Battlefield 5 anti-cheat
760 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
Has there been any info on whether or not the next bf will use a real anticheat?
Fairfight, the statistics-based anti-cheat (lol) is only barely managing to skim the surface.
Some of the most prominent cheat-engines for bf1 (and other battlefields) are in status: undetected since 2016, so fairfight doesn't really work against anything else than stupid rage-hacks.
In earlier battlefields, the community made their own anti-cheat system where people banned from rented servers got placed in a database of cheaters, so at the very least rented servers with active admins where (somewhat) safe.
But in bf1, they crippled rented server administration, so servers owners couldn't do that anymore. I doubt this will change for bf5.
So the only option left is that EA/Dice tries a LITTLE bit harder to fight of cheats. Maybe they could take a hint or 2 from how Blizzard deals with it, blizzard actually sued producers of cheats for their games.
Fairfight, the statistics-based anti-cheat (lol) is only barely managing to skim the surface.
Some of the most prominent cheat-engines for bf1 (and other battlefields) are in status: undetected since 2016, so fairfight doesn't really work against anything else than stupid rage-hacks.
In earlier battlefields, the community made their own anti-cheat system where people banned from rented servers got placed in a database of cheaters, so at the very least rented servers with active admins where (somewhat) safe.
But in bf1, they crippled rented server administration, so servers owners couldn't do that anymore. I doubt this will change for bf5.
So the only option left is that EA/Dice tries a LITTLE bit harder to fight of cheats. Maybe they could take a hint or 2 from how Blizzard deals with it, blizzard actually sued producers of cheats for their games.
8
Comments
It also draws red spot dots above all the enemies heads, so again the screenshot reviewer will just say, "He must have pressed Q to spot them, or maybe a team mate in an airplane spotted them all".
This free to download public cheat has been out for a month now and nobody on the cheating forums are complaining about being banned, because FairFight has no client-side cheat detection and this cheat cannot be detected through screenshots.
It's available for both BF1 and BFV alpha. It's too bad EA is too cheap to pay for BattlEye cheat protection. BattlEye would detect this public cheats very easily.
EA Anti-Cheat Technologies. EA may use its own anti-cheat technologies. When you connect online to a game server, these technologies will activate and monitor your game play, the game files associated with the EA PC Product and your computer's RAM. These technologies detect cheating and Unauthorized Third Party Programs running concurrently with the EA PC Product and any modifications to the EA PC Product's files enabling or facilitating cheating.
If any of these anti-cheat technologies detects cheating, we may collect relevant information, including your account name, details about an Unauthorized Third Party Program and the EA PC Product files modification detected, and the time and date it was detected. We also may terminate your License and your EA Account if we determine you have been cheating.
When you disconnect from the game server, these anti-cheat technologies will be deactivated.
I do think that the hack developers will find out themselves how to circumvent EA's new anti-cheat.
IMO the future of anti-cheat lies in AI:
Traditional anti-cheat systems concentrate on finding a cheating device of sorts on a user's computer prior to gameplay. While effective, the inherent problem with it is that if a new cheating device is created the system will need to be updated to recognize it as well. If the cheat itself is never released there is a high probability that it will never be found by the anti-cheat designers, letting one more cheater slip through the system, and as we can all agree, one cheater is one too many.
The HC System takes the opposing standpoint. There may be thousands of cheats available for players to use, but in the end, they all do the same things. A thousand different wallhacks will always do the same thing, show a player behind the wall. So why search for the thousands of cheats available, when you can just search for what they do? That's the principle around which HC has been designed. Don't find the cheat, find out what it lets a player do or see, and then test whether or not they are indeed seeing or doing those items. If a player opens fire on a door and kills an opposing player behind it, do we really care which cheat they are using if any, or do we just care about whether he is cheating or not?
Source: http://www.ghostrecon.net/html/interview-hackcam.htm
Other articles on anti cheat:
https://www.reddit.com/r/playrust/comments/88maoo/valves_latest_deep_learning_anticheat_vacnet_has/
https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/47dv61/insights_from_an_ex_anticheat_developer_on_the/
But it is free for all coder of this game to earn "extra" money in their spare time by programming and sell cheats.
This can be called "true" anticheat policy.
Actually, I disagree.
BF1 for me, Has been the cleanest BF game yet.
BC2 has been rife with cheaters, As has BF3 and BF4..
I have encountered many more cheaters in BC2, I have encountered many more cheaters in BF3 and I have encountered many more cheaters in BF4 than I have in BF1 within the same time period.
Pbbans, ACI anticheat and BF4DB yes, Though no system is foolproof.
The legal fees to do so would be relatively high, Plus the fact that many companies that operate outside of the Jurisdiction of where EA operate would mean on the legal side of things, It wouldn't be possible.
Battleye has been beaten multiple times, Much like PB has.
Again, No anticheat is foolproof.
Well of course it is, Why run a business if you're not doing it for profit?
Business 101, If you're not making a return on your products and services you will not be running a business for very long.
That is something for individual server owners such as those whom rent using the RSP to do.
This thread will exist in exactly the same form as the thread in the BF1 forum, so I expect the exact same outcome the moment that BF5 is released and resulting storm of cheat providers wanting to cash in. It'll be mayhem in the official BF5 forum, and much like the BF1 forum, you can expect crickets from the devs.
Pb is the worst.
And to answer the op,they're not going to tell people so hackers can start cracking the next code of bfv.
No one knows what DICE got in the bag for BF5 yet, but no doubt they will have to rise to the challenge because FF is not enough, the evidence of that is how many players got/gets away with cheating on BF4 and BF1. If you visit the Anticheat sites you can clearly see how many gets banned every day on an old game like BF4 and also a few gets caught by FF (often they gets a ban by 3. party anticheat but not by FF -which shows it doesnt really work when you catch a guy using a RAWR on locker and FF does nada!)
The worse part of all this is the lack of communication towards the community, and no, Im NOT asking to know HOW that would be stupid.
I can't see ANY reason why they left out names in FF kicks/bans .. to not hurt a cheaters feelings ????
DICE/EA would get far towards the community if they were openly agreeing about the cheater issues, and also supporting 3. party Anticheats like 247fairplay, bf4db and so on. That would be acomplished by letting us use procon with plugins as we like thus supporting it with their own devs to go through the stuff and give suggestions how to improve it, having an open mind and cooperation towards developing this would give an advantage against the cheaters.
Unlucky us, they have chosen to make a closed approach and now even removing battlelog as an option so we go full console lookie which to me indicates they dont really care what we would like it to be.
/end rant
When will people stop cheating?
Obviously you've contradicted yourself there. Why would PB catch a 'legit' program? The program would have been disallowed within the ToS/EULA or have been modified.
Probably for the same reason they don't use PB anymore? Purely out of paranoia about rights and legality. PB had 'false positives' and I think EA saw that as a risk. Some players said they were using AHK to help them overcome a disability and probably EA didn't like the way banning a disabled person for using a cheat might come across in the media or their liability. Plus all the other arguments people could come up with that jarred with EA.
EA prefers FairFight because it proves cheating in-game rather than PB which detects a disallowed 3rd party programme or other cheating some of which players could argue were being used for 'legit' reasons leaving EA to be worried about potential consequences.
MS, Nvidia etc.. doesnt care about EA's EULA when they make a driver or a program, they make it because they can sell/upgrade something we bought as customers, it is solely EA/PB/FF 's responsibility to figure out if its a legit program or not you are running not another software Inc's concern. Imagine EA telling MS to alter windows 10 because some of their customers cant play BF5 ?! nahhh - not really
No again, wether youre disabled or just a sick cheater you KNOW what you can or cannot, the game EULA states that you are not to use anything that gives you an unfair advantage thats it ! It is THAT simple.
I dont believe FF works, Ive manually had to ban a load of players with obvious cheats, like shooting players in MBT with a handgun from other end of map, shooting/killing with binocular at any range, flying or teleporting around ?! these examples is not to discuss "get better yourself" these are VERY obvious and never caught by a stats engine like FF so no, doesnt work because lots of these players Ive been following and they are still not banned by FF.
FF has definitely gotten better, but as long as I see this one particular blatant aimbotter that I reported 1,5 years ago still playing as of today I'll keep saying that FF is a joke.
Just now, I also read on a cheat forum that cheaters are still able to transfer their games from a banned account to a new account to circumvent their ban and keep cheating without having to pay for a new game. This was brought to EA's attention years ago and they said that took action...
Well they didn't, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised about that.
I never had any problems like that with PB.
A EULA applies to an end-user. So if you're using a 3rd party program which is disallowed then you could be banned. That would cover any software that enabled players to make something that constituted cheating.
How that would be interpreted and how difficult it might be to ban software from a major producer I'm not sure. It might be that an anti-cheat would be instructed to disallow a program because it was easy to use the program to make a cheat. But making bans stick might be difficult. I can see how that could result in a ban wave and then the bans being overturned when the manufacturer of the program disputes how it's software is used.
It's better to catch players in-game and ban them with evidence of what they did in-game. If you are banning for 3rd party software then people will say they weren't using it to cheat.
I don't think it is that simple because someone might have a genuinely could reason for using a pretty simple macro to help them overcome a disability whereas another person might just be cheating. You wouldn't be able to know the difference without going down some awkward roads. Again is better to use in-game monitoring from the game producers point of view to get actual evidence of cheating.
I was an admin for a long time in BF2. I was always polite and courteous and did my best to be fair. But over time a became more cynical after constant abuse and all the rest of it. I can remember there being a UAV hack that could completely ruin the servers. People would quit and the servers would begin to die. I though I had found a way to tell who was doing the hack but I was wrong. If you wrongly kick or ban any players then you have failed.
I'm very dubious about admins banning people for cheating. I've only come across one admin in my entire playing time who I thought was really good at it.
Even if FairFight doesn't ban the player who said was shooting people inside a tank with a pistol it may be that it bans all the others and then eventually catches up with that one. I can remember in BF2 being shot in a tank by a rifle but it was a very rare cheat. If FairFight caught 99% of cheats but missed those rare ones then I think I would take that.