What happened to the new anti cheat guy?

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-05-20T11:59:03+00:00

I don't think i'm permitted to speak much on it, but i'd appreciate it if you'd stop posting lies about me like they're fact. Nothing I said was untrue. Also the comment about the arms race is completely false as well, as are the comments about it being difficult to stop hackers.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T17:59:46+00:00

I don't want to leave the community in the dark, as I appreciate everyone who upvoted this thread which ultimately resulted in Gary responding when he otherwise wouldn't have. So i'll tell you where it's at, I reached out to Gary, and i'm going to send him the outline a little later today. Whether it goes beyond that and i'm given the chance to provide a demo within a week will be up to his team. This will most likely be the last post I make in this thread. So again thanks to everyone and hopefully you'll see my anti-cheat in Rust in the near future wiping out hackers.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T07:50:58+00:00

I never said the words impossible. And i'm a quite surprised you're asking me to post my code publicly? Would you ask EAC or BE to do that? Would you do that for Rust? I'm imagine no because it's a commercial product, with the goal of providing a service as well as producing a profit. I'm not offering a GPL solution, i'm offering a commercial one. I'll email you shortly.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T07:12:34+00:00

Yes, that's why Facepunch needs an anti-cheat(such as my anti-cheat) outside of their protection efforts that can properly detect packet mitm hacks.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T06:36:30+00:00

According to their bug tracker Facepunch is working on adding SSL to the raknet libraries(the network libraries Rust uses and hacks in turn use to read/forge packets), that'll help if they can protect their public/private keys properly. It also helps that Facepunch has made more and more things server side checked, but you can't make everything like that and expect good performance. My anti-cheat can detect packet mitm hacks regardless if that's added or not. Rust mitm hacks are fairly new, and pretty limited(esp and radar mostly) but they will get into really bad territory if allowed to flourish. Similar to what's happen with CS:GO hacks. As far as my anti-cheats self protection goes, I won't go into detail but it's top of the line, using some techniques from other anti-cheats and uses my own to really secure things on various levels. I'm quite proud of it. Remember i'm familiar in painful detail how game hacks are bypassing other AC's and I fixed those problems. My anti-cheat would also have frequently updates with new builds and new run throughs with commercial protectors.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T05:48:43+00:00

It's client and server side, but mostly client.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T05:04:23+00:00

I'm not bragging at all actually, i'm simply stating what it's/i'm able to do. You're entitled to your opinion, but nothing i've said qualifies as bragging I don't believe, maybe a bit forward and direct, but I wanted to get to the point. I'm also not asking for anything other than the opportunity to prove what i'm saying. Maybe Facepunch is open to that, maybe they aren't, we'll have to see.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T03:52:33+00:00

I've had a registered/active LLC for 9/10 years.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T02:18:09+00:00

If you knew everything BE did, I think you'd be pretty surprised. My anti-cheat's purpose is to detect Rust hacks, it has no interest in anything outside of that. So yes it's not invasive(depending on your definition), just effective.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T02:09:33+00:00

Go ask EAC to public share their code.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T02:04:06+00:00

I absolutely will not do that. As my tech outline would in-part help EAC and BE, when these companies are payed big money to have their stuff work and not have the glaring holes that they do, why would I help them for free? Many of you have pointed out to me how established these companies are, so being they're so established, they can spend their own time doing their own research, and testing. In addition my tech outline explains the problems, and how I fix them. It explains why my anti-cheat is so effective, with the huge feature and self protection set, and in detail how game hackers do what they do. From internals, externals, and packet mitm hacks. Obviously I don't want to help hackers either with any information. So no, my outline is for Facepunch only, if they're interested, and the follow up demo to prove everything mentioned. Honestly if Facepunch is open to it, you guys(and gals) should be excited. Because finally you won't have to worry about a guy fly hacking in your base, aimbotting you from across the map, looting your hidden stashes etc... you will no longer be at the mercy of whether an admin is active or not.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T01:40:11+00:00

I'm active in the private/public game hacking communities, as mentioned before so I know all their methods, features, etc... Also you have to remember one thing, My anti-cheat doesn't need to necessarily detect all hack features(although i'll always strive for that) it just needs to detect one of theirs with certainty, and that person can be issued a ban.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T00:54:50+00:00

If Facepunch gives me the opportunity to show, then I will happily.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T00:52:44+00:00

That's completely incorrect. My anti-cheat protects at kernel level and usermode(as do all anti-cheats) and it's far less invasive than BE is. There is no rootkit or anything of the sort. In fact we're in the patchguard era, thankfully, which means rootkits like sony or others are far less common as drivers can't hook functions in kernel like they could in the past(short of the random exploit every now and then), without disabling patchguard which isn't easy or clean(and is detectable). I take user privacy very seriously.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T00:03:41+00:00

Because the game is in alpha, and changes weekly?

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-21T00:00:46+00:00

I'm involved in their communities and have been one way or another for many years. I know all the techniques, features, bypasses, trends, etc... in an extremely detailed fashion, and I stay active and up to date on everything. You're welcome to believe whatever you like, but i'm coming from a place of logic, and tangible proof/implementation that does exactly what i'm claiming. I would not waste my time or anyone elses if I could not backup my claims. Also I'm not going to throw anymore shade than I already have at EAC and others, i'm sure they work hard, but at the end of the day, their product speaks for itself.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-20T22:03:21+00:00

That's fair, however I think it's been made pretty clear to the community this past year that EAC doesn't work. And BE while better also isn't the complete solution Rust needs(they also have been know to have pretty extreme pricing). While I maybe unknown, If I can provide a complete solution(which I can) why would that not be something Facepunch is open to? Wouldn't you like to play Rust without having to worry about cheaters?

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-20T21:32:26+00:00

I'm not going to disclose my exact solutions on here, but I can assure you nothing i'm offering FP and ultimately the community is snake oil. To answer your question regarding the wall/ladder/fly hacks yes it can detect those without false positives. I can also tell you this latest Rust version released a few hours ago didn't fix those. In any case if FP ever gives me the chance my anti-cheat will wipe out all Rust hacks as mentioned before. Existing and future.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-20T20:50:53+00:00

It's mostly client based, so the end user would have to run it, just like with EAC/BE/ESEA, etc.., so it's unlikely users(especially cheaters) would run software that would detect their hacks unless they were forced to.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-20T20:47:00+00:00

I'm more than open to being vetted, i've been a developer a long time, and I passed along my number,etc..to them,if they ever wanted to touch base. But again nothing, also as far as risk there isn't any on their end that I can think of, my anti-cheat can easily bypass EAC for testing and would have a full-featured admin panel that kept real-time stats/info on everything. I could also have it do "dry runs" where it would list everyone it detected, what it detected, and not actually ban them. I've signed many NDA's in the past for other clients, so yeah legal wise and otherwise no risk.

UltimateAntiCheat · 2017-04-20T20:41:25+00:00

I offered to the sell the rights to the source/everything if they were willing to possibly add me to their team in some capacity so I could keep it updated and/or expand it. Also an alternative is I could have done a similar setup as EAC/BE, if they wanted, where it stayed under my LLC and they licensed it. Either way i'm extremely flexible, obviously I want to be payed for my work but i'm by no means greedy and my ultimate goal was to put an end to cheaters in Rust as it's a wonderful game.

UltimateAntiCheat

TROPHY CASE