If Pale has breached SLAC, he can monitor all the things it really does, and get easy ways to bypass it. You don't really need to go on server and check if it kicks or not to be sure your hack is bypassed by the certain anticheat.
first it's very bold to state that something is unbreakable, second you say that traffic is encrypted.. and? software is responsible for generating the traffic, hence you determine how software works you determine how traffic is generated..
Don't show your ignorance, with your pseudo-knowledge.
I said currently unbreakable - and by that I mean that you cannot break it without the encryption key, hence attempts to decrypt such data almost always involve bruteforcing the encryption key.
Of course if one has the key one can easily decrypt the information - and in this case, when you have the key stored on your computer, it is possible, yet not necessarily easy.
Neither you or me knows how exactly the anticheat handles this stuff so it would be wiser to just wait and see.
Also, while you're at it, one guy on a certain Finnish forum has this sort of a bet going on, can you please decrypt me this message here and present me the information, sport? :)
-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
any software is breakable at any given time in many different contexts. You don't need any encryption keys to determine how software works. If processor is performing instructions (read: runs software) then we can figure out what's happening and you don't need any encryption key, because instructions aren't encrypted, there is no practical sense in it. CPU isn't a closed system that calculates something and gives a result that you could never predict, it's rather deterministic and it's how things work.
First of all cracker controls the way software works, hence you can determine the "secret" key that was generated assuming they use asymmetric keys, secondly the cracker doesn't even care, because he knows what software is going to send even before it's going to be encrypted, so what's your point now?
So what you're saying is "Yeah I see that you were talking about making cars absorb as much kinetic energy as possible in case of a crash to protect the passengers - but hey what if you didn't crash at all you could just drive slower and evade the obstacles?"
Keep on subject, really. Although now later I realise that Haffle wasn't talking just about network traffic - that's what you get for hastily reading comments on Crossfire.
How this analogy is related to the topic, somehow doesn't fit in my mind. I'm saying that anything that happens on your computer is traceable, explainable, modifiable, controllable. The only limiting factor is effort.
Think of it as a metaphor. Anyhow what I was talking about was there being encryptions that are currently unbreachable without the encryption key (e.g. PGP, in which case you need the private key in order to view the data), not about accessing the same information in other ways (i.e. before it's encrypted).
The problem in your analogy is that you don't really see what I'm trying to say. But replying to your comment.. traffic data is encrypted to ensure that the data won't be sniffed in the same network or by your ISP. Crackers aren't somewhere in the network they are inside of your computer. Crackers don't give a damn about network, nothing happens behind the scenes, everything is accessible.
I do see what you are saying, yet I'm afraid you don't see what I'm saying. My point originally was that someone was to capture the packets send from SLAC client to the SLAC server and from those sniff if the program had detected one's cheat or not - what you are saying is that this someone doesn't have to do it in such a complicated way.
In other words, you had drifted from topic, so to speak - yet this conversation serves no purpose anymore because we both agree and are now arguing about the conversation itself, not about the topic of the conversation.
well I guess you were the one who really missed the topic.. as I see you replied to Haffle, who stated nothing about sniffing nor network, he said cracker can "monitor" everything that SLAC does, which simply means that cracker can see everything that software does.
Are you kidding me or what? Do you understand that you can't just sniff someone's traffic? To sniff you need to be in the route between SLAC client and SLAC server, which can happen only in these cases:
1) You are an ISP of SLAC client's user.
2) You can access physically his WLAN if present.
3) You are in the same LAN where hub is used.
4) You are in control of his router.
Why would anyone sniff SLAC packets if he had such miraculous opportunity? They are of no value at all, I would better sniff cookies, authentication data and get hold of some internet accounts. So really it's not a rhetorical question - why someone would need to sniff SLAC packets?!
I'm not sure if you understand what cheater coders do, but well..
Of course it is pointless, because it's much easier just to disassemble the program and so forth, as you said. I just misread/misunderstood Haffle's comment - probably because I read it hastily and it contained the word "server", and then thought he meant "monitor the network traffic" instead of "monitor what the program does". My mistake.
do you know how hard it is to find out how a program works without the source code? sure you can find out some things, but without the source code you cant do much ...
you encrypt information to prevent man-in-the-middle attacks.
if you got slac on you pc, you also have the programm that encrypt your information.
I think you allude to the private key mechanism. And also that is not unbreakable if you has the possibility to attack one site.
Find the position of the public key in slac -> replace it with your own key -> sniff the packets -> decrypt it -> filter the bad packets -> encrypt it with the originally key
what? as far as I know it is compressed with a runtime packer. If you start it, it will be uncompressed and you got the originally code loaded in your RAM.
Never tried to run encryted machine code.....
Oh, I dunno. I just trust Chaplja to make it as good as he can. I can't get any official details of the project so I'm trying not to do too much guessing with my limited knoweledge.
it's obvious pale is attention whoring, he always does that, 3 days ago he said he won't waste his time on slac because it is still a beta and some hours later he made a newsposts about slac proof cheats, he's the worst cheat coder in ET so nothing to be afraid of.
brb ordering 8-)
tards ...
an accidental wrong action or a false statement not made deliberately.
Verb "to mistake"
To make an error
Noun "mistake"
An error
:-)
Don't show your ignorance, with your pseudo-knowledge.
Of course if one has the key one can easily decrypt the information - and in this case, when you have the key stored on your computer, it is possible, yet not necessarily easy.
Neither you or me knows how exactly the anticheat handles this stuff so it would be wiser to just wait and see.
Also, while you're at it, one guy on a certain Finnish forum has this sort of a bet going on, can you please decrypt me this message here and present me the information, sport? :)
-----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
jA0ECgMKFS40EGbZ9EBg0q0B8OkP6c++vE+UWvHurN15oxuqe6P7UcUSRYF4Yy6P
H9vFPBZVfXD5kn9N7KkegR3aOHPOIT27EFx9JBzxTxjoWWYAdK+NtBqijpOBbh7j
YTiVwIGGC0YKnWV9NCFAZCBjvT9WTHRHTDFt1+ZDrracKjVNtqlWP2xbEZQ4c9qi
wN95bW+bPP8FVt8D+CtFtfGONZ+yTfs/Fj6vdT3+1uSLtGkkMpoDKeIQ9b3QPQ==
=dRMJ
-----END PGP MESSAGE-----
Keep on subject, really. Although now later I realise that Haffle wasn't talking just about network traffic - that's what you get for hastily reading comments on Crossfire.
(read "crackers" as reverse-engineers)
In other words, you had drifted from topic, so to speak - yet this conversation serves no purpose anymore because we both agree and are now arguing about the conversation itself, not about the topic of the conversation.
Are you kidding me or what? Do you understand that you can't just sniff someone's traffic? To sniff you need to be in the route between SLAC client and SLAC server, which can happen only in these cases:
1) You are an ISP of SLAC client's user.
2) You can access physically his WLAN if present.
3) You are in the same LAN where hub is used.
4) You are in control of his router.
Why would anyone sniff SLAC packets if he had such miraculous opportunity? They are of no value at all, I would better sniff cookies, authentication data and get hold of some internet accounts. So really it's not a rhetorical question - why someone would need to sniff SLAC packets?!
I'm not sure if you understand what cheater coders do, but well..
Also,
slac is using a normal connection to send information to the server. you could filter the "bad" packets...
if you got slac on you pc, you also have the programm that encrypt your information.
I think you allude to the private key mechanism. And also that is not unbreakable if you has the possibility to attack one site.
Find the position of the public key in slac -> replace it with your own key -> sniff the packets -> decrypt it -> filter the bad packets -> encrypt it with the originally key
Never tried to run encryted machine code.....
I wanted to say that there are ways to bypass it. Didn't mean to say that HE has done this.
However I think most coders can't bother trying to crack SLAC yet as it's not of final version yet.
nice spelling mate :D
e: only losers buy bot