something other than the process name, as it could be faked) and others as unknown, an unknown process could then be researched and the unknown cheat identified and blocked. I'm just trying to think of ways to catch something that is rogue because of geographical location, and I think flagging unknown processes for further investigation would be a good route to take, to confirm or deny an unknown cheat.

[Crazylys]

CRIMENY, on 13 October 2009 - 10:44 PM, said:

Will there be a preventative/flagging feature as part of the anti-cheat solution? Something which flags an unknown or unusual process is functioning alongside or even directly with UrT, and keeps a database to see if it appears more frequently? I'm thinking that unknown cheats (especially in other countries) won't be as easy to pick out for a non-native speaker (search terms in another language wouldn't be used unless they knew the language) or someone who doesn't use a search engine to scour alternate domains. If there can be a system to categorize known processes as safe (judging by something other than the process name, as it could be faked) and others as unknown, an unknown process could then be researched and the unknown cheat identified and blocked. I'm just trying to think of ways to catch something that is rogue because of geographical location, and I think flagging unknown processes for further investigation would be a good route to take, to confirm or deny an unknown cheat.

There is a limit between a spyware, trojan and anticheat. I'm so annoyed about many games that don't give a shit about basic respect of computer security model, requiring the computer's owner to allow a game to bypass any OS security layout just to be able to run.

I can undertand the need for antivirus or system tool to have a wide access to the computer resources, but a game should have nothing to do with that and should be able to run with a standard
privilege user account, and without the need to install rookit, system hook or whatever.
But nowadays you kinda often end up with intrusive code, both security and privacy wise with softwares you purchase either for anticheat, DRM, or copy protection purpose.

Furthermore all the games that uses such anti-cheat techniques get owned anyway. The cheat softwares get more and more stealthly and are hidding themselves with supervisor privileges, which requires in turn so called anticheat spyware to run at the same level to be able to directly spot them. It's just a matter of time that cheat engine will exploit the hypervisor. And so on...
It's useless escalating run. While it may catch cheaters on the way, it's at the expense of messing with the majority of legitimate users computers.

I don't know how will work the UrT anticheat but I do hope it is doing it respectfully with my computer security and privacy, and by so with me.

Hmm.. well I'm just bored with the INSTALL-ME-AND-I-DO-WHAT-I-WANT-WITH-YOUR-COMPUTER current software trend
..ranting mode OFF...

This post has been edited by Crazylys: 14 October 2009 - 07:55 AM

[rfx]

Crazylys, on 14 October 2009 - 07:03 AM, said:

Hmm.. well I'm just bored with the INSTALL-ME-AND-I-DO-WHAT-I-WANT-WITH-YOUR-COMPUTER current software trend
..ranting mode OFF...

Another off-topic post, but man, I'm so with you in this case.

UrT developers simply rock, I don't think they will f\/<k this up

[FS |HSO|RaideR]

This is all hypothetical.

But... an anti-cheat does not become spyware if it is doing the one and only task its told to do. That is prevent cheats from being played with the game. AC is almost exactly like an Anti-Virus, since it is used to detect viral code. Now most people with any sense at all have an AV of some kind, most likely AVG if you don't wish to pay, and certainly any company worth its salt has protection as standard.

Allowing an Anti-Cheat by us to run as a privileged user should not be a "Big Issue" mainly because you could run your hacks as a super / privileged user and therefor the AC to detect it by hiding it. That is why while i agree with your concern... I think its a little off base. Also ... if a cheat exploites our AC to gain access and steel data from you, thats your fault for using hacks in the first place with our AC enabled!

[Crazylys]

My concern, if not having one different system hook by game following this concept , is not about a cheat that may exploit the AC, but simply is about the AC sending unknown information (to me) from my PC to a third party server.
Even Antivirus software do not send computer infos to their server until you allow them to do so. They can simply scan and do their work.

An AC can also scan and report a positive match to the anticheat server, allowing to ban or whatever, eventually with cheat ID/event to identify the reason of the ban, without the need to send private computer information. Furthermore when as an user I don't know which information is being gathered on my computer.

I don't care about an Hardware ID, my IP or Quake 3 datas such as c_var to be collected because it does not say much about me. ( One can always crossmatch such datas with other sites to get more usefull infos but that's beyond my points and its done regulary by things such as google and alike).
But however I consider for example reporting my process list to the server, which directly tells what software I may be using on my computer to breach my privacy. And what other infos might being sent? url opened in my browser, memory chunk of my PC that may contains login, password or personal datas, and so on..

I'm just concerned when a program is sending private datas from my PC when I have no idea what is being transmitted.

This post has been edited by Crazylys: 14 October 2009 - 10:05 AM

[FS |HSO|RaideR]

This is the difference between well coded, trusted applications and dodgy ones.

By law we are obligated to tell you what data we hold about you and why (as per the data protection act). We do not keep that kind of data. Also many items of data exist in our system as hash values rather than there true values. This allows for searching and checking of violations, but our staff nor our admins or even god forbid someone who compromises our database can see the raw data, as it simply does not exist.

You trust companys every single day with your credit card details when you pay for anything on your card. There is nothing to stop them keeping a copy of that info and then using it for there own ends. In fact some do (purchase tracking), shady business.

This is why I object personally speaking to people who go overboard on "there privacy". Because while i respect and also want myself what i consider to be private remain so. It comes down to trust. Do you trust MSN, Yahoo, Firefox, Office or even Windows, Linux (choose a distro) or Apple OS, not to be spying on you?

This is an interesting topic of discussion, but again it is simply a trust element. If your trust Kalish, Myself and the Dev Team to make a AC that only does things in the pursuit of cleaning up the game. Then download and use. If however you are still concerned about what data is flowing over our AC system, then don't install it and don't use it. Because honestly, this is the only choice you have to make .

[Crazylys]

I trust none. This is somehow my "default privacy setting". Now unless I wanna live in a cave, or keep my money in stash at home and whatsoever, or be uberly paranoiac, I still use some of these services. Most of the time by commodity, which however does not mean it pleases me. But the less there is, the better.

Even sometimes I wanna play a game so much that I will tolerate to run their crappy DRM,Anticheat or whatever.
Gluttony sin is not only for cakes but also for games even if it's not "healthy" .
So I will probably continue to play Urban Terror even with such AC.

But still since CRIMENY brought out the subject, I just wanted to express my opposite view on concept.

This post has been edited by Crazylys: 14 October 2009 - 11:46 AM

[FS |HSO|RaideR]

LoL well it's a valid point. Personally I know that the development of IT Systems and interconnection between them via the internet open a Pandora box of hell. The problem is that I believe that shying away from the problem gets no one anywhere, we stand still and no longer evolve. Granted in some respects we should slow down and think things through a little more before playing with some fire. But in order to progress in the world we need to take risks, hopefully thought, fair risk, rather than huge risk!

I'm not saying your shy away approach is the wrong one, but its defiantly a back seat in a life that is no where near long enough .

[Crazylys]

This is getting slightly off topic

I'm not at all against interconnection and alike. And I'm not the "shy" type for such. And if I was an super scientist I will probably be some Dr Frankeinstein, or build an uber LHC and BOOM the Earth

To make myself more clear, the following example:

I would not really mind CCTV to be installed everywhere in the streets. For sure it would be used to track my behaviour and alike and affect my privacy. And I would still hope for some control so it would not be easily abused either by criminals, governments.....
But however I clearly not want one of the CCTV filming inside my home.

Same goes for my computer. Google, Amazon and whoever may store info and do profiling and crossing infos about me when I visit them. They collect info that I'm willingly directly or indirectly providing to them by browsing their server. And I can live with that.
But my internet browser does not allow them (unless using some exploits ) to start scanning my pc and take whatever datas they want. And I would like if it could be the same for every software, to not send X information from my PC unless I explicitely allow X to collected.

This post has been edited by Crazylys: 14 October 2009 - 12:38 PM

[FS |HSO|RaideR]

Of course... i wouldn't like this also. What is interesting here, is that I agree with what you are saying about data probing. But if software is open about what data it transmits surely we are ok with it ?