Mad Scientist wrote:
According to the great words of Frank Stollar:
Another admin wrote an User-space SNAT Proxy
running on the server, the server will see the clients fake outside
IP and the Steam Ticket is valid for the people now.
Any idea where I can find this?
As this special solution was
m0gely wrote:
Mad Scientist wrote:
Hmmm... probably not. It is an Internet server... Anyhow, worth a try,
I will pass that suggestion on.
Basically you mean your server is publicly accessible and users are
authenticating to Steam to play on it. Users can still authenticate to
Steam playing a L
[BT]Black V wrote:
I have to disagree with that statement
I have several machines behind a double nat
And they get steam auth fine
Your statement does not colide with my statement. Servers have no
problem with NAT, the client has if the server connecting to is on the
same network.
But what im not
Frash wrote:
For the server update I'd like to request 2 things:
1) A referer: header containing the server IP address, professional
webmasters can grant access to files by referer
(More important than you think, other servers can get your bandwidth down by
leeching/sniffing the downloadurl)
2) A f
Jay Carter wrote:
After the update, my server is not starting. Has anyone else experienced
this? The server starts up, looks like everything is working fine but
doesn't show up on HLSW and doesn't accept console commands.
The update is not finished yet. Please look at
http://www.steampowered.com o
ruwen wrote:
Am I too stupid or did it not work under cs 1.5?
It was introduced with the new Steam update though. As 1.5 is not using
Steam it could not be updated and therefor it could not work :)
If you read all posting about this subject you should have known this
already...
Cheers,
Frank
___
Brett Fernicola wrote:
I never once claimed to have 0% cpu ususage. You guys are truely dumb and
try so hard to find fault in my posts.
I was trying to illustrate the fps of my server not my cpu usuage which
always shows 0% with hlsw you dumb noobs, this is also why I included a
screen shot of to
dual_bereta_r0x wrote:
The same here. Since the 3.1.1.1 servers I get pissed cause of the bad
performance. And since the release of Steam our XP2000+ in not capable
anymore of a fluid gameplay for 2 servers. That's not only bad that's
disgusting. Besides the point that 3.1.1.1 does not bring any n
Simon Garner wrote:
On Friday, November 07, 2003 4:42 AM NZT,
Brett Fernicola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Im pinging 250 on your server from a t3, thats
not good no matter where its at in the world.
Hmm, well, considering he's in Australia and you're (presumably) in the
USA... the speed of light
Very nice indeed!
Hope you will not bite my for adding a few ideas:
- What should be added is if you are VAC running or not.
- Possability to add server-fps and CPU load for old server 3.1.1.0 and
3.1.1.1 to compare with.
- Should I add the same machine multiple times for different
configurations/
Matthew Cheale wrote:
Didn't they say that if you authed with Steam then LAN restrictions
didn't apply?
I'm talking about 3110c 3111d and new Steam version. All have this
behavior, besides Steam does not support real offline LAN game till now.
And as old versions like 3110c also does not restrict L
Alfred Reynolds wrote:
The definition of LAN game has not changed. All clients that match the
servers ip with netmask 255.255.255.0 are allowed into a LAN game.
Sorry Alfred that's definitly not correct. We are running a few CS
servers for a large dormitory in Munich with 2500+ users. As they are
r
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am telling you, and PROVING to you, that using this kernel, with DEFAULT
kernel timings results in performance vastly superior to any kernel
released after.
When we all know it is just impossible for the 1% you quote to be true.
I fully ACK Jeremy. This is not possible,
Frank Stollar wrote:
Hi,
I have no idea how this can happen to a server - if the patch got
loaded
it prevents anything beyond 255 characters from being passed to the
original function.
I'm guessing, since no one else is reporting crashes/hangs/overflows,
that this isnt related to your
Hi,
I have no idea how this can happen to a server - if the patch got
loaded
it prevents anything beyond 255 characters from being passed to the
original function.
I'm guessing, since no one else is reporting crashes/hangs/overflows,
that this isnt related to your patch. Frank, are you sure beyond
Steven Hartland wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Frank Stollar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
OMG! I can't believe there are admins sticking with older versions than
1.16!! Hitbox bug was awesome till this release. I did research on my
own to discover it was metamod and not WW
Eric (Deacon) wrote:
Frank Stollar wrote:
Funny, the internation side seems to be not up-to-date. As the developer
is german, here the link from the german page (www.hlsw.de):
ftp://ftp.hlsw.org/downloads/beta/hlsw_1_0_0_6-beta.exe
Hmmm...so that's just the program executable, NOT an up
JC | KrUCiaL | Gamerezo.com wrote:
as you can see in this image the server runns for 40 seconds and seems
to be down every 40 seconds for 20 seconds - but the server is NOT
crashed - players are still connected and the have no lags or
timeouts...
Dowload lastest HLSW (v1.0.0-beta 3).
Latest beta
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
hi,
since i updated to hl 3.1.1.1c1 my server starts 2 hlds_amd processes???
why? is that correct? what does the 2nd one do?
9317 ?00:00:01 screen
9318 pts/300:01:14 halfd
9320 pts/301:19:35 hlds_amd
9338 pts/300:00:00 hlds_amd
You are running C-D 4.
Kevin J. Anderson wrote:
I cant believe you guys are STILL talking about this...
Hey, this is one of the best and most productive discussions since months :)
SCNR
Frank
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please vis
Florian Zschocke wrote:
"Britt Priddy (PZGN)" wrote:
LOL Florian - that is where I sit. (the spoofed packet):P
LOL Britt - I'm not sure what you are trying to tell me. :) That MAC
address is a Cisco MAC address and I am 95% sure that Frank doesn't have
a NIC with a Cisco MAC address. So I gu
Britt Priddy (PZGN) wrote:
Ok - to clear the confusion - this is done by spoofing and placing
yourself on that local segment - and you can obtain any MAC address you
are able to connect to - note I pulled the MAC of the IP of the guy that
asked me to look at it - this was done by sitting on his n
Florian Zschocke wrote:
Frank Stollar wrote:
Espacially this would be very hard if anywhere between two routers is no
ethernet-link but ATM or any other Layer2 protocol. In no other Layer2
are ARPs present.
Uhm, no. ARP is not restricted to Ethernet.
As ATM hast no MAC adresses, ARP would not
Thomas J. Stensås wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 26 February 2003 01:05, Frank Stollar wrote:
I see you take the point. The cheater has no new info but the admin
looking into the logfiles maybe days later, has no info at all. Why not
save and share that info. I
Thomas J. Stensås wrote:
The only problem is that the people being keept in the dark are the server
admins. The cheaters already know what VAC detects and not, they cant make
any real use of such an addition to logs as they are quite aware which cheat
they where running to test if VAC caught it or
Tyler "Overkill" Schwend wrote:
No, more info for us is fine. But the problem is, the cheaters
can make better use of that information than we can. We don't
really have any real dire need to know what is and isn't
detected. Sure, in time everyone will know, but that doesn't mean
we should go ahead
Simon Garner wrote:
By that reasoning there is no solution to the problem - even a
challenge/response system would be vulnerable if all you want is for the
server to return one packet. Only ISPs can solve this, by fixing their
routers as Jeremy said. In which case this security advisory has been
Frank Stollar wrote:
Jeremy Brooking wrote:
I believe a lot of it has to do with 1 having a degree vs a working
history in an ISP.
A lot of people either lack the ability, or purely do not understand the
effects these things can have. From their view, the network works, so I
wont touch it
I read this a few days ago on the newside of the german c't magazine. I
am a bit shocked that no gamedeveloper ever thought about such a common
vulnerability for DDOS attacks.
A very easy solution would be to limit the number of respons per IP.
I think about no more than 2-5 responses to requests
siberia wrote:
> I have tested them, and they don't seem to be blocked at all. I haven't
> tried them without HLGuard running, but they work well enough with it
> running that it's not worth the wasted resources. I've tried a xqz or
> whatever it's called variant and the latest ogc, they all work
Another way to have some fun is:
mp_buytime 0.01
slow buying players will have no fun
mp_footsteps 0
at the end of a round when everybody is camping and hear the enemy
before comming around the corner.
mp_roundtime 1
when the T (in de levels) will take too much time to finish
mp_c4timer 15
whe
Leon Hartwig wrote:
>We have confirmed a false positive with the current (August 28) beta
>modules: Windows XP clients who run HL/CS in Windows 98 compatibility
>mode. We'll get new beta modules up soon to correct this.
Well, this is used often by users trying to get a3d 2.0 to work under
Win
Jay Anstiss wrote:
> I had someone join my server tonight and they ahd the following wonid:
>
> :[Tara'sKnight]: - wonid: -1
>
> I'm not saying they're upto anything dodgy, but that is a weird wonid. I
> mean, -1?!
>
> Any thoughts?!
That's very easy. If you habe an LAN HL Server, the WonID you w
33 matches
Mail list logo
