So consider Valve does disable clientside plugins, what will change? Absolutely nothing. All the cheaters will continue to use their cheats that don't rely on clientside plugins. Everyone else will use a network proxy, which can replication all the malicious exploits you're worried about. With a network proxy you just send net_SetConVar to force any cvar on the client. There's also the magic of the exploits in the netcode that aren't fixed, like net_StringCmd before you do any sign on, which is what the NULL player crash is. There's also the client disconnect control command, which is again being exploited by the lua clientside plugin, but is trivial to do with a network proxy.
In the end Valve needs to fix the real exploits, which are the source of the issue, not disable a very useful feature. On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Charles Mabbott <cmabb...@verizon.net> wrote: > > --- Scott Highland wrote: > Maybe you could explain why this whole list, and the company that runs it > should all agree to completely remove the ability to incorporate > modifications just because it would suit YOUR needs as an anti-cheat > function to thwart the .3% of TF2 players that are abusing it in this > fashion? That's a pretty self-centered way of thinking and kind of > ridiculous, it's sad so many of you don't seem to see it this way. > --- > > The only suggestion I have seen that seems appropriate is a server CVAR that > forcefully unloads any non-valve released client plugins. (sv_pure extension > could be pretty good, but has a couple of issues). Which would allow > everyone a decent options. A CVAR was added to effectively disable Mic spam, > remove the wait command from client scripts. Of which a very small portion > of the population actually used, however, it only takes one aimbot to hop > into a full server and empty it in a matter of minutes and does a number to > the games overall population. How many games that made zero efforts against > cheating and other aspects do you think hold an audience? That is what most > of this discussion is about. A new threat is out there, all be it small at > the moment, but might as well get the counter measures in place now. > > Some client side plugins are legitimate as I pointed out, and loosing those > functions would be a hinderance to many players, but asking for Valve to > give server ops an option to disallow client plugins on their servers isn't > too much of a stretch since there is now a very public website and scripts > that from what I read serve no purpose other than exploiting the game > environment. Rather than having multiple parties code anti-cheat plugins, a > bunch of server ops with something extra to worry about, it be a nice > addition if Valve could give an option to server admins to disable non-valve > released client plugin. I don't think that is an unreasonable thing to ask > for if it's possible. > > I think the blanket removing of the feature entirely is a bit over the top > myself. > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
