Curse

Revelations · Jan 22, 2010, 02:05 PM // 14:05

I'm not even going to bother quotewarsing that, because I don't believe any of it made the slightest bit of sense. That plus the fact that it decided to entirely ignore the post it was written in response to.

The bot can easily be found on google code. It has been spread about on another well known/less strict forum. It's public, and if it's not prolific yet, it will be. It comes with DOCUMENTATION for easy user modification. Denying what is only a three minute google search away is stupid.

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

no one can tell us whether there's an actual threat

I lie. I am going to quote this, because it alone demonstrates you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. Please do the research before jumping on a bandwagon.

gone · Jan 22, 2010, 02:21 PM // 14:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

I mean, if there are some super-smart people behind these ideas and they have ethics, they'll come up with a solid proposal and that would transform completely the shape of this thread...

It's being injected into the GW.dat. it shouldn't need super smart people, solid proposals or ethics.

Fril Estelin · Jan 22, 2010, 02:28 PM // 14:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by flubber

It's being injected into the GW.dat. it shouldn't need super smart people, solid proposals or ethics.

Please, remind me, how does Anet (i.e. the GW server) check YOUR gw.dat (i.e. the one on your HDD) in such a way that they can be sure you've not modified the GW client?

gone · Jan 22, 2010, 02:35 PM // 14:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Please, remind me, how does Anet (i.e. the GW server) check YOUR gw.dat (i.e. the one on your HDD) in such a way that they can be sure you've not modified the GW client?

maybe you should be asking the devs that brah. not me. pretty sure they've done it in the past.

Fril Estelin · Jan 22, 2010, 02:38 PM // 14:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by flubber

pretty sure they've done it in the past.

Can you substantiate your claim? E.g. where did you read that exactly and what was it refering to?

(the reason I'm asking is that AFAIK GW is server-centric and the client is very, very largely untrusted; and Anet seem not keen at all on client monitoring technologies)

Revelations · Jan 22, 2010, 02:41 PM // 14:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by flubber

It's being injected into the GW.dat. it shouldn't need super smart people, solid proposals or ethics.

No, it's being injected into the GW process as it runs. The dat file has nothing to do with it. A dl file is a library of code used to extend .exe files.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Please, remind me, how does Anet (i.e. the GW server) check YOUR gw.dat (i.e. the one on your HDD) in such a way that they can be sure you've not modified the GW client?

Anet doesn't check your dat file. If anything goes wrong with it you usually won't notice until something occurs during gameplay. As for the exe file there is likely some sort of hash check on startup, but such a measure entirely fails to catch say... a dll injected into the process.

It would be very possible to create another outside process which monitors GW.exe for any sudden changes in behaviour. It could then terminate the process, flag any accounts accessed, or undertake similar actions. However, such a process is vulnerable to the exact loophole that the bots all use to function anyway. Intercept enough packets between the process and the server it communicates with and you can start to replicate normal behaviour artificially. It will buy some time however, though how much I am unable to say.

gone · Jan 22, 2010, 02:43 PM // 14:43

reading up on it as I type. my german is a bit rusty lol.

/edit
if it is going into the process then wouldn't a mem check of some kind be in order?

Tullzinski · Jan 22, 2010, 02:47 PM // 14:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revelations

The bot can easily be found on google code. It has been spread about on another well known/less strict forum. It's public, and if it's not prolific yet, it will be. It comes with DOCUMENTATION for easy user modification. Denying what is only a three minute google search away is stupid.

/agree Sunec has done a very nice job on the program. After reviewing it I would be able to have any of the premade bots up and running in a day or so. Creating other bots would take me a lot longer due to a lack of exposure to the programming.

Fril have you reviewed what has been created and placed on google code? I can pm how to get to it if you desire to review it. I for one would be very interested in what you think about it all...

Fril Estelin · Jan 22, 2010, 02:49 PM // 14:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revelations

Anet doesn't check your dat file. If anything goes wrong with it you usually won't notice until something occurs during gameplay.

It would be very possible to create another outside process which monitors GW.exe for any sudden changes in behaviour. It could then terminate the process, flag any accounts accessed, or undertake similar actions. However, such a process is vulnerable to the exact loophole that the bots all use to function anyway. Intercept enough packets between the process and the server it communicates with and you can start to replicate normal behaviour artificially. It will buy some time however, though how much I am unable to say.

Warden and PunkBuster are the two mostly used monitors in the gaming industry. You need a privileged module which can still be bypassed, as many games have shown. Unless you tie this to a hardware token (which WoW doesn't do) with some solid crypto, which thus requires the company to manage an expensive PKI, you're not going to avoid software bypass. AFAIK the Anet founders started from the very assumption that the GW is almost completely untrusted (apart from rubberbanding-like stuff). The check you're talking about is the "sanity check", which is about ensuring that your data is not screwed, not that it's actually been modified.

Packet intercepter is another techno, much stealthier if you're careful in your programming, but heavier to manipulate. And indeed these bots do it. But it's the untrusted world of the client, you computer.

Revelations · Jan 22, 2010, 02:53 PM // 14:53

Tbh, I'm not entirely sure how the exe check is made, I can only assume from various bits of evidence given.

The main issue here is that the vast majority of potential fixes are going to be fooled by simple fake packet generation.

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

AFAIK the Anet founders started from the very assumption that the GW is almost completely untrusted (apart from rubberbanding-like stuff). The check you're talking about is the "sanity check", which is about ensuring that your data is not screwed, not that it's actually been modified.

And obviously the level of trust granted to the client is sufficient to fuel one of the most advanced bots I have seen in a game. Or rather, the traffic between client and server.

What I mentioned above is not a 'sanity check', it's a nonexistence. The gw.dat file is not checked, to my knowledge, ever. The fact that nearly everyone's dat is different makes the probability of a check being slim to none. I inferred this by stating that even should your game be RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOed, it will attempt to run anyway. If there is no check on the dat file for corruption, there sure as hell isn't one for intentional manipulation, other than perhaps checking filenames or something equally simple inside the archive. In any case, this is entirely irrelevant, since the dat file has absolutely nothing to do with this exploit.

Tullzinski · Jan 22, 2010, 02:56 PM // 14:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thevil King

And the claim that the "bot" can detect a hidden rock is simply ridiculous:

I disagree the program we are discussing, but not allowed to directly name has the ability to display a skill log of all skills are being cast by the OTHER team. Making it very easy for the bot to detect and act accordingly.

Revelations · Jan 22, 2010, 03:04 PM // 15:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tullzinski

I disagree the program we are discussing, but not allowed to directly name has the ability to display a skill log of all skills are being cast by the OTHER team. Making it very easy for the bot to detect and act accordingly.

Even if they're out of radar range. This is not a question.

Fril Estelin · Jan 22, 2010, 03:06 PM // 15:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tullzinski

Fril have you reviewed what has been created and placed google code? I can pm how to get to it if you desire to review it. I for one would be very interested in what you think about it all...

I'm not interested in this in the slightest (too busy too :P ), ty for the offer though! I have a good idea of what's probably happening. It's what happened in most FPS/RTS before, with a very different flavor due to GW's architecture (Anet is actually a pioneer of the "don't trust your client", can't wait for GW2's architecture!). I bet the guy implemented a simple high-level interface to client management/packet manipulation. I can give you the ref of a few good books where you'll find the same stuff but in basic C programming, but I digress.

Here is the reason why I'm not going to go the route of looking into this (hint: I did find it in seconds): I want people to realise it's about ethics, not coding. Botting is not only a technical plague, it plagues the mind of people (in 2 ways: to think that botting is the end of the world; and that it makes you super-player). And their computer too (does this run with Windows privileges? if so you could be executing a rootkit; if it's not done now, it may happen in the future when/if the dev will sell his work for a lot of money to RMT companies). As I said before the only way to counter that is to engage into an update cycle that' may be a bit too costly for GW1's Live Team shoulders. (I'm hoping that actually by pushing ethics into the problem people will slowly realise they're harming themselves by harming the community of their game; these things that give a silly advantage in a game are worth real money to businesses, so that's the nerver of the "war"; but well it's going to be a very, very long time until this happens)

Edit: it reminds me of this brilliant comment Ravious made not too long ago here on Guru, that if this programming power was used for good, a lot of good things could be done for PvP!

Revelations · Jan 22, 2010, 03:17 PM // 15:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

I don't actually care what these bots are capable of, I just hope that suddenly their coders will use their abilities for everyone's gain and the world will be a magical happy place!

Not gonna happen, buddy.

As I understand it, you aren't even particularly inclined to PvP, especially the formats where this issue really is becoming more prevalent. Could you please do the entire community a favor and stop playing devil's advocate for something which you obviously don't have any idea about?

EDIT: Furthermore, this was posted a couple of pages back, but I'm going to quote it both for emphasis, and because I don't think it got the proper attention it deserved.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy Gus

Which is why those people are the most culpable for the problem: they're getting in the way of the botting issue being taken seriously. Chomsky would be ashamed of the way martin is using his intellect & position here.

So even if martin here admits that bots & scripts & add-ons exist and the game would be far better off without them in one small paragraph, he also spammed a novel's worth of theorycraft arguments on the pitfalls of bots and wants to discuss elite snowball & RBR strategies, until everyone stops reading his posts and assumes that there are 2 sides to an actual debate because people are having quotewars for 5 pages.

Then a fril comes in, and opens his first post by saying he has no idea what he's talking about but he chooses to side with martin, and then goes to bat with his 'team' for the next 4 pages.

And then either an overzealous or conflict-averse guru mod swoops in to lock the thread after one side spammed it enough to troll the people with a valid complaint into random rantings or repeating what was already said on page 1, or lock it based on some weak precedent because some other mod chose to close the last thread(s) about botting, or gives some excuse that because anet must already know about it, and they haven't done anything, then this is surely fruitless.

And we all lose because it lets anet ignore an actual problem.

Kattar · Jan 22, 2010, 03:31 PM // 15:31

Get some more batteries for your sarcasm meter.

If this issue is so important to you and Borat, why don't you take it to the people that can really do something about it? It's obvious that ANet ignores a lot of what goes on with fansites anyway. Take the issue directly to them if you want. If you'd like to use this thread to draw attention to the issue, that's fine, but don't think for one second you're going to change ANet's mind about anything.

If anything has been demonstrated over the last few month, especially with regard to security, it's that they do exactly what they think is best. We're all just a bunch of raving idiots in NCsoft/ANet's eyes anyway.

The outcome of this thread has already been predicted, so why bother? Is this all just an academic exercise? I'm all for fighting for honor and lost causes, but hasn't your point already been made? And if this kind of action hasn't produced the results you've wanted, isn't it time to change tactics?

Killed u man · Jan 22, 2010, 03:41 PM // 15:41

I've already send messages on wiki, and my support emails are getting ignored.

Tullzinski · Jan 22, 2010, 03:47 PM // 15:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

Here is the reason why I'm not going to go the route of looking into this (hint: I did find it in seconds): I want people to realise it's about ethics, not coding. Botting is not only a technical plague, it plagues the mind of people (in 2 ways: to think that botting is the end of the world; and that it makes you super-player). And their computer too (does this run with Windows privileges? if so you could be executing a rootkit; if it's not done now, it may happen in the future when/if the dev will sell his work for a lot of money to RMT companies). As I said before the only way to counter that is to engage into an update cycle that' may be a bit too costly for GW1's Live Team shoulders. (I'm hoping that actually by pushing ethics into the problem people will slowly realise they're harming themselves by harming the community of their game; these things that give a silly advantage in a game are worth real money to businesses, so that's the nerver of the "war"; but well it's going to be a very, very long time until this happens)

Funny you should mention the ethics of this; I recently let my 12 year old son start to play GW, since then he is over my shoulder alot for anything GW related. He was asking about what bots were and why people use them (ahhh the innocence of youth) After giving him the quick rundown of the pros and cons, I told him about Diablo 2 and how for the longest time I resisted the use of bots in that program. One day I finally broke down and loaded up the bots for Diablo and enjoyed them for a few months.

Well the Luck of the Polish was with me and Blizzard finally decided to put an end to all the bots and I lost everything. Slightly recovered from that but then they decided to kill the MapHack users also and completely lost everything.

He got the point about not putting his (mine) account(s) into any kind of possible danger by using things to make the game easier even though everyone else might be doing it.

Somebody else may be able to answer about windows privileges/rootkit.

Botting ended my world in Diablo and I swore never again. I felt that the people behind bots and other "hacks" destroyed Diablo. Probably why I hate bots so much in GW!

Since Sunec made this publically available I doubt he could sell it to the RMTs. I sure he can explain it for himself.

Edit:
If the RMTs got ahold of it they would flood the game with these bots which may trigger ANET into action. That is a nasty visual....

Kattar · Jan 22, 2010, 03:49 PM // 15:49

Quote:

I've already send messages on wiki, and my support emails are getting ignored.

I know. Hence this:

Quote:

It's obvious that ANet ignores a lot of what goes on with fansites anyway...If you'd like to use this thread to draw attention to the issue, that's fine, but don't think for one second you're going to change ANet's mind about anything.

Revelations · Jan 22, 2010, 03:51 PM // 15:51

My purposes are to try and raise both community awareness and outrage against such an issue. Though I realize that - to an extent - I am ranting I find it preferable to clog up this thread with fastidious anti bot sentiment, rather than allow it to be filled with denial that an issue exists, or is worth fighting for in the first place.

Satisfied?

As far as changing tactics is concerned, if you were to be so kind as to suggest methods by which we could better put our efforts to use I would be happy to oblige. But as Anet happily ignores the opinions of minorities (and oft majorities also) then what more can we do besides garner support in the hope that it will raise awareness all round?

EDIT: You are surely not going to deny that Anet is more likely to respond with action if a larger number of people are aware of, and are actively protesting the issue?

Kattar · Jan 22, 2010, 03:57 PM // 15:57

Quote:

EDIT: You are surely not going to deny that Anet is more likely to respond with action if a larger number of people are aware of, and are actively protesting the issue?

Not at all. I hope you can do that.

The only problem is that you ARE clogging up the thread. It's a mass of ranting and raving. A simple, concise message is the only way you're going to raise awareness. Otherwise you're only going to drive people away. This thread doesn't seem to be raising the awareness of anyone, as far as I can tell. 5 or 10 people maybe, but that's about it.