clantag abuse

Word · Post by **Word** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:28 pm

ok, another scenario, what would you say if the admin has a choice when there is a setting like "enable_tagfake" and the options are 0 and 1 ? he can do whatever he wants but if such a setting exist, i still think many players and admins think it is useful.

@DDMJ:

the situation i am thinking of goes like this:

tagFaker entered the game

tagFaker: Hi NOOBS! YOU SUCK!
tagFaker: You all are **********!
Player 1: stfu
Player 2: lol your clan must be crazy to let ppl like you join
Player 1 core dumped tagFaker for x points.
tagFaker was respawned by Player 2.
tagFaker core dumped teammate Player 2! BOO! No points for that!
Player 1 core dumped tagFaked for x points.
....
tagRealmember entered the game
tagRealmember: hey
Player 1: hi

Player 2: hello tagRealmember !!
tagFaker: Hi boss
tagRealmember: Do I know you?
tagFaker: I am in your clan
tagRealmember: who are you=
tagFaker: Faker
tagRealmember: You aren't a member.
tagFaker: I am
tagRealmember: Tell me a thing only I and you know.
tagFaker left the game

Player 1: the idiot is away...
Player 2: Realmember, why is that stupid twat in your clan?
tagRealmember: Idk him.
Player 1: You should know your clanmates. I will tell an admin what he said to us.
Player 2: I will complain at the forums.

----------------------------------------------------

You understand the problem? Auth doesn't help a lot here and isn't a real alternative. When the guy goes to the next server, the same problem starts again. and when the faker is an imposter at the same time, maybe some other player's IP gets banned because of him.

Post by **Tank Program** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:47 pm

Word wrote:ok, another scenario, what would you say if the admin has a choice when there is a setting like "enable_tagfake" and the options are 0 and 1 ? he can do whatever he wants but if such a setting exist, i still think many players and admins think it is useful.

This has been discussed about 4 times already in this thread. This is going in circles. The main thing so far appears to be that there's nothing that this solves that can't really be solved by simply authenticating.

Word · Post by **Word** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:52 pm

Tank Program wrote:
Word wrote:ok, another scenario, what would you say if the admin has a choice when there is a setting like "enable_tagfake" and the options are 0 and 1 ? he can do whatever he wants but if such a setting exist, i still think many players and admins think it is useful.
This has been discussed about 4 times already in this thread. This is going in circles. The main thing so far appears to be that there's nothing that this solves that can't really be solved by simply authenticating.

sry haven't finished writing this post while you have already read and answered it

but you're right: enough xD

DDMJ · Post by **DDMJ** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:01 pm

Word wrote:You understand the problem? Auth doesn't help a lot here and isn't a real alternative.

We must be misunderstanding each other. Auth would've helped:

tagFaker: Hi NOOBS! YOU SUCK!
tagFaker: You all are **********!
Player 1: stfu
Player 2: Player 1, he's probably not even in that clan since he's not logged in in the /players menu
Player 1: o of course, good point, tagFaker, could you login please?
tagFaker left the game.
Player 2: what a n00b =/

Word · Post by **Word** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:04 pm

DDMJ wrote:
Word wrote:You understand the problem? Auth doesn't help a lot here and isn't a real alternative.
We must be misunderstanding each other. Auth would've helped:

tagFaker: Hi NOOBS! YOU SUCK!
tagFaker: You all are **********!
Player 1: stfu
Player 2: Player 1, he's probably not even in that clan since he's not logged in in the /players menu
Player 1: o of course, good point, tagFaker, could you login please?
tagFaker left the game.
Player 2: what a n00b =/

"Sorry, this server doesn't support the type of Authentication you requested"

Website · Post by **Z-Man** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:16 pm

'sorry, this server does not do fancy clan tag detection'. As wrtl pointed out already, the system you suggest would not be enabled by default and chances it would be enabled by more server admins than authentication are very, very slim.

Yeah, circles. Goodbye. Come back when you have a solid design that actually works and have accumulated enough evidence that Armathentication won't solve things.

Post by **Lucifer** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:51 pm

Heh, minor point about hole scoring. That was introduced in regards to fortress play, which we support very strongly. The fact that it is also useful in CTF, which we don't support, is pure coincidence.

sinewav · Post by **sinewav** » Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:59 pm

DDMJ wrote:.:] Durka: orly? if you are, please authenticate yourself
.:] n00bsicle has been logged in as DrJoeTr0n@forums
.:] Goody: i knew it!
.:] n00bsicle: mwahaha I R rox0rz at MS paint cart00nzzz!!

OMG LOL

DDMJ · Post by **DDMJ** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:00 am

Word wrote:
DDMJ wrote:
Word wrote:You understand the problem? Auth doesn't help a lot here and isn't a real alternative.
We must be misunderstanding each other. Auth would've helped:

tagFaker: Hi NOOBS! YOU SUCK!
tagFaker: You all are **********!
Player 1: stfu
Player 2: Player 1, he's probably not even in that clan since he's not logged in in the /players menu
Player 1: o of course, good point, tagFaker, could you login please?
tagFaker left the game.
Player 2: what a n00b =/
"Sorry, this server doesn't support the type of Authentication you requested"

I thought the point of this topic was to introduce a new feature, hopefully by 0.2.8.3. 0.2.8.3 will have Authentication so all server admins will probably upgrade.

Paladin · Post by **Paladin** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:27 am

I ask out of ignorance, excuse me for such, but has there been a stable 'Dedicated Server' release that supports auth? Or is that to be the .2.8.3 that Durk mentioned?

Anyways, glad to see that this 'idea' was dropped for the most part.

Website · Post by **Z-Man** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:39 am

Paladin wrote:I ask out of ignorance, excuse me for such, but has there been a stable 'Dedicated Server' release that supports auth? Or is that to be the .2.8.3 that Durk mentioned?

0.2.8.3 will be the first release designated as stable that will support authentication. Our own builds will have it compiled in. If you build from source on Unix, you have to activate it during ./configure time. 0.3.1 will have it compiled in by default in all cases.

Paladin · Post by **Paladin** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:42 am

Much thanks Z-Man. I look forward to hopefully seeing Cheers! and such running auth then.

Sinn · Post by **Sinn** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:54 am

Well honestly Word no one is going to care about your problem that isn't or hasn't experianced the same thing. Even if some have, many people just don't care anyway. For some reason tron goes through it's moments where impostering isn't a big deal and times where it is. I know I was pissed back when I was going for number 1 on XzL server. Worked really hard to beat the really good players scores. Then someone came a long, impostered my name (and tags) and totally ****ed up my score.

I don't understand why something like a simple login name and password can't be a fix? I am no programmer but I would think this would be possible without too much trouble. Of course I can see problems with it also.

Some of us take this game a little more seriously. I know myself take great pride in mine and EagleEyes creation of ID. To see people wearing our tags that shouldnt and going around being an jerk just isn't cool. There are not always Server Admins or mods in a server. There is not always someone who can kick. There are not always other players who give a crap someone is wearing your tags. I am not always in a server where I have Admin rights.

Bottom line Word is that SOME of us do care and would like to see something more done about this. Like I said maybe a login and PW option. BUT from reading these forums it's obvious not enough people care or think there is already something done that fixes the problem, which I can tell you right now is TOTALLY false. This does NOT fix a problem it shows that there IS a problem.

I applaud your efforts in trying to get something more done about this. On the other hand it's clear to see people have put their foot down and are not seeing eye to eye with you. I recomend just forgeting about it for now because replying over and over again is just going to make you look bad and seem annoying.

Do what other Admin have done for years.

1: Make sure you have good relations with Other server Admins.
2. If you are in your own server, kick these people and ban them if you wish. In older versions you get their IP when you ban them. New servers when /players you have their IP right off the bat.
3. If you are in someone else's server take a screen shot of the imposter. Many other server Admins keep logs of the servers. They can go back, get the IP, and if you follow Step one, might just ban them for you.
4. You know our forums. If you have a problem and follow these simple steps we will be glad to try to help you.

Good luck Word, and sorry your haveing these issues.

Post by **Tank Program** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:20 am

Sinn wrote:I don't understand why something like a simple login name and password can't be a fix?

That's what Armathentication is. Login to an authority on any supported server. Only you can be Sinn@forums, for example. No one else can. Don't want @forums? Run your own authority, only for clan members.

It's not that we don't care, it's that we feel we don't need to protect clan tags specifically, when the whole name is protected.

Word · Post by **Word** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:52 am

Thanks Sin. If everyone who agrees with that would write a text like you, the devs and those who have the opposite viewpoint would really know that we like something to be done. Of course, we would do it ourselves, but we aren't programmers. We would do it even if it can take 40 hours. And the @forums thing isn't really an option because it proves only that your nick is your nick. if someone would register here as Word1 he can authenticate as Word1. If a group of players does that, where all can trust each other, it is different.