i could reveal a trick i found to get a better protection for locked maps if anyone want to know :D
If you do reveal it now the method to circumvent it may come back in seconds right after your posts, which is irony ... There are two sides for this and obviously both cant exists in mapster at the same time. From just the irony above, protector might be better off hide his secret somewhere else rather than public it here to have a chance of it not hacked immediately
We do acknowledge there is a bug that still allow some user to post to a locked thread, so in general a thread is tagged deleted or move to a thrash forum to prevent people from posting. Side effects include other people not having any other way to read the thread.
Some of yours points I agree, but some of that you misunderstood my points
Quote:
Since all the data to play the game is stored in the map, someone could make an entirely new map editor that wouldn't care if non-critical files were missing. Someone could make an editor that doesn't load a map if the file "LolzMapIsLocked" exists in the map, but the Galaxy Editor would open it just fine. "Locking" in this manner can only be per-application.
If you have an editor that open a map with non critical file missing, then its the current shitty protection.(which is not my point) With a better system that is protected client and/or server side this should happen. If you managed to make a third party program that can emulate sc2 and open a map that only sc2 can load to play, it might break some moral grounds. And blizzard might talk to you on this matter
Quote:
This is a feature of the publishing system, not map locking. This feature applies to unlocked maps equally as it does to locked maps.
You really dont know how it work (or you might not even have a valid sc2 account to test this). Unlocked map can be found and play under guest account, while locked map couldn't. I have the most unstable internet to actually play guest account more than my account. Even if its not like this currently, I would love to have this feature.
Quote:
This cannot be helped. Anyone could spam their upload server with anything, because they have an upload server. They have an upload server so that they can control things like map name and author. Map locking has no bearing on this.
I don't mean on normal map spamming and similar map competing, variety is good, what I mean is that map with the same name as yours keep showing up every where, with slightly edited unit and such, taking gullible player to play it instead of your map. (which is the obvious case of war3 map hack and edit) Though hardcore hacker can hack open them anyway, there will definitely be less of them happening.
Nah the battlent forum should be what its meant to be, a place for spamming
Jokes aside, map locking is definitely a features, even a damn good one for keeping the custom scene alive. They have their development planned out, which we do not know, that's why everyone is still whining for every features. Even though the publishing system solve stealing to some extent, the features we want currently does the following: (which we request/hope to do more)
- Prevent a locked map from being found/downloadable in the editor.
- Prevent a locked map from being opened by the editor.
- Prevent a locked map from being played locally by guest account (which directly means you need to pay for a valid sc2 account to play).
- Distributing a playable map that cannot be opened for hacking purpose.
- Make sure hacked map/stolen map does not spam their upload server and not competing with your own maps. (and now that you can pay $10 to have the exact name as the author, a slightly modified map name will pretty sure catch me playing from time to time)
Now that all of this do not working as intended. Do your "really" "not" want this feature ?
"Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. Sun-tzu" People will think twice about sharing something controversial in a big forum as they know it's being read by many people including Blizzard. They will balance the pro and cons ... At the end the information will be of a greater quality.
If you let people be angry by deleting posts here, they are going to do extreme actions that have all the chances to be bad (example: making a program to rip the maps and spam Battle.net with ripped maps).
Its a good approach, I myself prefer to keep them close by bookmarking and registering when I have the chance on a related hacking website that I came across. If they sure think twice about posting a controversial topic is another problem, (if someone cant tell this is controversial or not) as I have never think of posting a tutorial about this even though I just know the exact process from bibendus a few days before (also in a constructive and not so tutorial style thread). If people really care about hacking map open, I'm sure they will post at places they are allowed no matter what.
If anyone bother to find the thread started by bibendus about this same problem, with the same instruction, it does not generate much negativity from the community, even though some of us discussed and tried it ourselves, just not in the way this was phrased as "supported" or "tutorial", or "map download". (On a side note If i'm doing a tutorials for this I probably upload a map by myself to battlenet and post an unlocked version of it here instead of taking any popular map for example. )
@PeasantOpenSource: Go
I dont refer your post to any previous one you made. I'm also not getting your first sentence.
With Lost Temple and Marrauder, yes I was referring to adding thing while you still synchronize and play. But by saying the same logic that adding file to an archive gave no harm, I have a sense that you might go so far as doing that (though not publicly). Even now that you just defend that such abusers will probably be banned. (and just that)
Getting back on topics, this protection is silly, there's no way anyone can do about it. Exposing it is fine, opening map doesnt "seems" to break any rule.
However what I feared is this open attitude toward future map protecting and unlocking. If I can make a good protector, I would be now discouraged given the fact that the first site I want to public it on have an open attitude, such that within days another person could come up reverse engineer my protector. ( I totally respect reverse engineers as they have to be way better than yourself to figure you what you have done, but it sure piss you off that someone who is better than you make something that circumvent your work in less work then you did ) So in short I would not ever try to make this protector happen.
With this system, I can only rot for blizzard's implementation for a server side thing .. ( which can still be hacked, but then they should violate some rule and be banned from mapster )
If we delete this post I bet you that a website unlocksc2maps.com will open with a detailed tutorial and even a program to do it. Having the information here is a way to control it.
Could you clarify this point on controlling information ? For any I have known, controlling information means censoring and removing information you don't want to appear ? Or it just mean knowing the information is there or not ?
Sorry I just have to argue with your posts because its too funny. (Not to assume that I tried to argue with any other point you make)
- Clearly this method does not involve hacking into the game memory or external modules, but as better protection is enforced, some of these will happen in order to unlock maps. Would you continue pursuing open source in this direction ?
- 90% of .rar file anyone download from the internet is either pirated software, music or movies (not really relevant)
- The game client composed of multiple archive that contains game data, which are mpq archive (you must have known this though). Any map is based on the structure of an mpq archive, even Lost Temple. Now is this break the TOS if you add another vespene geyser into Lost Temple ? Or adding 10 damage to Marauder in the game client ?
While custom contents does not belong to the client itself and might subject or not subject to the TOS, arguing that adding file to any archive does not break any agreement is just silly. (and sure sounds like from a hacker's viewpoint to me)
Reminder: We are still trying having to have a healthy discussion as s3rius recommended to argue until out head explode, any new points from any side is welcome, but please avoid repeating them unneccsary
To drive this thread off track, the only solution that I think can be feasible should come from blizzard itself regarding their own publishing and marketplace system. Bank can never be protected so long as it is saved offline and map can be opened. You can never obfuscate the map to the point that the client cant read it anymore. (and so long as there are people who want to hack it open)
( Btw continue in this trend after this thread will be the new way to protect map thread, then the new way to unlock the new way to protect map thread, then the better way to protect map then the new way to protect map etc ... )
Map protection has to come from the game client itself with an online server. (So long the only thing blizz can protect right now is their server). When a player publish a map version, it will be encoded and uploaded to battlenet. Any other player who click on the map will download an encrypted map on their computer, only with a key gotten from the battlenet server that they could decode the map and enable the client to load it (the key would be one time only). This does make sense for the market place, as whoever bought the map have access to the encode key. (But they could just prevent an account from seeing and playing a map also)
I'm no expert on encryption so I'm not sure how this can be truly protective (real hacker can hack the game memory and get the key value during encoding ) Some solution would be to change the key daily, key based on checksum or harsh value of the downloaded map.
Other than that I have no idea for a good enough protective method given the current way the client works
The way blizzard map works is not protect, its merely applying a property on map called "blizzard signed map" that none of us can replicate. Blizzard signed map can make use of restricted native function. Other than that, I can open them just fine, no protection intended.
Also no pun/offense/argue intended. Just passing the knowledge.
Edit: Also anther things to note on. Locked map by definition and by warning of blizzard is that you have to back it up since you cant open a locked map later in the editor. Nothing protective is mentioned.
(I''m staying neutral, sixen might have broken some shit, but it does make sense how bullshit this locking thing is)
You brought this back sixen ??? Yeah guide for unlocking maps should be ok, i just cant figure out how to delete that attachment. If you want to view the map, you would have to do it yourself though
And there's no magic. Just find the map in the cache, reconstruct the component list file and it will be loaded nicely
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This reminds me of mapster thread locking issue for some reasons. Oh wait ...
@ChromiumBoy: Go
You know the first result in TL is for unlocking sc1 map right ?
But yeah for sc they beat every other site.
If you do reveal it now the method to circumvent it may come back in seconds right after your posts, which is irony ... There are two sides for this and obviously both cant exists in mapster at the same time. From just the irony above, protector might be better off hide his secret somewhere else rather than public it here to have a chance of it not hacked immediately
@BumpInTheNight: Go
We do acknowledge there is a bug that still allow some user to post to a locked thread, so in general a thread is tagged deleted or move to a thrash forum to prevent people from posting. Side effects include other people not having any other way to read the thread.
@SmoothPorcupine: Go
Some of yours points I agree, but some of that you misunderstood my points
If you have an editor that open a map with non critical file missing, then its the current shitty protection.(which is not my point) With a better system that is protected client and/or server side this should happen. If you managed to make a third party program that can emulate sc2 and open a map that only sc2 can load to play, it might break some moral grounds. And blizzard might talk to you on this matter
You really dont know how it work (or you might not even have a valid sc2 account to test this). Unlocked map can be found and play under guest account, while locked map couldn't. I have the most unstable internet to actually play guest account more than my account. Even if its not like this currently, I would love to have this feature.
I don't mean on normal map spamming and similar map competing, variety is good, what I mean is that map with the same name as yours keep showing up every where, with slightly edited unit and such, taking gullible player to play it instead of your map. (which is the obvious case of war3 map hack and edit) Though hardcore hacker can hack open them anyway, there will definitely be less of them happening.
@SmoothPorcupine: Go
Nah the battlent forum should be what its meant to be, a place for spamming
Jokes aside, map locking is definitely a features, even a damn good one for keeping the custom scene alive. They have their development planned out, which we do not know, that's why everyone is still whining for every features. Even though the publishing system solve stealing to some extent, the features we want currently does the following: (which we request/hope to do more)
- Prevent a locked map from being found/downloadable in the editor.
- Prevent a locked map from being opened by the editor.
- Prevent a locked map from being played locally by guest account (which directly means you need to pay for a valid sc2 account to play).
- Distributing a playable map that cannot be opened for hacking purpose.
- Make sure hacked map/stolen map does not spam their upload server and not competing with your own maps. (and now that you can pay $10 to have the exact name as the author, a slightly modified map name will pretty sure catch me playing from time to time)
Now that all of this do not working as intended. Do your "really" "not" want this feature ?
Its a good approach, I myself prefer to keep them close by bookmarking and registering when I have the chance on a related hacking website that I came across. If they sure think twice about posting a controversial topic is another problem, (if someone cant tell this is controversial or not) as I have never think of posting a tutorial about this even though I just know the exact process from bibendus a few days before (also in a constructive and not so tutorial style thread). If people really care about hacking map open, I'm sure they will post at places they are allowed no matter what.
If anyone bother to find the thread started by bibendus about this same problem, with the same instruction, it does not generate much negativity from the community, even though some of us discussed and tried it ourselves, just not in the way this was phrased as "supported" or "tutorial", or "map download". (On a side note If i'm doing a tutorials for this I probably upload a map by myself to battlenet and post an unlocked version of it here instead of taking any popular map for example. )
@PeasantOpenSource: Go I dont refer your post to any previous one you made. I'm also not getting your first sentence.
With Lost Temple and Marrauder, yes I was referring to adding thing while you still synchronize and play. But by saying the same logic that adding file to an archive gave no harm, I have a sense that you might go so far as doing that (though not publicly). Even now that you just defend that such abusers will probably be banned. (and just that)
Getting back on topics, this protection is silly, there's no way anyone can do about it. Exposing it is fine, opening map doesnt "seems" to break any rule.
However what I feared is this open attitude toward future map protecting and unlocking. If I can make a good protector, I would be now discouraged given the fact that the first site I want to public it on have an open attitude, such that within days another person could come up reverse engineer my protector. ( I totally respect reverse engineers as they have to be way better than yourself to figure you what you have done, but it sure piss you off that someone who is better than you make something that circumvent your work in less work then you did ) So in short I would not ever try to make this protector happen.
With this system, I can only rot for blizzard's implementation for a server side thing .. ( which can still be hacked, but then they should violate some rule and be banned from mapster )
Could you clarify this point on controlling information ? For any I have known, controlling information means censoring and removing information you don't want to appear ? Or it just mean knowing the information is there or not ?
@PeasantOpenSource: Go
Sorry I just have to argue with your posts because its too funny. (Not to assume that I tried to argue with any other point you make)
- Clearly this method does not involve hacking into the game memory or external modules, but as better protection is enforced, some of these will happen in order to unlock maps. Would you continue pursuing open source in this direction ?
- 90% of .rar file anyone download from the internet is either pirated software, music or movies (not really relevant)
- The game client composed of multiple archive that contains game data, which are mpq archive (you must have known this though). Any map is based on the structure of an mpq archive, even Lost Temple. Now is this break the TOS if you add another vespene geyser into Lost Temple ? Or adding 10 damage to Marauder in the game client ?
While custom contents does not belong to the client itself and might subject or not subject to the TOS, arguing that adding file to any archive does not break any agreement is just silly. (and sure sounds like from a hacker's viewpoint to me)
Reminder: We are still trying having to have a healthy discussion as s3rius recommended to argue until out head explode, any new points from any side is welcome, but please avoid repeating them unneccsary
To drive this thread off track, the only solution that I think can be feasible should come from blizzard itself regarding their own publishing and marketplace system. Bank can never be protected so long as it is saved offline and map can be opened. You can never obfuscate the map to the point that the client cant read it anymore. (and so long as there are people who want to hack it open)
( Btw continue in this trend after this thread will be the new way to protect map thread, then the new way to unlock the new way to protect map thread, then the better way to protect map then the new way to protect map etc ... )
Map protection has to come from the game client itself with an online server. (So long the only thing blizz can protect right now is their server). When a player publish a map version, it will be encoded and uploaded to battlenet. Any other player who click on the map will download an encrypted map on their computer, only with a key gotten from the battlenet server that they could decode the map and enable the client to load it (the key would be one time only). This does make sense for the market place, as whoever bought the map have access to the encode key. (But they could just prevent an account from seeing and playing a map also)
I'm no expert on encryption so I'm not sure how this can be truly protective (real hacker can hack the game memory and get the key value during encoding ) Some solution would be to change the key daily, key based on checksum or harsh value of the downloaded map.
Other than that I have no idea for a good enough protective method given the current way the client works
@LordAbyss: Go
I only agree with 50%, the other half was .. quoted materials
@Kaprisvatten: Go
The way blizzard map works is not protect, its merely applying a property on map called "blizzard signed map" that none of us can replicate. Blizzard signed map can make use of restricted native function. Other than that, I can open them just fine, no protection intended.
Also no pun/offense/argue intended. Just passing the knowledge.
Edit: Also anther things to note on. Locked map by definition and by warning of blizzard is that you have to back it up since you cant open a locked map later in the editor. Nothing protective is mentioned.
(I''m staying neutral, sixen might have broken some shit, but it does make sense how bullshit this locking thing is)
@Sixen: Go
You brought this back sixen ??? Yeah guide for unlocking maps should be ok, i just cant figure out how to delete that attachment. If you want to view the map, you would have to do it yourself though
And there's no magic. Just find the map in the cache, reconstruct the component list file and it will be loaded nicely