MuOnline antihacks 2015.

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 141
  1. #61
    LiveGuard Software Ltd Mecanik is offline
    MemberRank
    Jan 2012 Join Date
    404 Not FoundLocation
    343Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    This whole conversation has no point. Server side validation does everything.
    MuOnline was not designed properly.

  2. #62

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Quote Originally Posted by steve5287 View Post
    Did you read my whole text? 99-Season 1 and 97 servers have bugs and you can dupe with those bugs without packets you idiot.

    Wanna see a video making dupe even on season 3,4,5,6 without packets? My god, in which planet are you living? Good files don't let you dupe, bad files have a lot of bugs and you know that, even when i wrote on my last post "BUGS AND CHEATS PROGRAMS ARE NOT THE SAME" then you answer to me this "Shadow BUG is a BUG not a HACK, if you are dumb and wont realise that the item is duplicated with the '!' sign then only blame yourself." get the F out of here, if you are blind then go and check it
    Why so mad? i didnt call you dumb, i am talking in General, therefore you are just another ranting addict here.
    Yes you Just wrote
    Quote Originally Posted by steve5287
    you're wrong... If someone use cheats programs Anti-cheats should block them but, if your server files are bad there's no way that antihack block some things like shadow bug or vault dupe by server bug... or chaos machine dupe by server bug.... If server files are bad then look for a better files...

    Why you mention the bugs then?
    1st you say Server bugs = Antihack won't help (Oh really?)
    Then you say "BUGS AND CHEATS PROGRAMS ARE NOT THE SAME" = (Hallelujah Lol)
    looks like you don't know what you are saying anymore.

  3. #63
    HITMAN CAPITOL is offline
    MemberRank
    Apr 2013 Join Date
    PhilippinesLocation
    717Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Been using NSEngine by StolenStar
    - No need to update cheat database (Because there is none)

    For me, I am happy with it and its working OK! Very Recommended

    I've been a customer of MuGuard & UGK too when I started my servers before.

  4. #64
    Apprentice ageofali is offline
    MemberRank
    Jan 2008 Join Date
    5Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Well, what to say i have been also tested liveguard. if need to compare liveguard vs nsengine i dont need to say anything, all the users reply says that what is answer :) I dont see anyone complaining about NSEngine. But liveguard? tons of...

  5. #65
    LiveGuard Software Ltd Mecanik is offline
    MemberRank
    Jan 2012 Join Date
    404 Not FoundLocation
    343Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Quote Originally Posted by ageofali View Post
    Well, what to say i have been also tested liveguard. if need to compare liveguard vs nsengine i dont need to say anything, all the users reply says that what is answer :) I dont see anyone complaining about NSEngine. But liveguard? tons of...
    Sure they do! Because liveguard actually works -_-

  6. #66
    Banned Mr X is offline
    BannedRank
    Nov 2015 Join Date
    RussiaLocation
    317Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    NSEngine Security Suite (4th Generation of Protection) - Announcements & Promotions - NSEngine Community Forum's
    This looks legit. But can i ask, whats the different of server side antihack vs client side? Can't server side be bypassed? Then why dudes still develope client side antihacks?

  7. #67
    LiveGuard Software Ltd Mecanik is offline
    MemberRank
    Jan 2012 Join Date
    404 Not FoundLocation
    343Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr X View Post
    NSEngine Security Suite (4th Generation of Protection) - Announcements & Promotions - NSEngine Community Forum's
    This looks legit. But can i ask, whats the different of server side antihack vs client side? Can't server side be bypassed? Then why dudes still develope client side antihacks?
    Because, MU-Online was developed pretty bad, there are too many files on server side, you can do almost anything...
    And server side, you can validate anything you like...

  8. #68
    Banned Mr X is offline
    BannedRank
    Nov 2015 Join Date
    RussiaLocation
    317Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mecanik View Post
    Because, MU-Online was developed pretty bad, there are too many files on server side, you can do almost anything...
    And server side, you can validate anything you like...
    Well Sir, is it still better then Client side which is able to be bypassed?

  9. #69
    Enthusiast StolenStar is offline
    MemberRank
    Nov 2013 Join Date
    31Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr X View Post
    Well Sir, is it still better then Client side which is able to be bypassed?
    The client side of the anti-cheat system is being developed as an independent product, while the server side requires integration for each server.

  10. #70
    Banned Mr X is offline
    BannedRank
    Nov 2015 Join Date
    RussiaLocation
    317Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Quote Originally Posted by StolenStar View Post
    The client side of the anti-cheat system is being developed as an independent product, while the server side requires integration for each server.
    I don't think so, cause Zteam Server side has a Fixed Anti-Hack system.

  11. #71
    LiveGuard Software Ltd Mecanik is offline
    MemberRank
    Jan 2012 Join Date
    404 Not FoundLocation
    343Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr X View Post
    Well Sir, is it still better then Client side which is able to be bypassed?
    Of course it is, but to be honest server side validation can be bypassed too.
    Client side protection is indeed needed, because many kids have appeared from the clouds and started making stuff like these:

    Code:
     [DebuggerNonUserCode]
        static ReadWritingMemory()
        {
        }
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern int OpenProcess(int dwDesiredAccess, int bInheritHandle, int dwProcessId);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "WriteProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern int WriteProcessMemory1(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref int lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "WriteProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern float WriteProcessMemory2(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref float lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "WriteProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern long WriteProcessMemory3(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref long lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "ReadProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern int ReadProcessMemory1(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref int lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "ReadProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern float ReadProcessMemory2(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref float lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "ReadProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern long ReadProcessMemory3(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref long lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    Wich is basicly all of the new cheats that are created by TGH (teamgamehacks) for example.
    These kind of things are no validable from server side, and all you can do is to block it or prevent it, wich is pretty dangerous, because it`s Kernel32.dll, this is why most AntiVirus engines detect these kind of cheats as Trojans.

    The more interesting fact is, that they actually sell these stuff with "VIP" packages...

  12. #72
    Banned Mr X is offline
    BannedRank
    Nov 2015 Join Date
    RussiaLocation
    317Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mecanik View Post
    Of course it is, but to be honest server side validation can be bypassed too.
    Client side protection is indeed needed, because many kids have appeared from the clouds and started making stuff like these:

    Code:
     [DebuggerNonUserCode]
        static ReadWritingMemory()
        {
        }
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern int OpenProcess(int dwDesiredAccess, int bInheritHandle, int dwProcessId);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "WriteProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern int WriteProcessMemory1(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref int lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "WriteProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern float WriteProcessMemory2(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref float lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "WriteProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern long WriteProcessMemory3(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref long lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "ReadProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern int ReadProcessMemory1(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref int lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "ReadProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern float ReadProcessMemory2(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref float lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    
        [DllImport("kernel32", EntryPoint = "ReadProcessMemory", CharSet = CharSet.Ansi, SetLastError = true)]
        private static extern long ReadProcessMemory3(int hProcess, int lpBaseAddress, ref long lpBuffer, int nSize, ref int lpNumberOfBytesWritten);
    Wich is basicly all of the new cheats that are created by TGH (teamgamehacks) for example.
    These kind of things are no validable from server side, and all you can do is to block it or prevent it, wich is pretty dangerous, because it`s Kernel32.dll, this is why most AntiVirus engines detect these kind of cheats as Trojans.

    The more interesting fact is, that they actually sell these stuff with "VIP" packages...
    Well it not necessary is a Virus my friend. Even Skype has kernel32.dll - Its a Process
    So 100% Server side check isn't enough? As i can see but it bypass the IP checks, but the Serverside checks are done as you are in-game from time to time, Anti-Speed/Potting.
    Where else you can just bypass the Guard on the client and totally throw it away.
    Kids who uses those Hack in the VIP zone has surely got a bypasser to work with it. So how good is still client side against bypassers?

  13. #73
    LiveGuard Software Ltd Mecanik is offline
    MemberRank
    Jan 2012 Join Date
    404 Not FoundLocation
    343Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Well it not necessary is a Virus my friend. Even Skype has kernel32.dll - Its a Process
    So 100% Server side check isn't enough? As i can see but it bypass the IP checks, but the Serverside checks are done as you are in-game from time to time, Anti-Speed/Potting.
    Where else you can just bypass the Guard on the client and totally throw it away.
    Kids who uses those Hack in the VIP zone has surely got a bypasser to work with it. So how good is still client side against bypassers?
    You got it all wrong, cheats are using windows API`s in a wrong way to alter the game...

  14. #74
    Banned Mr X is offline
    BannedRank
    Nov 2015 Join Date
    RussiaLocation
    317Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mecanik View Post
    You got it all wrong, cheats are using windows API`s in a wrong way to alter the game...
    Can u explain more.

  15. #75
    Account Upgraded | Title Enabled! Dudi2 is offline
    MemberRank
    Dec 2006 Join Date
    PolandLocation
    217Posts

    Re: MuOnline antihacks 2015.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mecanik View Post
    Did you dream all this?
    No, it's a true :)

    screenSHU - The fastest screen capture ever.
    screenSHU - The fastest screen capture ever.



Advertisement