that's what md5 type checking is all about. they can "modify" the client
anyway.
----- Original Message -----
From: "accident" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 2:57 PM
Subject: RE: PB no more.....
>
> I just want to drop 1 quick note and will discuss anything privately....
>
> If its open source and a client/server app, then anyone can modify the
> client to not detect the cheat.. I don't think this falls into the
> normal.. I would be all for a server side open source project but I
> wouldn't be able to support a client side open source project.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Buddha-Pest [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 5:41 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: PB no more.....
>
>
>
> i don't want to continue this argument on the list. it's the same
> argument that all closed/open source pundits have all the time. i
> believe open source is the way to go, you don't. i would like to be a
> part of an open source project as an alternative to the closed source
> PunkBuster.
>
> that's all.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "SQLBoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 2:25 PM
> Subject: Re: PB no more.....
>
>
> >
> >
> > Thats not the point. I'm just going on here-say here but I think each
>
> > individual cheat is coded into Punkbuster. I'm sure the program has a
> couple
> > different ways of finding out if a cheat is installed. Things like
> checking
> > for registry changes a cheat makes, looking for the installation
> > files,
> etc.
> > Yes, its possible for the coders to find out how PB is detecting them
> > and make some changes, it happens everyday I'm sure. Why give them
> > the source though so they can update their cheat 5min after the
> > release?
> >
> > I understand what you are trying to say with your openSSH example, but
>
> > I don't agree. What makes a hacker a hacker is detailed knowledge of
> > how things work. There are always going to be bugs or exploits in
> > weaker software that could allow me to replace your SSH server binary
> > with a
> custom
> > one of my own, and then gain access via SSH. I've seen it done on
> customer
> > machines running old Bind and FTP servers.
> >
> > I believe in open source but since the game server and client code is
> > not open source, you will run into the same limitations PB did, and
> > more since all the cheaters will be studying your source code.
> >
> > SQL
> >
> >
> > On Tuesday 25 September 2001 16:27, you wrote:
> > > that's wrong. that's like saying: knowing how openSSH works means
> > > you
> can
> > > circumvent it. the best secure software has always been open source
>
> > > software because of the amounts of eyes that review it.
> > >
> > > besides, the source is just a tool. you don't NEED the source to
> > > find
> out
> > > how something works. i really believe that a smart open source
> > > based
> team
> > > can do just as good of a job, and not be such control freaks about
> > > it.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "SQLBoy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 12:34 PM
> > > Subject: Re: PB no more.....
> > >
> > > > It makes no sense to go open source. Since PB was basically
> > > > reacting
> to
> > > > cheats, if cheat coders had the source, they would know exactly
> > > > how to circumvent the software.
> > > >
> > > > On Tuesday 25 September 2001 15:27, you wrote:
> > > > > > There has never been a chance that a "one man army" can get
> > > > > > rid of cheats that hundreds of cheatcoders work on. Maybe it's
>
> > > > > > time for
> some
> > > > > > open source project ...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I personally do NOT miss punkbuster at all.
> > > > >
> > > > > LMAO...it's been funny to watch the dark-eyed penguin pushers
> > > > > try to
> > >
> > > wrap
> > >
> > > > > their minds around the PB team not going public with their
> > > > > source.
> And
> > > > > it's been frustrating to watch them get all pissy about it, not
> because
> > >
> > > it
> > >
> > > > > doesn't work, but because it's not open source. If it's not
> > > > > opensource, then fsck you! It's a pretty dense way to live, to
> > > > > cut
> off
> > > > > your nose to spite your face. But, regardless, I guess none of
> > > > > you actually develop software professionally...
> > > > >
> > > > > Eric (the Deacon remix)
> > > > > http://www.firekite.com
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Ketchup [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 11:58 AM
> > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > Subject: Re: PB no more.....
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello Sysop,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tuesday, September 25, 2001, 6:29:01 PM, you wrote:
> > > > > > > So what are the chances of getting an official comment by
> > > > > > > valve
> on
> > >
> > > why
> > >
> > > > > > > PB and Valve couldn't work together on a integrated
> > > > > > > solution?
> PB
> > >
> > > has
> > >
> > > > > > > pulled the plug on HL/CS because of (they say) lack of
> > > > > > > participation
> > >
> > > by
> > >
> > > > > > > Valve. I would like to hear Valve's side of the story, as
> > > > > > > to
> why
> > > > > > > we are loosing something that could have REALLY improved the
>
> > > > > > > quality of the game...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Peter aka Ketchup
> > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > http://www.pommesbude.org
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
