'Counter-Strike' Gets Invaded By An Unblockable Chat-Bot (kotaku.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

'Counter-Strike' Gets Invaded By An Unblockable Chat-Bot (kotaku.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on Sunday February 19, 2017 @08:34PM from the first-person-chatter dept.

An anonymous reader writes: "At least one intruder is taking advantage of a Counter-Strike: Global Offensive exploit to flood lobbies (even private ones) with text from chat bots that can't be kicked," writes Engadget. The attack "allegedly comes from one person," according to Kotaku, which reports that "It's a similar exploit to one found a few weeks ago, where typing messages into a lobby allowed users to rank up and down as they chose." The chat bot's text includes various complaints about Counter-Strike which it claims motivated the attack, including cheaters, hackers and "bugs that break the game," and it urges a one-day boycott "to proof [sic] them that we care about the game and want them to fix it."

105 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Nothing is unblockable by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 20:45 · Score: 0

Don't believe me, believe Tucker Carlson, the dough boy!
Caring by Calydor · 2017-02-19 20:50 · Score: 4, Funny

"I hack and exploit the game because I care about it and want it fixed!"
"I rob banks because I care about them and want them to have better security!"

--
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
1. Re:Caring by jopsen · 2017-02-19 21:21 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  "I hack and exploit the game because I care about it and want it fixed!"
  "I rob banks because I care about them and want them to have better security!"
  Using an exploit to highlight the exploit and lack of support, is not exactly the same as robbing a bank.
  
  It's more like walking into the bank vault through an unlocked backdoor and then proceeding to call the bank manager to complain about security measures.
  (okay, maybe the kid jumped a tiny garden fence before walking over to the backdoor, but it's more like that).
  
  When people demonstrate an exploit their intent matters. Same thing applies when demonstrating a broken lock.
2. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 21:51 · Score: 0
  
  WHOOOOOOOOOoooooooooshshshshshshshhshsshsssss
3. Re:Caring by Calydor · 2017-02-19 21:55 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  So his argument is more like, "I picked the lock on his front door and painted graffiti on all his walls (the spamming) because I care about him and want him to get a better lock on his door!"
  
  --
  -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
4. Re:Caring by war4peace · 2017-02-19 22:25 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Improper analogy.
  Let me rework it.
  "I walked through this overlooked hole in the fence and tapped you on the shoulder while you were sun tanning in your backyard, telling you to fix it".
  
  --
  ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
5. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 22:28 · Score: 1
  
  No permanent harm is being done, so actually it's more like showing the owner of a Master Lock how easy it is to pick.
  And in this case, you yourself happen to have a stake in the security of the premises and the owner refuses to replace it, so you just keep picking it until the owner drags his lazy arse out of the couch and replaces the bloody lock.
6. Re:Caring by Gussington · 2017-02-19 22:34 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Using an exploit to highlight the exploit and lack of support, is not exactly the same as robbing a bank.
  Yes it is. If I figure out that a certain sequence of events gets me into the vault and out again with as much money as I like, then I can choose to notify the bank, or publish it in the interest of customers. Those are the ethical and legal options. I have no right then to rob then bank if because they ignored me. It is still illegal regardless of how cool you think it is.
7. Re: Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 22:54 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  Locks are a cosmetic deterrent, treat them like warning signs. Walking through a private property uninvited and unannounced is trespassing.
8. Re:Caring by cheesybagel · 2017-02-19 23:33 · Score: 1
  
  Sounds more to me like someone writing "Clean me!" with their finger on the grime of a car windshield or something like that.
9. Re:Caring by mwvdlee · 2017-02-19 23:34 · Score: 1
  
  Where's the private gain in his spam?
  
  --
  Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
10. Re:Caring by murdocj · 2017-02-19 23:41 · Score: 1
  
  If this is such an obvious exploit, how is it no one walked thru this open hole in the fence the last few years?
  And really, at that point you are just arguing over how hard it is. That really doesn't matter. If someone throws a rock thru your window to show you that you have cheap glass, it's not your fault that you didn't have bullet proof glass in place.
11. Re:Caring by murdocj · 2017-02-19 23:42 · Score: 2
  
  Sounds a lot more obnoxious than that. More like they took off the tires of the car and piled them in the rear seat because the car was unlocked.
12. Re:Caring by war4peace · 2017-02-20 00:21 · Score: 1
  
  If this is such an obvious exploit, how is it no one walked thru this open hole in the fence the last few years?
  I guess nobody gave a fuck.
  And I never said it was an obvious exploit, the point was damage comparison. he's annoying people, not doing anything dealing long-lasting damage.
  
  --
  ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
13. Re: Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:27 · Score: 0
  
  That is the point. People are easily hacking the game. He made a chat bot(which isn't a popular hack in CS but other games have chat spam bots that usually get everyone) to highlight the problem.
  If people are going to annoy you with cheats in game may as well fuck the chat. The more people it can get the better.
14. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:57 · Score: 0
  
  Ethical hackers are just so not ever annoying. Like waking up in the morning to find someone has changed the water pump on your car free of charge and merely left their calling card in case you liked their work so much you'd pay them for it. Of course, they didn't put the rest of the belts and engine components back in the car so you could start it up and drive it and get to work. But hey what do you want? Its was free!
15. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 01:14 · Score: 0
  
  Very often these types of hacks happen when someone with the ability to exploit but enough morals not to exercise that ability becomes fed up with the negative impact that the exploits of other people with less scruples have. It's vigilantism. The root cause of vigilantism is almost always the complacency of those who are supposed to enforce the rules. The purpose of vigilantism isn't to break the rules, but to get others to enforce them.
16. Re:Caring by DontBeAMoran · 2017-02-20 01:17 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe he works for Hormel Foods, LLC.
  
  --
  #DeleteFacebook
17. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 01:29 · Score: 0
  
  Isn't that how it works anymore? Breech and then inform?
18. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 01:38 · Score: 0
  
  You don't think annoying people on a service they paid for -is- damage? I think the developers would disagree with you. Flooding lobbies is not exactly a courteous behavior. And your 'tap on the shoulder' analogy is pretty flawed too. That's assault and likely to result in a physical response.
  
  Bottom line: this guy is being a dick.
19. Re:Caring by redmid17 · 2017-02-20 02:07 · Score: 2
  
  It's not even remotely similar in scope or detail. I can't and won't say it's benign, but you have to be high or a moron to equate a chat bot with armed assault and theft of physical property.
  
  Here's to hoping you smoke a joint before you wrote this post.
20. Re:Caring by Calydor · 2017-02-20 02:46 · Score: 1
  
  His amusement.
  
  --
  -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
21. Re:Caring by drinkypoo · 2017-02-20 03:08 · Score: 2
  
  I have no right then to rob then bank if because they ignored me. It is still illegal regardless of how cool you think it is.
  Yes, that would be illegal. And what he is actually doing is also illegal. He's not taking anything from the bank. What he's doing is equivalent to breaking into the bank vault, which is visible from the bank floor for the purposes of this simile, and shouting at the customers about how shit the bank security is to the point that they can't talk to the tellers and actually conduct any business. It's trespassing, it's harassment, it's denial of service, but it is not theft. This is basically the copyright infringement vs. theft argument all over again. Just like that argument, we know it is different because there are whole bodies of law which apply specifically to what he is actually doing. If everything you didn't like were theft, we would only need laws about theft. That's not how the world works, so please, stop shouting theft.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
22. Re: Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 03:09 · Score: 0
  
  You're kind of a moron.
23. Re:Caring by Notabadguy · 2017-02-20 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  Drawing parallels between a bank vault full of money and a counterstrike chat lobby..... ..... ...
  That's enough for any sane person to realize the argument is irrelevant.
24. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 03:39 · Score: 0
  
  I think you mean, I busted into your backyard and stood infront of you, blocking the sun, yammering on about random bullshit until you got so annoyed you went inside.
  Because I care or something.
25. Re: Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 04:08 · Score: 1
  
  Not necessarily true. Yes, given a bazooka you could probably just blow a hole in the wall if need be, but it'll attract so much unwanted attention that in practice nobody will do it. What a lock does, or should do, is make it hard to quickly and unobtrusively enter the premises.
  Master Locks are purely cosmetic. But there are plenty of good locks out there and they usually aren't even that much more expensive.
26. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 04:28 · Score: 0
  
  "I hack and exploit the game because I care about it and want it fixed!"
  "I rob banks because I care about them and want them to have better security!"
  Using an exploit to highlight the exploit and lack of support, is not exactly the same as robbing a bank.
  It's more like walking into the bank vault through an unlocked backdoor and then proceeding to call the bank manager to complain about security measures.
  (okay, maybe the kid jumped a tiny garden fence before walking over to the backdoor, but it's more like that).
  When people demonstrate an exploit their intent matters. Same thing applies when demonstrating a broken lock.
  True.
  People who claim 'demonstrating the vulnerability' is a valid defense should have the most seavear penalty applied. As they clearly understood the purpose of the lock and ignored it. Those who simply broke in for personal gain might be treated more leniently if they didn't understand why the lock existed.
  Fundamentally the lock serves the same purpose as a "keep out" sign. It signals that you're not suppsoed to be there, and bypassing it is a violation of the social concepts of property and privacy. Ignoring it makes you a douchebag, and bypassing it solly for the purpose of showing you can makes you a douchebag who;'s doing it for the sake of being a douchebag.
  Think of it like this.
  if someone were standing on the fenced in side of a "trespassers will be shot" sign and is shouting with a megaphone "look nobody's shooting me! the sign is a lie!", would you call them a hero or a moron? That's pretty much what's happening here.
27. Re:Caring by someone1234 · 2017-02-20 04:39 · Score: 1
  
  Ok, maybe he is poking his dick through the fence...
  
  --
  Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
28. Re: Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 04:59 · Score: 0
  
  except he/she is not exploiting to cheat or take account(as far as we know)info doesnt make it right but hey looks like the individual at least sticks to thier ethics.
29. Re: Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 05:07 · Score: 0
  
  Bullshit , everyone knows why security measures are there.
  Anyway , hacking the game to complain about bad security is stupid. Play or don't play. Everywhere people have a forum they think the owner must respond to them. This guy is so lame. Actual govts don't even respond to peasant outcries. All he did was annoy a bunch of people who can't solve his problem.
30. Re:Caring by war4peace · 2017-02-20 05:23 · Score: 1
  
  And your 'tap on the shoulder' analogy is pretty flawed too. That's assault and likely to result in a physical response.
  Not in my country, dear. We're not that fragile around here, to consider a tap on the shoulder as "assault". I mean, seriously, how fucked up IS that?
  
  Bottom line: this guy is being a dick.
  I'm not saying he isn't. I'm just saying is not really that big of a deal.
  
  --
  ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
31. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 06:07 · Score: 0
  
  WHOOOOssshhhh up you ass, homo.
32. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 07:43 · Score: 0
  
  When people demonstrate an exploit their intent matters. Same thing applies when demonstrating a broken lock.
  It is apparent that you live in a world of theory and are unfamiliar with real-world legal systems.
33. Re: Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 10:50 · Score: 0
  
  Actually if everyone quit playing csgo in 1 day you can bet there would be a patch very soon.
34. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 11:33 · Score: 0
  
  A *single* tap on the shoulder wouldn't reasonably be considered assault here, no. But if some guy kept aggressively following you around and repeatedly tapping you on the shoulder every few seconds, no matter how many times you tried to move away from him or asked him to stop doing it, which is a closer analogy to what this twit on Counterstrike is doing -- *that* becomes assault.
35. Re:Caring by Gussington · 2017-02-20 21:10 · Score: 1
  
  It's trespassing, it's harassment, it's denial of service, but it is not theft. This is basically the copyright infringement vs. theft argument all over again.
  No it isn't. I said it was illegal, which it is. You brought up the theft thing just now to somehow discredit my argument, but it has nothing to do with me.
36. Re:Caring by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 02:09 · Score: 0
  
  "I hack and exploit the game because I care about it and want it fixed!"
  "I rob banks because I care about them and want them to have better security!"
  Using an exploit to highlight the exploit and lack of support, is not exactly the same as robbing a bank. It's more like walking into the bank vault through an unlocked backdoor and then proceeding to call the bank manager to complain about security measures. (okay, maybe the kid jumped a tiny garden fence before walking over to the backdoor, but it's more like that). When people demonstrate an exploit their intent matters. Same thing applies when demonstrating a broken lock.
  The parent's analogy was correct, and your analogy is wrong for one key reason; Impact.
  Since chat rooms were flooded to make a point about a vulnerability (also known as a denial of service), I'd say the impact was a hell of a lot more than you let on.
  Intent does matter, but impact often matters more. Since services were actually interrupted, the analogy goes well above and beyond a mere chat with a bank manager.
37. Re:Caring by drinkypoo · 2017-02-21 03:09 · Score: 1
  
  I have no right then to rob then bank if because they ignored me.
  It's trespassing, it's harassment, it's denial of service, but it is not theft. This is basically the copyright infringement vs. theft argument all over again.
  No it isn't. I said it was illegal, which it is. You brought up the theft thing just now to somehow discredit my argument, but it has nothing to do with me.
  What do you think "rob" means?
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
38. Re:Caring by Gussington · 2017-02-21 08:14 · Score: 1
  
  What do you think "rob" means?
  What do you think illegal means?
Unblockable? by Quakeulf · 2017-02-19 21:00 · Score: 0

There's an app for that.
Cheating at Tournaments by Drakster · 2017-02-19 21:17 · Score: 5, Insightful

Although I don't play CS:GO, I have heard it has a major cheating problem. The worst part about this is that it doesn't only occur on random online servers, this occurs at major tournaments with prize pools of thousands.
As the hacker mentions, Valve makes some major cash from CS:GO, being one of their most popular games. They should be doing a lot more to prevent it.
1. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Calydor · 2017-02-19 21:51 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  No, the worst part about this is that there are professional tournaments with prizes ranging in the thousands and millions for a computer game.
  
  --
  -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
2. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Avarist · 2017-02-19 22:10 · Score: 2
  
  No, the worst part about this is that there are professional tournaments with prizes ranging in the thousands and millions for a computer game.
  Someone is stuck in the 20th century. Move along with the times. A hundred years ago people were saying the exact same thing about people playing just a 'game' aka football. There isn't much difference betweeen regular sports, chess, and computer games.
  
  --
  In Capitalist US, the commerce controls the Government.
3. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Gussington · 2017-02-19 22:35 · Score: 2
  
  Although I don't play CS:GO, I have heard it has a major cheating problem. The worst part about this is that it doesn't only occur on random online servers, this occurs at major tournaments with prize pools of thousands.
  As the hacker mentions, Valve makes some major cash from CS:GO, being one of their most popular games. They should be doing a lot more to prevent it.
  So how is this different from say cycling?
4. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Gussington · 2017-02-19 22:37 · Score: 2
  
  No, the worst part about this is that there are professional tournaments with prizes ranging in the thousands and millions for a computer game.
  Games of skill played for cash prizes are a surprise to you? Have you just woken from a coma out of the 19th century?
5. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Quakeulf · 2017-02-19 22:48 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I must admit I still play the CS:GO regularly.
  
  I have also played with and against cheaters quite regularly and have been told through the in-game menu that players I have played with in previous matches have been permanently banned for cheating and had my match statistics readjusted to reflect that, as it seems matches with cheaters get voided.
  
  It's really annoying, and especially when it gets really evident like when you sneak towards a corner making no sounds and the guy around just knows you are getting close and starts prefiring. This happens way more often than it should, and reporting users seems not to work.
6. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by smallfries · 2017-02-19 23:12 · Score: 1
  
  Valve makes some serious cash from it?
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
7. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 23:17 · Score: 0
  
  > A hundred years ago people were saying the exact same thing about people playing just a 'game' aka football.
  To be honest, I find this media wallyhoo and all the accompanying corruption, doping &c around "football" (the exact details change a bit based on locale) idiotic and disgusting.
  Now a couple of friends kicking a ball or pedaling up a mountain --or swinging a joystick-- and having (more or less competitive fun)... that's a totally different kettle of fish.
  Am I now stuck in the 19th century? What about the Olympic games?
  My golden rule: once "sport" is in TV (youtube for you greenhorns) it loses its interest.
8. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by smallfries · 2017-02-19 23:18 · Score: 1
  
  Some of those people are cheating - some of them are not. If the spot that you were creeping towards is popular then people will blind fire at it anyway. There many be far more cases when the person blind firing doesn't hit anything - but nobody will see those (unless they happen to be spectating them). The only cases that people see are the rare occasions that it works - and without any way to determine the sample size it looks like clairvoyance (or cheating).
  It's the same effect as the stock scam: pick 1024 people and tell 512 that a stock will go up on a day, and the other 512 that it will go down. Drop anyone that gets a false predication and repeat ten times until some sucker thinks that you have a gift for picking stocks.
  
  --
  Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
9. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 23:23 · Score: 0
  
  I'm GN2 so pretty average. After Xmas the game becomes a lot less pleasant to play as all the smurfs and cheats get new accounts, and the boosting services get advertised. Its calmed down a bit but its still pretty fucked up: every third game has someone suspicious, and on weekends most premades have a couple of silver players who just own it, they must spend the rest of the week deranking on single queue.
10. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by mwvdlee · 2017-02-19 23:38 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, they should go back to million dollar chess tournaments and million dollar ball throwing tournaments.
  
  --
  Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
11. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Mashiki · 2017-02-19 23:43 · Score: 2
  
  So to tournament organizers for cycling, and the bike manufactures, and then there's the clothing folks, and on, and on, and on. Failing to see a problem here, except that some people are stuck in 1973.
  
  --
  Om, nomnomnom...
12. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 01:12 · Score: -1
  
  Oh look, a pathetic old man.
  On the plus side you've probably died of old age replying in this pointless thread. What's the real "worst part," the fact that people are making more money than you are doing what they enjoy, rather than being a bitter old fuckstick like you?
  Enjoy returning to dust in the near future, the rest of us won't notice you're gone.
13. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by DontBeAMoran · 2017-02-20 01:19 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Have you just woken from a coma out of the 19th century?
  I'm actually from the 27th century, but whatever...
  
  Games of skill played for cash prizes are a surprise to you?
  What the fuck is "cash"?
  
  --
  #DeleteFacebook
14. Re: Cheating at Tournaments by Luthair · 2017-02-20 02:09 · Score: 1
  
  Well, in gaming the people giving you money are directly impacted. In cycling the riders are not giving the money rather taking it.
15. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by drinkypoo · 2017-02-20 03:11 · Score: 1
  
  A hundred years ago people were saying the exact same thing about people playing just a 'game' aka football.
  Some of us are saying the same thing about it now. It's understandable why this has happened:propaganda works, which is why advertising exists — and professional sports exists as an advertising substrate. Look at who's applying the majority of the money.
  
  There isn't much difference betweeen regular sports, chess, and computer games.
  Sure there is. There's loads of differences. Granted, some computer games are just like chess, and some computer games are sort of like sports, albeit only the ones which involve moving your body more than wiggling your thumbs and fingertips. But as a whole, each of these things are very different.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
16. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by antdude · 2017-02-20 05:43 · Score: 1
  
  Just like any other non-electronic sports.
  
  --
  Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
17. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Calydor · 2017-02-20 06:06 · Score: 1
  
  Chess can be played in 500 years same as we play it today. So can football, baseball, any sport you can think of.
  How long do you think it will be until CS:GO just can't really run on modern computers, or no one wants to because the graphics are too dated? That is going to be the curse of any kind of e-sports, the crazy pace at which the medium itself moves.
  
  --
  -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
18. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by thegarbz · 2017-02-20 07:01 · Score: 1
  
  The mark of a great athlete is their ability to adapt. The actual method or game they are playing is irrelevant, and so is the fact that {FPS of the day} will be replaced with {new FPS of the day} in a tournament. The same applies to strategy.
  Also the fact that you think sports are unchanged for 500 years (or even 50 years) is laughable.
  You may be surprised to see what Tennis looked like 500 years ago
19. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by ZeRu · 2017-02-20 09:56 · Score: 2
  
  Chess can be played in 500 years same as we play it today. So can football, baseball, any sport you can think of.
  Except car racing, which is constantly evolving, just like computer games (and has a lot more common with e-sports than chess or football). It, however, isn't an olympic sport, and I think it shouldn't be (even though I'm a big fan of it) since that would force the car racing to submit into certain cliches, removing the charm that comes from every track and car being different.
  Racing cars get replaced my more modern version and so do competitive video games, but the main premise won't change much for as long as it has clear and attractive goals. Even CS:GO has the same basic rules as the original CounterStrike that got released 20 years ago.
  
  --
  If you post as an AC, don't expect me to spend a mod point on you.
20. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by sysrammer · 2017-02-20 10:06 · Score: 1
  
  I might mention that, depending on the game and architecture, it sometimes happens that the local client is "catching up" to the server. You give the local client the command to fire, and you start firing. On the server, though, the opponents action was registered before your fire command. And you die, though you "clearly" see that you shot first. Sort of a reverse Greedo.
  
  --
  His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
21. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 12:34 · Score: 0
  
  I have a console and don't seem to have this problem. Stupid PC peasants
22. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 14:05 · Score: 0
  
  For the OP, you can't walk around corners for two reasons:
  1.) Shadows -- you can't see your own shadow, but enemies can. This is important on maps like dust2, where shadows give CT's an advantage.
  2.) Your model sticks out past just the single point of your camera. As a result, whoever is further from a corner will see the opponent first. (excluding network effects)
  In short, you might think you are being sneaky, but you opponent might have been able to see you a full second before shooting at you.
23. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 15:09 · Score: 0
  
  except for that xbone mmorpg that lets you run in circles getting free xp and loot from hacking your controller
24. Re: Cheating at Tournaments by Gussington · 2017-02-20 20:50 · Score: 1
  
  Well, in gaming the people giving you money are directly impacted. In cycling the riders are not giving the money rather taking it.
  Um, cyclists all around the world pay money for bikes, clothes, accessories, competition entry etc. The few pros at the top get freebies and win cash, but the bottom 99.9% pay to play. It is exactly the same concept
25. Re: Cheating at Tournaments by Luthair · 2017-02-21 05:18 · Score: 1
  
  The Point
  Your Header
  And none of those cyclists are affected by what happens in the tournament. Whereas in gaming, cheaters are playing in your matches which directly impacts you.
26. Re: Cheating at Tournaments by Gussington · 2017-02-21 08:24 · Score: 1
  
  The Point Your Header
  And none of those cyclists are affected by what happens in the tournament. Whereas in gaming, cheaters are playing in your matches which directly impacts you.
  I can only assume you know nothing about any sports ever. Go down to any sports field, court, track on any weekend and you will find millions of people who have paid for the privilege of competing. Further up the chain some of those people get a small reward for their efforts, and right at the top a small few get paid a lot. But at all levels, in all types of events, people cheat. This is nothing new just because the chosen 'sport' takes place on a computer.
27. Re:Cheating at Tournaments by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 09:09 · Score: 0
  
  he never said it was surprising, just that it was bad
  what did you just wake up from a coma out of the 16th century?
  cos modern English seems beyond you
TERRORISTS WIN by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 21:29 · Score: -1

DEATH TO AMERICA
1. Re:TERRORISTS WIN by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 22:05 · Score: -1
  
  Jihad motherfuckers!!!
2. Re:TERRORISTS WIN by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 22:18 · Score: -1
  
  Make America Great For NlGGERS
3. Re: TERRORISTS WIN by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 22:59 · Score: 0
  
  and for smelly indo-chimps with phony masters of PhD degrees. Then breed a new species - a parasitic PhD sand n1gger that shits in the street.
4. Re:TERRORISTS WIN by DontBeAMoran · 2017-02-20 01:21 · Score: 1
  
  The rubber chicken did it.
  
  --
  #DeleteFacebook
5. Re: TERRORISTS WIN by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 05:43 · Score: 0
  
  You seem to have a sincere emotional attachment to shitting in the street. Perhaps this relates to something that happened to you as a small child. You should consider getting professional help because this problem will only become worse until you can no longer hold a job or appear in public without talking about shitting in the street and people will be afraid of you and avoid you. Best of luck.
Not that easy by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · 2017-02-19 21:59 · Score: 3, Interesting

It's almost impossible to eradicate cheaters in CS:GO and similar games for one important reason: CS:GO servers send you full information about all the gamers who're playing the match with you, which means it's quite trivial to intercept this information and modify certain game engine variables to e.g. make other players visible though the walls (wallhack) or to make your bullets always reach the destination (aimbot). Now even if you don't send all the information, the game still has to show other visible nearby players to you, so dealing with aimbots seems like a lost game.
Speaking frankly I've got no idea if this problem can be fixed at all except for controlled LAN matches (but even then we've had reports that certain cheaters made through by bringing their cheat programs inside their mice - the mouse is connected via USB which makes it trivial to extend its internals to include a mass storage device).
To give Valve credit they're now testing an AI to detect cheaters. They do it because it's virtually impossible to detect cheat applications using any sort of matching (like antiviruses do).
1. Re:Not that easy by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:47 · Score: 0
  
  Aimbots are hard to eliminate without introducing server-side randomness to bullet trajectories, which is very frustrating for players. Might not be so bad with auto weapons, but with pistols/snipers it's very noticeable and makes the game feel very "unfair". Analysing mouse movements to spot cheaters (which is what I assume this "AI" is doing) is probably a better approach.
  Wallhacks aren't really difficult to eliminate though: just work out who can see who on the server, and don't send the data for those out of sight. If you want to have the sound of footsteps, then have a separate data object for sounds (which surely you already have for environmental sounds anyway?) and send that only to the clients that could hear it, rather than flinging all the data about everyone to everyone and trusting the clients to sort it out.
2. Re:Not that easy by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 01:17 · Score: 0
  
  They could simply supply a range of mice brand and models that are the same the competitors have at home. That way the USB modified mice problem is prevented. If the competitor refuses to compete, show him the the nearby seat or the exit door.
3. Re:Not that easy by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 01:18 · Score: 0
  
  This is the reason I stopped playing FPS since Unreal Tournament. It got kind of frustrating when you would deluge someone with a rocket launcher as an opponent was coming at you and he receives no damage and then proceeds to dispatch you with a single knife strike. Hmm, game manipulation so I will never lose? Pass.
4. Re: Not that easy by Luthair · 2017-02-20 02:06 · Score: 1
  
  I always thought it was odd they relied on the client to determine whether the bullet would hit. I would have expected a trajectory (and the server knows the starting point). But I assume the game devs aren't all dumb so there must be performance reasons to rely on the client. Maybe they could check only some of the bullets that hit. It ought to be easy to find the wall hacks from a tape of the game though.
5. Re:Not that easy by Eloking · 2017-02-20 02:55 · Score: 1
  
  It's almost impossible to eradicate cheaters in CS:GO and similar games for one important reason: CS:GO servers send you full information about all the gamers who're playing the match with you, which means it's quite trivial to intercept this information and modify certain game engine variables to e.g. make other players visible though the walls (wallhack) or to make your bullets always reach the destination (aimbot). Now even if you don't send all the information, the game still has to show other visible nearby players to you, so dealing with aimbots seems like a lost game.
  Well, the root of the problem is in this very paragraph.
  As long as a competitive game will calculate stuff on the client side, hacking will happen. As the technology of hacking software grow, sooner or later we'll have to switch server side.
  Let me give you an example of an extreme. The game could be computed 100% on the Server side and the client receive the audio + video output over the internet. Then client send the input (keyboard + mouse) to the server. Eventually hacker will figure out a way to analyse the screen to identify other player and control the mouse accordingly but most problematic hack will be neutralized this way.
  Of course, computing "everything" server side and sending the video over the internet is a bit extreme (well, until everyone is connected to Google Fiber) but you get the point. To solve hacking, find their input and move them from client side to server side.
  
  --
  Elok
6. Re: Not that easy by drinkypoo · 2017-02-20 03:15 · Score: 1
  
  I always thought it was odd they relied on the client to determine whether the bullet would hit.
  They don't. But they rely on the client to determine whether or not the players can see one another. If you tamper with the client then you can get more information than you're supposed to have.
  
  It ought to be easy to find the wall hacks from a tape of the game though.
  It seems to me like there ought to be a log of every shot in the game; timestamp, initiating actor, a list of who took damage and how much they took and whether it was direct or splash damage, and the positions and facing of all the relevant actors. Ideally you would actually log literally everything for later replay, every single event. Now that would be professional.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
7. Re: Not that easy by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 05:31 · Score: 0
  
  It seems to me like there ought to be a log of every shot in the game; timestamp, initiating actor, a list of who took damage and how much they took and whether it was direct or splash damage, and the positions and facing of all the relevant actors. Ideally you would actually log literally everything for later replay, every single event. Now that would be professional.
  In the id engine family (which CS is derived) it's called a "demo" and is an integral part of the speedrunning communites. While intended for entertainment value via playback, there are plenty of folks out there who analyze such demo recordings forensically (with tools or simply in a hex editor).
8. Re: Not that easy by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 07:18 · Score: 0
  
  The big problem with doing everything on the server is you need an exponentially more powerful server. It's a lot easier if all the line-of-sight, what is audible stuff is done using each PC's video game card, which is much more optimized for that sort of thing.
9. Re: Not that easy by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 10:19 · Score: 0
  
  They do both of these things.
  There is "Overwatch", which shows short demos of accused cheaters to multiple long-time players of the game.
  Now that people know about this measure, they mostly have stopped staring at walls to see enemies. They even try to throw in an occasional bad decision to make it look like they didn't know where the opponents were. In some cases it even gets comical. The point is that cheaters are getting good at hiding wallhacks -- they don't have to have wallhacks continually running either. If you are a decent player, but just don't like losing, you might only toggle the hack during parts of key rounds.
10. Re:Not that easy by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 03:58 · Score: 0
  
  A long time ago in a land far far away, I used to admin counter strike servers. Cheating was rampant. I used many anti-cheat programs. Punkbuster was among the best but it would take less than a weak for cheats like OGC to find a way to not be detected.
  I tried a few addons for the server that were kind of neat. I had one that would trigger when a person's gun would follow the movements of another player for X amount of time. AWPs were problematic for that plugin but it was awesome for spectating. You would find guns tracking people through walls and such.
  I had another plugin that would measure accuracy. Unfortunately, some deeply skilled players would trigger this. I went over to a clan members house one night and snuck up behind him to watch him cheat. Turns out, he was not cheating at all, he was just triggering the damned accuracy check. Damned 13 year old kids and their amazing dexterity. lol
  Even back then, the cheats were designed to defeat AI because the cheat programmers knew that people who took the time to admin a server would care enough to spectate their players for cheating. All of the casual cheaters would get banned but dedicated cheaters were quite difficult to catch. I would spectate with wall hacks and would watch for the slightest trace of a gun tip moving based on information that the player could not have. Corners were always terrible places to try and detect cheats because people like me would pre-aim regardless if anyone was there or not.
  Long story short, if even a human has a hard time discerning whether or not someone is cheating, an AI is going to have an absolutely terrible time of it.
  Another data point, the vast majority of people do not cheat; however, at 10% being cheats, that means there is at least one cheater in each match. I have no idea if the number of cheaters has stayed constant but humans have not changed much so I would assume it is roughly the same.
11. Re:Not that easy by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-22 03:26 · Score: 0
  
  That's part of the reason cod blows on pc for a long while now and why 'official' servers in most games are trash. Without ranked servers that a live human is policing its just too much bullshit to deal with in most games.
Lame... by Freischutz · 2017-02-19 22:44 · Score: 1

This 'invasion' would be way cooler if the bot manifested itself as an army of annoying hecklers that you can shoot.
The hacker cares more than Valve by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-19 22:58 · Score: 0

or whoever develops CS:GO, because it's evident they don't give a shit about all the cheating, griefing, and bullying. They just pretend to actively develop it by mixing up the sounds and gun models every 6 months. They are raking in money, but only putting in pennies into the game and the community. Bullshit.
1. Re:The hacker cares more than Valve by murdocj · 2017-02-19 23:44 · Score: 2
  
  Well, then play a different game, no?
2. Re:The hacker cares more than Valve by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 04:46 · Score: -1
  
  You don't like someone's comment? Well, then go live in a different online forum, no?
3. Re: The hacker cares more than Valve by murdocj · 2017-02-20 12:13 · Score: 2
  
  So I'm not allowed to comment, comrade trump?
Fago8z by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 00:52 · Score: -1

will recall t44t it distributions
proof them [sic] by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 01:46 · Score: 0

Not proof [sic] them, that would imply "prove them" is right when it isn't. The correct syntax is "proof them [sic]"
People who play this game... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 01:58 · Score: -1

are retarded.
1. Re:People who play this game... by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 10:47 · Score: 0
  
  Still waiting for a better game. Overwatch and Battleborn are for children.
Who cares? by circularWaffle · 2017-02-20 02:46 · Score: 1

I bought GO a while back, have played it maybe a couple hours total? 1.6 was where it was at, and still is. I play 1.6 way more than GO will ever get my attention.
ivan offers political commentary during gameplay by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 05:09 · Score: -1

"huh, well anyway is better than hillary ... would be WW3 under hillary , benghazi must be investigated "
Terrorists win by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 08:03 · Score: 0

You failed to cover the underpass and now the terrorists have won.
Re:ivan offers political commentary during gamepla by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 08:06 · Score: -1

It's funny that the right wants to blame Hillary for Benghazi, but don't hold Bush and Cheney responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. But they knew it was coming and were unwilling to disrupt the flow of oil from Saudi Arabia by locking down our borders and kicking every Saudi out of the country.
more reasons to not do online games by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-20 10:40 · Score: -1

Thanks, I've just found even more reasons to not do online gaming.
Thanks /.!
Analogy by spineboy · 2017-02-20 19:15 · Score: 1

I agree. It's more like
"Hey your house is unlocked, so we decided to have a party - sorry you can't use it now."

--
..........FULL STOP.
1. Re:Analogy by Gussington · 2017-02-20 21:07 · Score: 1
  
  I agree. It's more like
  "Hey your house is unlocked, so we decided to have a party - sorry you can't use it now."
  Which is equally illegal...
kek by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 00:46 · Score: -1

how is a chat spamming bot a problem when all those popular shooting games are plagued by cheaters?
seriously, some of them are unplayable. Never even tried counterstrike, thats how bad its reputation is
if this bot could format cheater computers, or better yet, fuck their moms, it would be even better
fuck counterstrike scum
I tried CS once by Anonymous Coward · 2017-02-21 02:07 · Score: 0

I played Teamfortress for years & loved the hell out of it. One day i decided to try CS, I wasnt in the game for 5 minutes before people started shooting me thru walls.
I havent been back since. I have zero interest in it. The cheaters can have it.