RE: [hlds] VAC2 Source only?
Eventually 1.6 will have to get buried... The more time spent refining new technology the better. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Whisper Sent: 15 March 2005 03:59 To: HLDS Subject: [hlds] VAC2 Source only? From what I have read nobody knows whether VAC2 will for SRCDS AND HLDS or just SRCDS because everybody seems to just assume VAC2 = problem solved for all Valve games across the board! Is CS 1.6 just going to be left to wither and die? Can we get a clarification on this issue? I ask because the 2 rendering methods for HL Source are totally different and would require completely seperate detection methods imho, I could be wrong. So what the deal? If VAC2 does not deal directly with HL based games, for crying out loud can Valve unlock the damn game so people who do want to create good anti-cheats for what is still a very popular game, can do so, without fear of Valve coming in and breaking everything quite deliberately! ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds MWEB: S.A.'s trusted Internet Service Provider. Just Like that. To join, click here or call 08600 32000. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] VAC2 Source only?
cs 1.6 is still going very strong here, and people even prefer it above source - Original Message - From: Brandon Dumont - MWEB [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 12:50 PM Subject: RE: [hlds] VAC2 Source only? Eventually 1.6 will have to get buried... The more time spent refining new technology the better. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Whisper Sent: 15 March 2005 03:59 To: HLDS Subject: [hlds] VAC2 Source only? From what I have read nobody knows whether VAC2 will for SRCDS AND HLDS or just SRCDS because everybody seems to just assume VAC2 = problem solved for all Valve games across the board! Is CS 1.6 just going to be left to wither and die? Can we get a clarification on this issue? I ask because the 2 rendering methods for HL Source are totally different and would require completely seperate detection methods imho, I could be wrong. So what the deal? If VAC2 does not deal directly with HL based games, for crying out loud can Valve unlock the damn game so people who do want to create good anti-cheats for what is still a very popular game, can do so, without fear of Valve coming in and breaking everything quite deliberately! ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds MWEB: S.A.'s trusted Internet Service Provider. Just Like that. To join, click here or call 08600 32000. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.2 - Release Date: 3/11/2005 ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] VAC2 Source only?
You know, it's funny. We were talking about something similar at work (since we all work in IT). That deadlines for stuff people don't want or need are always met, yet with stuff they're dying for, those deadlines are NEVER met. If I remember correctly, VAC2 was an end of Febuary release. That has come and gone. Weeks away? I can say weeks away and mean 5 weeks. I'd rather them say nothing at all than give us another crappy time estimate. It's time to let third parties get in on the security bandwagon. There were 8 cheaters reported on my server last night... Valve may care, but they need to get their priorities straight. Basically, you can not play on any server that doesn't have active admins. Luckily on my server, during the day at least someone is watching the console if not directly in game (hey, we get bored at work XD). On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:36:49 -0500, Jay Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. -- Jason O. Washburn wrote: I THIRD THAT!!! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of J Marcus Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 9:16 PM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: RE: [hlds] VAC2 Source only? if VAC2 does not deal directly with HL based games, for crying out loud can Valve unlock the damn game so people who do want to create good anti-cheats for what is still a very popular game, can do so, without fear of Valve coming in and breaking everything quite deliberately! I second that...I mean as long as this game has been out and we still do not have an anti-cheat...stop making maps...stop f'in with bots and get us an anti cheat. Please? No VAC updates in almost a year, what do you guys think? Removing VAC altogether would be great. -- Jay Jay Carter Site Administrator - Turbo 6 Power [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [ Jay.vcf of type text/x-vcard deleted ] -- ___ 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
Re: [hlds] Name change exploit
Three Cheers for David Harrison On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 09:31:00 -0800, Erik Mannon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Go get a name management plugin for the mod you are running they exist. On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 01:12:29 +1100, Andrew Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can Valve do something about the name change exploit, where a player can change their name extreamly fast (ie, no flood protection/throttling) in a server and prevent them from being easily kicked (as their name changes so fast, on a full server, its very hard to match up their steam ID to their name - since its changed by the time I read the status output!). Can we have a throttle of 1 name change per round as usual or 1 name change while in observer per reconnect etc ATTN VALVE: response please Thanks ___ 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 ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] VAC2 Source only?
Dude I've seen a server collapse that was running nicely as 1 hacker comes in, starts using some blatant speedhack just to be disruptive and then have the rest of the server turn their hacks on in response, thats how bad it is. I just rcon quit the server. What do you do on an 18 player server which was full and running fine, only to find out that you and perhaps 2 other guys are the only ones without hacks? On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 07:43:07 -0500, Tony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You know, it's funny. We were talking about something similar at work (since we all work in IT). That deadlines for stuff people don't want or need are always met, yet with stuff they're dying for, those deadlines are NEVER met. If I remember correctly, VAC2 was an end of Febuary release. That has come and gone. Weeks away? I can say weeks away and mean 5 weeks. I'd rather them say nothing at all than give us another crappy time estimate. It's time to let third parties get in on the security bandwagon. There were 8 cheaters reported on my server last night... Valve may care, but they need to get their priorities straight. Basically, you can not play on any server that doesn't have active admins. Luckily on my server, during the day at least someone is watching the console if not directly in game (hey, we get bored at work XD). On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 23:36:49 -0500, Jay Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. -- Jason O. Washburn wrote: I THIRD THAT!!! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of J Marcus Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 9:16 PM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: RE: [hlds] VAC2 Source only? if VAC2 does not deal directly with HL based games, for crying out loud can Valve unlock the damn game so people who do want to create good anti-cheats for what is still a very popular game, can do so, without fear of Valve coming in and breaking everything quite deliberately! I second that...I mean as long as this game has been out and we still do not have an anti-cheat...stop making maps...stop f'in with bots and get us an anti cheat. Please? No VAC updates in almost a year, what do you guys think? Removing VAC altogether would be great. -- Jay Jay Carter Site Administrator - Turbo 6 Power [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [ Jay.vcf of type text/x-vcard deleted ] -- ___ 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 ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
RE: [hlds] Invalid steam ticket - two legal accounts connecting to internal server
Hi all Weird problem with invalid tickets recently myself. After the latest 1.6 server update, everyone who connected to the server got a invalid steam ticket (1) error. The server itself was running from a normal user account. Running the server from the administrator account fixed this problem. Running win server 2003 standard ed. Could someone please shed some light on this for me? I really don't like running servers from the admin account as I have some terminal uses who help maintain our servers. /Brandon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason O. Washburn Sent: 14 March 2005 04:36 To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: RE: [hlds] Invalid steam ticket - two legal accounts connecting to internal server That would be a good place to start. Networking problems can make you insane. Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ook Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 7:27 PM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] Invalid steam ticket - two legal accounts connecting to internal server So, I moved the account to another computer and it worked just fine. And, interesting enough, I did NOT change clientport settings. Both clients connect to my server just fine. Went back to the first and it still did not work. There must be something about either the box or my network config. The two that work are connected to each other via a Dlink 1000mbps switch and gigabit nics (you ever transfer files from box to box at 700mbps? Holy Crap!), and from there into my WRT54G. The server itself goes into the WRT54G. The box that doesn't work is connected to WRT54G via a Linksys WirelessG nic. There is no firewall anywhere, and I don't see how it being a wireless connection would cause this. The box is 20 feet from the router, and everything else works fine on the box, including connecting to other servers out in the real world. shrug..Only problem is that I need it to work on the one box, so I think I'll run a cable to it and see if it is the wireless connection causing the problem. - Original Message - From: Ook [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 12:35 PM Subject: Re: [hlds] Invalid steam ticket - two legal accounts connecting to internal server I tried that already, but it did not help. Also, if I exit the first client and close steam, the second client still can't connect. - Original Message - From: List Keeper [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2005 12:49 PM Subject: Re: [hlds] Invalid steam ticket - two legal accounts connecting to internal server On each computer you will need to specify a different client port. This has to be done separately for each game. Right click on the game name then go to 'Properties'. Click on Lauang options and add something like '+set clientport 27###' with ### being a different port for each computer like the example below. Computer #1: +set clientport 27101 Computer #2: +set clientport 27102 On Sunday, March 13, 2005 12:25 PM [GMT-06:00], Ook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure if this is a server issue or just Steam flakiness, so I'll post here and see if anyone has any ideas. I have two legal purchaged legitimate Steam accounts. Neither one has been loaned out, borrowed, or hacked. I run these on different computers behind the same router on the same Internet connection. I can login and see the correct available games, and both can connect to different servers at the same time (which proves the accounts are valid). However, I can't get both to connect to my own server. One will, the other keeps giving Steam ticket expired and asks for password. I can immediatley connect to some other server, so it is obviously not an invalid steam id issue, hacked account, etc. How do I get both accounts to connect to my own server? It doesn't matter if I use internal or external ip address. And if I log out of the working account, the second account still won't connect. ___ 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 ___ 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 ___ To unsubscribe, edit your
Re: [hlds] VAC2 Source only?
Just opinionating here.. Perhaps the VACII timeline is more dependent upon the lawyers than upon the code. We need something big to happen here and soon. I have shut down all but 2 servers because of the enormous surge of cheats that have been released in the last 2 weeks. We simply don't have enough mature admins to handle the load. I went into one server yesterday and only one player out of 14 was not using speed hacks (and thus rendering the entire system unstable). So, I banned the cheaters. After I shut down all the servers they like to hang out in. Perhaps someone at VALVe/STEAM would become concerned if suddenly the source server count dropped to less than a thousand. Why bother running the code if speed hack racing is what the future of Source servers has become? On the other hand I do appreciate Alfred the VALVe Team's efforts and attention to these list server messages. Regardless of the cheaters and general hassles, I continue to work on admin utilities for Source servers. Eventually VACII (or whatever it is called) will come out as will new games from other vendors and the hacker community will, as they always do, run off to harrass the players elsewhere. The hackers like the challenge of the new games more than they like the drudgery of writing hax with trojans for the perverse pleasure of seeing thousands of idiots disappear from the servers when the idiot's hard drives get eaten up. (Death Adder Trojan) So why don't the game developers use the features of Data Execution Prevention to stop the WriteProcessMemory() calls all hax use anyway? I would immediately upgrade my processor to the AMD FX55 if they did. Tony wrote: You know, it's funny. We were talking about something similar at work (since we all work in IT). That deadlines for stuff people don't want or need are always met, yet with stuff they're dying for, those deadlines are NEVER met. If I remember correctly, VAC2 was an end of Febuary release. That has come and gone. Weeks away? I can say weeks away and mean 5 weeks. I'd rather them say nothing at all than give us another crappy time estimate. snip snip ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
RE: [hlds] RE: Name change exploit
You're discussing the difference between 30 minutes of coding and testing and 20 minutes of coding and testing. Dave -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Harrison Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 1:20 AM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] RE: Name change exploit Rather than Valve wasting their time adding in features to cater to unco people, I'd rather see them putting in a quick, sane default to stop the immediate problem and then focusing on some of the other more serious issues, and I'm sure the majority of server administrators and game players would also. -- david Original Message From: David Fencik [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 4:02 PM Subject: RE: [hlds] RE: Name change exploit No it isn't. Sometimes people have goofy clan tags, don't bind a key to change their name, and might make 3 typos in a row, forget quotes, etc. Dave -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dv8 Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 12:24 AM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: [hlds] RE: Name change exploit I see no reason why anyone would have to change a name once a minute. I wouldn't mind a few variables if Valve wants to spend the time for bells and whistles but it is my personnel opinion that changing your name once a round is more than enough. ___ 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 ___ 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
RE: [hlds] VAC2 Source only?
Wait...so you'd update your processor just to ensure that YOU don't hack? I think you're just looking for an excuse to spend another 800+ dollars on your pc. Dave -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of wArgOd Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 8:34 AM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] VAC2 Source only? Just opinionating here.. Perhaps the VACII timeline is more dependent upon the lawyers than upon the code. We need something big to happen here and soon. I have shut down all but 2 servers because of the enormous surge of cheats that have been released in the last 2 weeks. We simply don't have enough mature admins to handle the load. I went into one server yesterday and only one player out of 14 was not using speed hacks (and thus rendering the entire system unstable). So, I banned the cheaters. After I shut down all the servers they like to hang out in. Perhaps someone at VALVe/STEAM would become concerned if suddenly the source server count dropped to less than a thousand. Why bother running the code if speed hack racing is what the future of Source servers has become? On the other hand I do appreciate Alfred the VALVe Team's efforts and attention to these list server messages. Regardless of the cheaters and general hassles, I continue to work on admin utilities for Source servers. Eventually VACII (or whatever it is called) will come out as will new games from other vendors and the hacker community will, as they always do, run off to harrass the players elsewhere. The hackers like the challenge of the new games more than they like the drudgery of writing hax with trojans for the perverse pleasure of seeing thousands of idiots disappear from the servers when the idiot's hard drives get eaten up. (Death Adder Trojan) So why don't the game developers use the features of Data Execution Prevention to stop the WriteProcessMemory() calls all hax use anyway? I would immediately upgrade my processor to the AMD FX55 if they did. Tony wrote: You know, it's funny. We were talking about something similar at work (since we all work in IT). That deadlines for stuff people don't want or need are always met, yet with stuff they're dying for, those deadlines are NEVER met. If I remember correctly, VAC2 was an end of Febuary release. That has come and gone. Weeks away? I can say weeks away and mean 5 weeks. I'd rather them say nothing at all than give us another crappy time estimate. snip snip ___ 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
Re: [hlds] VAC2 Source only?
David Fencik wrote: Wait...so you'd update your processor just to ensure that YOU don't hack? I think you're just looking for an excuse to spend another 800+ dollars on your pc. Dave got to justify that new ASUS A8N SLI Deluxe with 2 SLI enabled nVidia 6800s somehow... ;-) FYI, I have a box built on that ASUS mobo with 2 6800s now and it makes a humongo difference. (Using the current setup I see you a half second before you can see me, etc. constant hax accuasations, etc.) I'm wondering what diff the high end processor and the ASUS 6800 pair would make. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
Re: [hlds] VAC2 Source only?
David is right, NOTHING you do will prevent other people from hacking. Its a completely client side issue If HLDS/SRCDS were setup a lot better in reagrds to forward thinking about what people are going to do to break their systems it would alleviate a lot of the problems. Look what HLGuard can do as a Server Add on, most of which many of you will aggree would appear to be a no-brainer to be running as part of the Server software by default. Speedhacks, I seriously don't understand how these can be allowed to exist when the server is the final arbitor of all player actions Wallhack should be significantly less effective if the damn server would stop send all clients perfect player positions Script Exploits, well bugs are bugs and they should be addressed, but server administrators should have a way of being able to force CVAR's to a specific Value or Range of Values. Hell if the only thing stopping this is because Valve are worried about abusive server adminsitrators, the answer is rather simple, have the ability for CVAR checking/setting to only be able to be set at server start up. Now you are left with AIMBOT's Just a little bit more helpful information from the server in regards to the actions the server is seeing players make would make all the differece. If CPU usage is an issue and in this case and some of those above simply setup a port that sent the raw data to another server for analysis. Who cares if an aimbot isn't detected straight away, just as long as they are detected reasonably quickly. Hell, the script/cvar checking could also be done by a totally seperate server which clients connect to as well as the gameserver. This can be an option and most GSP's would jump at it as it enables us to admin our servers better, and provide a better user experience, whislt the little one server shops can run with or without and because they generally have a better admin presence don't need all these fancy tools larger server providers do. On that note, I'd be very intrested to see if the greater amount of server slots AND used server slots are provided by GSP's or by the single server operators running off their home connections (generally) It ought to give Valve a good indication where they should focus their efforts and on who they should be providing the majority of the support for. Obviously being part of GSP and being familiar with the environment, I more for automated tools to take care of 90% of issues as that is the only way we see we can deal with administrating such a large number of servers, but I could be wrong and the direction that servers are taking is for lots of single server setups run by the people playing on them, thus this is why I feel we get ignored on these sorts of issues. On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 09:59:10 -0500, David Fencik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wait...so you'd update your processor just to ensure that YOU don't hack? I think you're just looking for an excuse to spend another 800+ dollars on your pc. Dave -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of wArgOd Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 8:34 AM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] VAC2 Source only? Just opinionating here.. Perhaps the VACII timeline is more dependent upon the lawyers than upon the code. We need something big to happen here and soon. I have shut down all but 2 servers because of the enormous surge of cheats that have been released in the last 2 weeks. We simply don't have enough mature admins to handle the load. I went into one server yesterday and only one player out of 14 was not using speed hacks (and thus rendering the entire system unstable). So, I banned the cheaters. After I shut down all the servers they like to hang out in. Perhaps someone at VALVe/STEAM would become concerned if suddenly the source server count dropped to less than a thousand. Why bother running the code if speed hack racing is what the future of Source servers has become? On the other hand I do appreciate Alfred the VALVe Team's efforts and attention to these list server messages. Regardless of the cheaters and general hassles, I continue to work on admin utilities for Source servers. Eventually VACII (or whatever it is called) will come out as will new games from other vendors and the hacker community will, as they always do, run off to harrass the players elsewhere. The hackers like the challenge of the new games more than they like the drudgery of writing hax with trojans for the perverse pleasure of seeing thousands of idiots disappear from the servers when the idiot's hard drives get eaten up. (Death Adder Trojan) So why don't the game developers use the features of Data Execution Prevention to stop the WriteProcessMemory() calls all hax use anyway? I would immediately upgrade my processor to the AMD FX55 if they did. Tony wrote: You know, it's funny. We were talking about something similar at work
RE: [hlds] VAC2 Source only?
It could make a big difference, depending on what processor you got. At this level, your graphics cards may not be the performance bottleneck. Are those regular (12 pipeline) 6800s? I had one of those, but traded it in for a 6800GT. Dave -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of wArgOd Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 10:11 AM To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] VAC2 Source only? David Fencik wrote: Wait...so you'd update your processor just to ensure that YOU don't hack? I think you're just looking for an excuse to spend another 800+ dollars on your pc. Dave got to justify that new ASUS A8N SLI Deluxe with 2 SLI enabled nVidia 6800s somehow... ;-) FYI, I have a box built on that ASUS mobo with 2 6800s now and it makes a humongo difference. (Using the current setup I see you a half second before you can see me, etc. constant hax accuasations, etc.) I'm wondering what diff the high end processor and the ASUS 6800 pair would make. ___ 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
Re: [hlds] VAC2 Source only?
Whisper wrote: snip snip Obviously being part of GSP and being familiar with the environment, I more for automated tools to take care of 90% of issues as that is the only way we see we can deal with administrating such a large number of servers, but I could be wrong and the direction that servers are taking is for lots of single server setups run by the people playing on them, thus this is why I feel we get ignored on these sorts of issues. I consider myself fortunate that i decided to NOT rent servers out thus the option I have to simply close up shop and board the doors against hackers. A GSP has no such option. Maybe if the GSPs agreed to some sort of miniscule royalty back to VALVe the new revenue stream would make them pay more attention than they currently do. (it could not be much of a royalty since making money as a GSP is as difficult as any other business today) Being a software engineer myself I understand why Alfred tries to limit access to the team so as to ensure they are concentrating on priorities for VALVe. Speed hax. What a pain. I tried dropping the sv_max_usercmd_future_ticks to 5 and it appears this variable has no effect on anything whatsoever. Perhaps sv_max_usercmd_future_ticks is not hooked up due to an oversight. I think I will see what happens when this setting is zero or 1. If the server code is not checking for movement bounds then I suspect there will always be speed hax. Seems to me the server would work harder but provide better quality gameplay if a player movement distance were checked to make sure they are not going faster than allowed. Perhaps Alfred (or other VALVe engineer) might be willing to comment and make recommendations on the following variables as related to speed hax prevention... sv_maxrate sv_minrate sv_maxupdaterate sv_max_usercmd_future_ticks sv_maxspeed sv_maxunlag sv_maxvelocity sv_minupdaterate ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
[hlds] Re: hlds digest, Vol 1 #3497 - 6 msgs
I would say 2 would be good per round. I always warn ppl about their names and give them 1 round to change before I kick them. Or make it a cvar so we can set it to what we want. Just my input, Wazoo What mod are you talking about? Counter-Strike: Source has rate limiting on name changes (once per second), we could change that threshold. - Alfred ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
[hlds] Re: hlds digest, Vol 1 #3500 - 1 msg
Ditto here. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 7:26 AM Subject: hlds digest, Vol 1 #3500 - 1 msg Send hlds mailing list submissions to hlds@list.valvesoftware.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of hlds digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: VAC2 Source only? (wArgOd) --__--__-- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 08:33:36 -0500 From: wArgOd [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds] VAC2 Source only? Reply-To: hlds@list.valvesoftware.com Just opinionating here.. Perhaps the VACII timeline is more dependent upon the lawyers than upon the code. We need something big to happen here and soon. I have shut down all but 2 servers because of the enormous surge of cheats that have been released in the last 2 weeks. We simply don't have enough mature admins to handle the load. I went into one server yesterday and only one player out of 14 was not using speed hacks (and thus rendering the entire system unstable). So, I banned the cheaters. After I shut down all the servers they like to hang out in. Perhaps someone at VALVe/STEAM would become concerned if suddenly the source server count dropped to less than a thousand. Why bother running the code if speed hack racing is what the future of Source servers has become? On the other hand I do appreciate Alfred the VALVe Team's efforts and attention to these list server messages. Regardless of the cheaters and general hassles, I continue to work on admin utilities for Source servers. Eventually VACII (or whatever it is called) will come out as will new games from other vendors and the hacker community will, as they always do, run off to harrass the players elsewhere. The hackers like the challenge of the new games more than they like the drudgery of writing hax with trojans for the perverse pleasure of seeing thousands of idiots disappear from the servers when the idiot's hard drives get eaten up. (Death Adder Trojan) So why don't the game developers use the features of Data Execution Prevention to stop the WriteProcessMemory() calls all hax use anyway? I would immediately upgrade my processor to the AMD FX55 if they did. Tony wrote: You know, it's funny. We were talking about something similar at work (since we all work in IT). That deadlines for stuff people don't want or need are always met, yet with stuff they're dying for, those deadlines are NEVER met. If I remember correctly, VAC2 was an end of Febuary release. That has come and gone. Weeks away? I can say weeks away and mean 5 weeks. I'd rather them say nothing at all than give us another crappy time estimate. snip snip --__--__-- ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds End of hlds Digest ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
[hlds] hlds from network share
Just to be different (and to see what happens) I'm currently running hlds (OP4 6 player server) from a network share. Has anyone else tried this? I have a gigabit connection to the server (a linux box, old PIII/800), and I'm finding that it consumes little bandwidth. ___ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
