So i get banned for "boxing"

[Dullah]

Originally Posted by Nirgon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You'd mind 2 boxing if all these people your level you fought had a boxed 50 cleric/druid/whatever covering their ass dude.

They could play a mean defense, but other than that you just range their healer. In most places its not possible to run two chars in pvp.

[kindred]

Originally Posted by Dullah [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

They could play a mean defense, but other than that you just range their healer. In most places its not possible to run two chars in pvp.

Sounds like a boxer from a boxing guild. What guild are you in?

[Arillious]

Consider yourself lucky. GM saved you from wasting days of your life on server that has become irrelevant.

[Sniperfire]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Silikten]

Originally Posted by mizin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

They cant tell if you're on the same computer.. thats the point.. its a blatant lie and she had no idea what she was talking about. I know people who box on blue and red all the time from the same computer lol.. We've all seen it.

Your network card (thing that plugs interwebs to pc) had a unique I.D. (IP). It can be tracked.

[kprobe]

Macs are not reliable 'beyond reasonable doubt' evidence. Routers typically show single mac for whole network; even if backdoor was implemented, you can change mac to a new address on nearly any hardware these days. It is however unlikely for the average user to have the necessary hardware (special nics) to hook two 'same mac' computers to a router.

That said backdoor could easily detect multiple instances of a game running on the same OS, send special packets based on hardware profile (i.e. simple hashing), which would be generally unique for each computer. Its also highly likely IP exemptions are on a watch list in general.

I'd say if they are implementing auto-detection with MAC addressing, its a lazy, but largely effective for average cases if they're OK with false positives; which, based on history, this server's admins seems to be, but it could be something else.

Without more data, its hard to say anything but reasonable conjecture on the technical side of things.

Either way boxing is determined based on behavior as it has to be caught in the act. This can also lead to false positives in cases of AFK and new players.

This leads to inconclusive evidence on the technical side. What we're left with is whether we believe the people's stories on either side of on the event.

[El Culo]

MAC address probably isn't used. Would literally just have an int counter in the dll itself with # of eq instances and then # of open p99worldserver streams (so you could still box another server or even play live at same time). This is realistically how it is probably done but I still havent been able to unpack and extract any good info from the antihax yet. My top indians are working on it though.

[Bardalicious]

As stated previously the router has no bearing on what MAC address the data packet sent back contained. It wouldn't be reading a MAC address attached to the data packet externally, because yes, the router would be stripping that information and adding its own. The MAC of the computer that the data packet originated on would be contained in the actual data of the packet (i.e. untouched by the router). It's possible to spoof a MAC address, correct, but unless you were trying to give each instance of eqgame.exe it's own MAC address information on the same machine, why would you bring that up? It has no bearing on someone being caught reporting back two accounts logged in from the same MAC. You likely wouldn't purposely spoof a second PC to have the same MAC as a PC on your own network, as that generally defeats the purpose.

It's possible this is used in conjunction with the system process list they get back, yes, similar to how they can see if macroquest.exe is running and such. Same MAC address listed for each account logged in AND the process list shows two copies of eqgame.exe in memory? Yep, 95% of the time that would be someone boxing.

[Rogean]

Ahh, this feels like Toop all over again. Person breaks rules, gets caught, swears innocence to enstill doubt in population, get sympathy.

Anyways, I'll have you know that I looked into the ban on the OP's accounts, and confirmed that not only were they boxing at the time on the same pc, but in every single case of accounts logged into from their household, they were always from the same single computer.

You guys are on the right track with the DLL, but I'll say that nothing is based on the MAC Address. Nor is it processes (Our DLL does not send information to the server about other processes running on your computer unless a process interacts with the EQ Client).

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Tombom]

incinerated