~~~Host's guide to catching injected cheaters~~~

[Compy]

oh yeah you can just eject the dll temporarily too. forgot about that. then inject it back when the test is complete

[Ad Bot]

[Blockzillahead]

glass said something I agree with and expanded on it
compy said something that sounds smart to me so I agreed with it
you said nothing of value to me so I dismissed it

it doesn't need to get more complicated than that

<1% of the entire community is actually smart enough to successfully decompile, then recompile a .dll file just to change some keymappings, and most of the people that are capable of it don't

your last repeat ticket for the day

on todays show, a guide to catch idiots by an idiot

[PowerDag]

blockzilla you're being unnecessarily forgetin hostile about this. come on man take the advice and use it, don't kill the guy giving you help.

[Cca^n]

oh yeah you can just eject the dll temporarily too. forgot about that. then inject it back when the test is complete

I wasn't aware you could do that. :o

[McZealot]

the IP banning mod by Pecon will disconnect problem users before they're able to send a crashing packet to the server. You can use that to get rid of them.

because changing your ip is so hard especially for problem users

[Jubel]

I wasn't aware you could do that. :o

If they were suddenly brought back into "admin interrogation" about this, it would certainly take a few seconds before they could Alt-Tab out of game and get back in while ejecting the .dll, moreso if they had game in fullscreen.

I guess if they said brb quickly or something of the like before going active for a noticable amount of time, that could be indication that they are using a .dll

[Blockzillahead]

before this turns into a personal debate of whether im an starfish or not let me point out that this test could have been brought up by any monkey with the hack on their hands. op might have spread more information to those not having it, thumbs up to you friend. but all in all the information here is not as useful as you all make it out to be. im pointing out the big flaw behind the idea here because rest assured these tech geeks that do these things are lurking all around us and it will be not a moment too soon before this whole test becomes completely useless.

[Farad]

Well that escalated quickly

[ButlerBlockhead125]

this thread has derailed to about 3 paths

[Compy]

some allow keybinded ejection for this purpose

[Jubel]

The hardcore problem users will always find a way around the issues keeping them from "playing", however, they are the >1%.

This information will be much more useful against the people who came across this hack who have no idea how it works, aside from that it is an aimbot and makes the game "easier to play". A young kid who innocently* downloaded an aimbot .dll off the internet won't know how to decompile it, change keybinds, and make it less detectable by the server administrators.

_{*(subject to debate)}

[Maxxi]

out of random curiosity, if you and computermix didn't make this stuff then maybe we wouldn't have to deal with it

[Foxscotch]

out of random curiosity, if you and computermix didn't make this stuff then maybe we wouldn't have to deal with it

not seeing how this has anything to do with curiosity tbh

[otto-san]

before this turns into a personal debate of whether im an starfish or not let me point out that this test could have been brought up by any monkey with the hack on their hands. op might have spread more information to those not having it, thumbs up to you friend. but all in all the information here is not as useful as you all make it out to be. im pointing out the big flaw behind the idea here because rest assured these tech geeks that do these things are lurking all around us and it will be not a moment too soon before this whole test becomes completely useless.

you're right.

but that doesn't mean we can't still have similar tests for whatever tweaks are implemented. at the end of the day, the only way these kinds of tests will no longer work is if ease of use is sacrificed for low detectability (eg a gui or some other kind of wonky activation method). there's also the problem of distribution, though i'm sure the kind of people that use these things are connected one way or another and will know about new versions. of course, this isn't really a huge issue to begin with; if someone is clearly giving themselves an unfair advantage, you don't need to give them the benefit of the doubt and test them. you can just ban the guys and be done with it anyway.

[Ipquarx]

if you and computermix didn't make this stuff

Cca had nothing to do with the creation of the dll hacks and nobody ever implied he did.