Jump to content


Photo

Dhp ~ Daz Hack Protection. Only Checks For Running


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
88 replies to this topic

#1 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 26 October 2007 - 01:19 AM

This is an anti-hack dll that checks if known programs are currently running. It's advised that you check this once every +- 10 seconds so if they open a program when your game is running it'll detect.

Current # of known programs: 18
<span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'>Pm me with your cheat programs so I can add protection against it!</span>
Download 1.2 (53kb):
Mirror 1
Mirror 2
Download 1.1 stable (56kb): Mirror 1
Mirror 2
Contents:
DHP.dll - my hack protection dll.
DHP example.gmk - gm7 version of the example
DHP example.gm6 - gm6 version of the example (exact same as gm7 example btw)
DHP_SCRIPTS.gml - the scripts for dhp.

So yeah. Make sure that if you want continuous protection that you use alarms or something in Gm.

Usage
This script is extremely easy to use.
1. In the create event of an object call init_HP();
2. On the game end event call freeme();
3. Whenever you feel like searching call opensearch();
4. To search for a program that's not recognized by the dll use searchExtra("apptitle"); It will also call cheatOpen(); if found.
5. To protect an integer call protectInt(#0-9, yourvar, random#);
NOTE: A maximum of 10 integers can be protected!
NOTE: Make sure you store your random # in a variable so you can check/modify it!!!
6. To modify a protected integer use modifyInt(#0-9, your value, same random # used before);
7. To check a protected integer use checkInt(#0-9, same value as before, same random # used before);

Note: If the dll finds a known cheat program open it'll call a script named cheatOpen(); That is one of the powerful features of this: you can put whatever you want to happen in that script if the dll finds a cheat program.

Note: If you modify a protected integer or check for hacking on the integer it will call a script called intHacked();

License
You may use this in your freeware games with credit to Daz or Dazappa
You may not use this for commercial junk. Why? Well there's no way for me to know how much profit you're making and I have no method of receiving money. Blah blah it's free right? Well yes but only for freeware! I don't want the hassle of commercial junk, this dll isn't great and you/them could get ticked at my dll for sucking etc. Anyways don't bother asking, just no commercial games pl0x.

Hope-to-add
+ Checking if variables changed too much etc.
+ Protection against frozen variables like hp.

FAQ:
Q: ZOMG I just downloaded what do I do?!?!?!
A: I provided both version 6 and 7 examples as well as explained them in this post under the usage section.
Q: What language is this made in! :GM008: :lol:
A: Pascal, compiled with dev-pas
Q: Can I have your source?
A: No. Go do something with your life instead of begging. If you want more cheat protection then drop a pm with a cheat program that's undetected

The example
All right so you just got the example and started poking around. Great. Well here's something you need to know: the dll function whoami is not needed but is a small measure of protection. Use it if you want. Just run the example and press space. When you press space it calls the dll checking for known open cheats. When the program doesn't seem to notice you pressed space it means it didn't notice any cheat programs. So either 1) You don't have any cheat programs open or 2) You don't have any known cheat programs open.

NOTE: The example now calls checkInt in the step event, this can cause lag so please use an alarm or something! (I did step cause I was lazy)

Err... I forgot to uncomment that line! Uncomment it to test variable protection


~Enjoy.
  • 0

#2 Camman

Camman

    UnReal Software CEO

  • GMC Member
  • 639 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 26 October 2007 - 01:25 AM

I was actually working on something like this, but yours works in a similar way to mine also. Although, I don't have nearly as many known programs at the moment. You did a great job.

~Cameron
Edit: Grammar.
  • 0

#3 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 26 October 2007 - 02:28 AM

Thanks - it's usually annoying to add more programs to the list because for 99% of the time I have to actually download and install the program myself.
  • 0

#4 Sindarin

Sindarin

    Indie Game Developer

  • New Member
  • 1644 posts
  • Version:GM:HTML5

Posted 26 October 2007 - 09:33 AM

It'd be useful for Online Games, Does it check for the process and the registry?

Q: Can I have your source?
A: No. Go do something with your life instead of begging. If you want more cheat protection then drop a pm with a cheat program that's undetected


I think that the best would be for this dll to go open source so that everyone can add more programs as they are needed for their game. I don't think you should worry about someone taking the source and claiming it his own

You may not use this for commercial junk. Why? Well there's no way for me to know how much profit you're making and I have no method of receiving money. Blah blah it's free right? Well yes but only for freeware! I don't want the hassle of commercial junk, this dll isn't great and you/them could get ticked at my dll for sucking etc.


1st of all, you are prejudiced. Why a commercial game would be junk? I understand that you like free games, everyone likes them. But I believe the number 1 reason for protecting a game against memory editors would be in order not to harm the sales of the game/fun for other users (online games).
And if you care about receiving money for your work, you could always add a donation link to your post or make this dll go commercial by releasing a trial version and a full/source version. I personally give my dlls out for free, because I don't feel I can charge for a library with some functions.

Anyways, I installed and ran Cheat Engine and it detected it, good work, but because of your terms, I won't use it. I might try to create my own library.

That is one of the powerful features of this: you can put whatever you want to happen in that script if the dll finds a cheat program.


Like destroy the player's computer for punishment! :D j/k

Edited by Sindarin, 26 October 2007 - 09:35 AM.

  • 0
GM 8.1 / GM:HTML5 User

#5 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 26 October 2007 - 10:53 AM

Nah like if you're making an online game you could send a message to the server saying they hack then exit the game. What kind of protection would this provide if this was open source? Then 90% of game maker game hackers would have the only cheat programs it can protect

edit: No DHP does not check the registry, only running programs. Seeing gameshield's thing maybe 1 in 4 liked the concept of having to uninstall all their programs just to play your game when many of them might not use them to hack your game. The only real advantage of checking the registry and such would be to 1) Prevent the dll from being haxed or 2) Maybe they have more cheat programs than this can detect, but hey they'll most likely end up uninstalling it because DHP doesn't/wouldn't tell them what cheat programs they have :3.

All right well I don't want you to use this for commercial reasons because it just started out. It doesn't even have a whole lot of known cheat programs, it would only stop the noobiest of hackers.

All right so you asked about it checking processes: No. I thought I would have to do that and it looked extremely hard then I found out a very interesting fact: some cheat programs I thought I would have to check the processes because they have changing titles (like a program saying untitled.cheatzor - cheatzor haxor thing). Then I noticed that some things like that have different titles in the taskbar - which don't change. Yeah I'll probably add process checking later and maybe let people use it commercial games. It's just not ready yet.

Edited by daz, 26 October 2007 - 11:00 AM.

  • 0

#6 Sindarin

Sindarin

    Indie Game Developer

  • New Member
  • 1644 posts
  • Version:GM:HTML5

Posted 26 October 2007 - 11:08 AM

What kind of protection would this provide if this was open source?


Many protection algorithms are open source yet hard to crack.
Also let's say someone makes a trainer especially for a game of mine, then I'd have to contact you in order to include it; I'll have to wait; and if you someday decide to quit on the dll, then I'll be screwed.

Then 90% of game maker game hackers would have the only cheat programs it can protect


What hinders me from making a custom trainer program?
This is not a problem, maybe someone could do some more research and add more programs without telling the others.

All right well I don't want you to use this for commercial reasons because it just started out. It doesn't even have a whole lot of known cheat programs, it would only stop the noobiest of hackers.


maybe you could make a way so we can input our own programs we want to detect. Hmm..

Then I noticed that some things like that have different titles in the taskbar - which don't change.


This can be changed.

Edited by Sindarin, 26 October 2007 - 11:11 AM.

  • 0
GM 8.1 / GM:HTML5 User

#7 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 26 October 2007 - 11:14 AM

Alright well if I do quit this I'll make it open source first xD I like your idea about maybe including more cheats without having to have the source. If anyone - you'd probably be one of the ones I'd let have the source just not yet. What I meant by the whole 90% thing is that then the hackers could see the only programs dhp protects against and thus get around it. Just wait until sometime later today and I'll release a version with a function that lets you check if a program is running :3

Function added (rushily cause I have to go in literally a few minutes, 1.1 available example not changed didn't even test if it worked or not)
function youropen(ctitle:string):string; returns same as cheatsopen

Edited by daz, 26 October 2007 - 11:23 AM.

  • 0

#8 krele

krele

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 640 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 26 October 2007 - 11:40 AM

Won't work for me. When I press spacebar and while having *heat engine,Rev*****on engine opened, it detects nothing.

-krele
  • 0

If I helped you, you can help me back :3

Brocoola


#9 Sindarin

Sindarin

    Indie Game Developer

  • New Member
  • 1644 posts
  • Version:GM:HTML5

Posted 26 October 2007 - 12:16 PM

*heat engine,Rev*****on


What? Ah, I think I misunderstood. :D

Alright well if I do quit this I'll make it open source first xD I like your idea about maybe including more cheats without having to have the source. If anyone - you'd probably be one of the ones I'd let have the source just not yet. What I meant by the whole 90% thing is that then the hackers could see the only programs dhp protects against and thus get around it.


okay, I'd be glad to help.

Function added (rushily cause I have to go in literally a few minutes, 1.1 available example not changed didn't even test if it worked or not)
function youropen(ctitle:string):string; returns same as cheatsopen


Gotta try it.
  • 0
GM 8.1 / GM:HTML5 User

#10 Chocsalty

Chocsalty

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 209 posts

Posted 26 October 2007 - 01:31 PM

I find that it isnt detecting the Process's because i run ArtMoney from a USB stick and it doesnt detect it.
  • 0

#11 krele

krele

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 640 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 26 October 2007 - 02:33 PM

*heat engine,Rev*****on


What? Ah, I think I misunderstood. :D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yup,you did. I Won't post them here for security reasons. Maybe I'll send him a PM of all hacking friendly programs I know. :P
  • 0

If I helped you, you can help me back :3

Brocoola


#12 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 26 October 2007 - 08:21 PM

Ehh it should have, that and some variations are on the list. Which dll version did you use? 1.1 is not stable yet..

Oh btw function youropen doesn't work yet, I forgot one word of code before I left this morning :P That's what I get for writing the function is less than 30 seconds at 6am :D I'll fix it up and fix the examples soon. (and make it the latest stable version.)

You'll notice that sindarin seems to have it been successful just fine. Oh and sind, I'm not charging for this dll, I just don't want it used commercially for now.

Dhp 1.1 stable uploaded check first post.

Edited by daz, 26 October 2007 - 08:39 PM.

  • 0

#13 programmer455

programmer455

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 87 posts

Posted 27 October 2007 - 03:00 AM

will this protect against remote hacking programs? such as over the internet hacking(fasttrackhack.exe)
  • 0

#14 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 27 October 2007 - 03:50 AM

No. This dll is meant to be all client side. I'm not precisely sure about what you mean by remote hacking programs, but if someone's trying to hack into your server from their personal computer there's nothing this can do about it.
  • 0

#15 Sindarin

Sindarin

    Indie Game Developer

  • New Member
  • 1644 posts
  • Version:GM:HTML5

Posted 27 October 2007 - 09:00 AM

Oh and sind, I'm not charging for this dll, I just don't want it used commercially for now.


I understand, so let's make it better!
  • 0
GM 8.1 / GM:HTML5 User

#16 uuf6429

uuf6429

    Covac Software

  • New Member
  • 2522 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 27 October 2007 - 02:47 PM

Pros
First, you should make it search for a list of processes given by GM (if this is fast enough, it could detect the program before it does the damage/hacking)
Cons
Those knowing how it works, ie the real hackers, would know how to deter this, by simply renaming such things as the window class name, or using a very generic one like TRunnerForm. Imagine the game blocking itself :) . Anyway if someone goes on in more game protection will end up having more protection code then game code, making it ALOT slower.
  • 0

#17 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 27 October 2007 - 04:03 PM

Yeah the more it searches for the slower it goes. I've been working on adding searching processes but it probably won't be done for a while. And what do you mean by "a list of processes given by GM"? And yes, I know this won't stop any good hackers, take maplestory for example, people keep finding ways around gameguard and this is not nearly and will never be nearly as good as gameguard. I'm planning on making a function called protectVar but doing so would require you to call a dll function every time the score changes. That'll be really bad if you call it on say, the step event. Even though the dll function that's being called won't be too big I'd say it would probably still have a significant impact. Guess we'll see eh? BTW I think that searchExtra (dll function youropen) can get real slow real fast. Why? Well everytime you call searchExtra you're calling the dll. And if you have 100 more known programs than dhp you'll most likely be calling searchExtra 100 times.
  • 0

#18 uuf6429

uuf6429

    Covac Software

  • New Member
  • 2522 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 27 October 2007 - 06:03 PM

"a list of processes given by GM"
I guess you using find window class name or window name. I fdoing so, the hacking program's name should be given from gm not be inside the dll.
  • 0

#19 Mister_M

Mister_M

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 499 posts

Posted 27 October 2007 - 08:33 PM

You know its actually pretty silly...
You need to check actions, not programs but this works too..
  • 0

#20 Zipo™

Zipo™

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 14 posts

Posted 27 October 2007 - 10:47 PM

Your download has failed. You have an invalid session set. Click here to try your download again.

:D What is this "invalid session"?
  • 0

#21 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 27 October 2007 - 10:59 PM

Maybe it's a php session? I dunno guess I'll put up a mirror.
Mister M - I plan on trying to do some of that after I get finish off app checking and some other minor stuff.
  • 0

#22 Doogie_Forever

Doogie_Forever

    Dog Warrior

  • GMC Member
  • 824 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 28 October 2007 - 10:01 AM

Daz, instead of making it open source, make a script that allows you to see if that process is running.

So it has your built in processes and they can add their own.

eg.

if (ProcessRunning("iexplore.exe")) {
game_end()
}

Then they could add their own processors and the current ones protected are still safe.
  • 0

#23 Sindarin

Sindarin

    Indie Game Developer

  • New Member
  • 1644 posts
  • Version:GM:HTML5

Posted 28 October 2007 - 11:32 AM

if (ProcessRunning("iexplore.exe")) {
game_end()
}


However a nice workaround would be to rename iexplore.exe to ixplore.exe and run it.
Maybe the solution would to check for more than just the process, like the caption, the taskbar button, and registry.
  • 0
GM 8.1 / GM:HTML5 User

#24 cephei

cephei

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 801 posts

Posted 28 October 2007 - 11:59 AM

Complete WASTE ^^ ok, it may prevent total noobs from hacking, but i can easily write a C++ DLL, name it DHP.dll -.-
  • 0

#25 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 28 October 2007 - 12:03 PM

Thanks for the encouragement. -.-;
  • 0

#26 ChIkEn AtE mY dOnUtS

ChIkEn AtE mY dOnUtS

    Pwner of barcodes

  • GMC Member
  • 2410 posts

Posted 28 October 2007 - 12:47 PM

...This is bogus, i could crack this in seconds.
  • 0
I've moved away from GM. If you want to contact me, feel free to email ryanwebdev@gmail.com.

Thanks,
Ryan.

#27 Josh @ Dreamland

Josh @ Dreamland

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 455 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 28 October 2007 - 12:58 PM

Also, if your Dll works the way I think it does, it can be spoofed. And you should allow custom program titles to be sent to the dll as a string.

Meaning, let them send a caption and exename.

Don't forget though that this Dll can just be replaced. Plus the game can be spoofed in other ways. And the program at hand can be edited.

Also, yours doesn't even check for debug window.

Edited by Josh @ Dreamland, 28 October 2007 - 02:00 PM.

  • 0

#28 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 28 October 2007 - 02:54 PM

Sorry CAMD every single anti-hack thing CAN be hacked. Including the USA's govmt computers, supposedly china hacked in over 1700 times. Anyways you can send custom window names but no exe names yet. The window name is what's seen in the taskbar not the actual title. I think once I add variable protection it'll also protect against replacing the dll... and you have to understand that not many people are smart enough to know how to replace a dll :blink:. And I guess I'll have to add a check for the debug window now...
  • 0

#29 GearGOD

GearGOD

    Deus Verus

  • GMC Member
  • 2153 posts

Posted 28 October 2007 - 03:59 PM

This should be banned everywhere.
You have no idea how much it pisses me off when I'm doing homework and a debugger is open, and when I go have a break and start a game it cries at me. This offers 0% protection against hackers, and 100% annoyance for everyone else.
  • 0
Engineers are not programmers. Stop thinking that you can save a few bucks by writing code yourself instead of hiring a programmer. Your code sucks.

#30 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 28 October 2007 - 04:30 PM

So, geargod you're saying you hate my dll or just don't want debugger checking?
Edit: well even so 1) I haven't figured out how to check for the debugger yet, and 2) I'll make it optional to check for the debugger if I figure out how - because the debugger can really screw a game over.

Edited by daz, 28 October 2007 - 04:33 PM.

  • 0

#31 GearGOD

GearGOD

    Deus Verus

  • GMC Member
  • 2153 posts

Posted 28 October 2007 - 04:34 PM

The idea of looking at running processes and crying at certain ones is retarded. Whoever came up with it should be shot. I can easily circumvent any software that attempts to do this if I want to mess with it, but its otherwise a complete pain in the ass.
  • 0
Engineers are not programmers. Stop thinking that you can save a few bucks by writing code yourself instead of hiring a programmer. Your code sucks.

#32 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 28 October 2007 - 04:48 PM

GearGod I'm not sure I understand your logic. Is it not logical that if you don't want your game hacked you're going to look for running cheat programs? What's the big deal if it ONLY checks for running ones? At least this doesn't search your registry -.- Anyway I think I finished up integer variable protection... someone pm me if you hax it =D (will upload soon)
  • 0

#33 ChIkEn AtE mY dOnUtS

ChIkEn AtE mY dOnUtS

    Pwner of barcodes

  • GMC Member
  • 2410 posts

Posted 28 October 2007 - 05:16 PM

Sorry CAMD every single anti-hack thing CAN be hacked. Including the USA's govmt computers, supposedly china hacked in over 1700 times. Anyways you can send custom window names but no exe names yet. The window name is what's seen in the taskbar not the actual title. I think once I add variable protection it'll also protect against replacing the dll... and you have to understand that not many people are smart enough to know how to replace a dll :blink:. And I guess I'll have to add a check for the debug window now...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Yeah, and then i'll just bypass that. I don't think you understand what I can do to a GM7 EXE.
  • 0
I've moved away from GM. If you want to contact me, feel free to email ryanwebdev@gmail.com.

Thanks,
Ryan.

#34 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 28 October 2007 - 05:22 PM

No I don't. And I put both a gm6 and gm7 file in there, how would you know which one the user compiled it with? xD... And I see you decided to publicly announce your z0mg 1337 h@x1ng ski!11$ in your sig. Try the new version. (and make sure you uncomment the step event) Not like I have many people using this system yet, doubt people will bother with your crack ;/

Yeah already because I made a new version with more functions I'm already getting error defining external function (expected) so try to add the new functions)

And after a bit of thought I bet you should be able to haxor this one, even probably the same way as last time.

Edit: Hmm wonder if I could get the mods to take the 'crack' out of your siggy :blink: After all you're only trying to ruin my hard work.

Edited by daz, 28 October 2007 - 05:25 PM.

  • 0

#35 ChIkEn AtE mY dOnUtS

ChIkEn AtE mY dOnUtS

    Pwner of barcodes

  • GMC Member
  • 2410 posts

Posted 28 October 2007 - 05:31 PM

No I don't. And I put both a gm6 and gm7 file in there, how would you know which one the user compiled it with? xD... And I see you decided to publicly announce your z0mg 1337 h@x1ng ski!11$ in your sig. Try the new version. (and make sure you uncomment the step event) Not like I have many people using this system yet, doubt people will bother with your crack ;/

Yeah already because I made a new version with more functions I'm already getting error defining external function (expected) so try to add the new functions)

And after a bit of thought I bet you should be able to haxor this one, even probably the same way as last time.

Edit: Hmm wonder if I could get the mods to take the 'crack' out of your siggy  :blink: After all you're only trying to ruin my hard work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Yeah, i've only made constant posts about me cracking GM7 over and over.

And omfglolz u b reporn meh 4 be liek craxn ur stuffz? LUULLZZ
  • 0
I've moved away from GM. If you want to contact me, feel free to email ryanwebdev@gmail.com.

Thanks,
Ryan.

#36 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 28 October 2007 - 05:37 PM

*Sigh* as you wish. Why do you feel like picking on me today? =/ I know it's insecure etc but especially remove your sig. This is meant to prevent nub haxors not help them.

Edit: I think I could fix this - I might pm you the compiled example with dll first before posting an 'official' hax fix update.

Edited by daz, 28 October 2007 - 05:38 PM.

  • 0

#37 necrotic

necrotic

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 238 posts

Posted 28 October 2007 - 06:11 PM

Don't be discouraged, this may be of some use for checking running programs.

If you want something to be secure, don't try. That or use PGP.... then your secure.
  • 0

#38 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 28 October 2007 - 06:32 PM

Don't be discouraged, this may be of some use for checking running programs.

If you want something to be secure, don't try.  That or use PGP.... then your secure.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well this was only meant to check for running programs but camd still has a way around the running program check -.- (the entire dll to be exact)

Edit: After 1 1/2 hours + of work I think I have protection against CAMD. I'd like him to try it first though, so I don't think I'll post a new version just yet. I also have to modify the example now because with the changes it creates 100% cpu usage in the step event.

Edited by daz, 28 October 2007 - 07:17 PM.

  • 0

#39 ChIkEn AtE mY dOnUtS

ChIkEn AtE mY dOnUtS

    Pwner of barcodes

  • GMC Member
  • 2410 posts

Posted 28 October 2007 - 07:27 PM

*Sigh* as you wish. Why do you feel like picking on me today? =/ I know it's insecure etc but especially remove your sig. This is meant to prevent nub haxors not help them.

Edit: I think I could fix this - I might pm you the compiled example with dll first before posting an 'official' hax fix update.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


lololol

Don't be discouraged, this may be of some use for checking running programs.

If you want something to be secure, don't try.  That or use PGP.... then your secure.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well this was only meant to check for running programs but camd still has a way around the running program check -.- (the entire dll to be exact)

Edit: After 1 1/2 hours + of work I think I have protection against CAMD. I'd like him to try it first though, so I don't think I'll post a new version just yet. I also have to modify the example now because with the changes it creates 100% cpu usage in the step event.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ok, gimme it.
  • 0
I've moved away from GM. If you want to contact me, feel free to email ryanwebdev@gmail.com.

Thanks,
Ryan.

#40 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 28 October 2007 - 09:20 PM

_-_ Apparently 1. Had a memory leak 2. Unexpected error occurs every time I try sooo 3. Not really ready yet. meh. =|

Alright well here's what I have happening now: If I change the variable in the function manually in my dll it'll throw the "zomg you haxed" event. If I change/set the variable from gm, it refuses to work.. ah well I'll just keep trying.

Edited by daz, 28 October 2007 - 09:41 PM.

  • 0

#41 Dr. Watz0n

Dr. Watz0n

    The Best Doctor

  • New Member
  • 351 posts

Posted 29 October 2007 - 01:45 AM

This is the biggest piece of BS I have ever seen before in my lifetime. Correction, the second piece of BS I have ever seen before in my lifetime. I don't play GM games, but just for fun, I added this to a little thing I made. Cracked your system in under 40 seconds. It is so retard-idly done its not even funny. You know what though? Your not going to have Kevin Mitnick come over here to the good 'ol land of the GMC and try to crack games. No one cares if you crack a Game Maker game, just like no one cares when you try to stop it. Give up.
  • 0

#42 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 29 October 2007 - 02:51 AM

Oh you would care if you were to say, make your own mmorpg with GM and have lots of people on at a time with NO hack protection - what would happen? Yeah you'd get a boat load of hackers that ruin your game and you'd get ticked. Anyway blah blah you can hax my dll in 40 seconds. Did you use the same way as CAMD did before?

Edited by daz, 29 October 2007 - 03:23 AM.

  • 0

#43 necrotic

necrotic

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 238 posts

Posted 29 October 2007 - 11:05 AM

The trick isn't to prevent people from cracking the clientside app, but making all critical pieces on your server, where it requires sufficient authentication to access.
  • 0

#44 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 29 October 2007 - 11:18 AM

How are you going to know they're hacking without anti-hack stuff? Your server can't tell if they're hacking, except for something like "zoinks! your hp just jumped up 49492!"
  • 0

#45 Mister_M

Mister_M

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 499 posts

Posted 29 October 2007 - 11:56 AM

why dont you just have a flag array where each variable represents a slot in that flag. If the value was changed and the flag was true it means the change was leagal. else - it wouldnt be!

When people look for values in whatever hacking engine they use, they look for the value itself - if its unkown - by values that have changed or not, decreased or increased...

Another hacking prevention is to have an array that store coded information about variables lets say coded in arc4 method.
if a variable isnt equal to the decoded information in the parrallel array then its probobally a hack.

You chose an unefficient, easily hackable, and almost useless method...

I say - HACKED! I reprogrammed cheat engine to display "cheet engine" instead of cheat engine and the program didnt catch it...
  • 0

#46 GearGOD

GearGOD

    Deus Verus

  • GMC Member
  • 2153 posts

Posted 29 October 2007 - 03:35 PM

How are you going to know they're hacking without anti-hack stuff?

How are you going to know they're hacking with 'anti-hack stuff'? I don't think I made this quite clear enough: any protection can and will be broken. Some are reasonable to employ as a detterrant, but some (like this one) are plain stupid. They do nothing at all to stop even a newbie attacker, but they do a good job of irritating people who aren't trying to hack anything at all. Just don't do it.

Not that it matters because GM is vulnerable in so many ways that I can completely pull a game apart and make it do anything I want without it even being run.

The only part of a multiplayer game that can be assumed to be reasonably secure is the server. Thus in the perfect world, all ciritcal things should be done on the server, just like necrotic said. The safest online game is going to be one where the client just sends keystrokes to the server.
  • 0
Engineers are not programmers. Stop thinking that you can save a few bucks by writing code yourself instead of hiring a programmer. Your code sucks.

#47 uuf6429

uuf6429

    Covac Software

  • New Member
  • 2522 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 29 October 2007 - 07:42 PM

I want without it even being run.

How would you do that? Hmm sounds like decryption to me ;)

The only part of a multiplayer game that can be assumed to be reasonably secure is the server. Thus in the perfect world, all ciritcal things should be done on the server, just like necrotic said.

That's right.

The safest online game is going to be one where the client just sends keystrokes to the server.

Interesting but alas slow concept.
  • 0

#48 daz

daz

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 804 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 29 October 2007 - 08:09 PM

The server's not going to be able to at least tell if they have macroing software. Sure you can check only for keystrokes and mouse clicks but they can be simulated.

Edited by daz, 29 October 2007 - 08:35 PM.

  • 0

#49 necrotic

necrotic

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 238 posts

Posted 29 October 2007 - 08:51 PM

Anyone who is trying to build something to macro won't use any sort of name that even suggests that it may be illegal.

If you really want to keep things 'secure' from hacking, then store critical code on the server encrypted with PGP (which also does authentication).
  • 0

#50 ChIkEn AtE mY dOnUtS

ChIkEn AtE mY dOnUtS

    Pwner of barcodes

  • GMC Member
  • 2410 posts

Posted 29 October 2007 - 09:14 PM

DHP Crack

I've been told to post it in the topic instead of in my signature.

Oh yeah, I don't even know C++, and i created this DLL which cracks his system, secure eh?
  • 0
I've moved away from GM. If you want to contact me, feel free to email ryanwebdev@gmail.com.

Thanks,
Ryan.