We're getting close, but I don't want to commit to a release date yet, since I've set tentative dates repeatedly over the last few weeks that have come and gone. I'll keep posting updates to this thread as I finish the items on that list.
Yes, it's getting near done. But, lets save the celebrations for when it's done, shall we?
Agreed. It might come back from Krash: Failed, if it's not done right, then Thyth will sadly have to go back threw and check. I'd not like him getting stuck and needing help. Really only 2 other people can help him on ruby. Soulice isn't that good. All he does is mess up.
The files do appear to be functioning properly, everything is working fine on my end. It's all prepped to be hooked in to the system, and once the back-end is ready it shouldn't take too long to get it rolling.
I've attached a tentative teaser of the login screen you'll see right when the game is launched if you've already got an account. It could change a bit before the release, but it should give you a general idea.
For accounts that aren't stored locally, the drop-down menu has an option that pushes the password box down and adds a username entry field.
The files do appear to be functioning properly, everything is working fine on my end. It's all prepped to be hooked in to the system, and once the back-end is ready it shouldn't take too long to get it rolling.
I've attached a tentative teaser of the login screen you'll see right when the game is launched if you've already got an account. It could change a bit before the release, but it should give you a general idea.
For accounts that aren't stored locally, the drop-down menu has an option that pushes the password box down and adds a username entry field.
THANK YOU!!! To all of you who are working on this project to save Tribes 2... I have been a constant player since about 4 months after it was released and it is by FAR the BEST online FPS I have had the pleasure of playing! When I tried to login this last week to see if the servers where still up, my heart was broken! I cant believe a gaming company as large as they are would throw out such a good game. The only reason more people aren't playing is the UE crash problems and the lack of support from the new company and no more CD keys! The UE's are a pain but I can live with them, the support, well I have always gotten it from the community. As for the CD keys, I have my original and tried to get another during the free giveaway years ago but they where gone in an instant... With that said I cant wait till we're up and running again and if there is any way I can help I would be more than glad to!
I've been asked to split some things out of the thread to try to keep it on topic. If you wish to continue your previous conversation, you can do so here.
Auth server is sufficiently functional for development and testing purposes. I have not yet implemented the IP limiter on account signing requests, but other than that, most of the functionality has been tested and it works. There may be some minor bugs left, but those can only be tested for once the client GUIs and integration are complete
When it comes to the IP limiter and creating user ID's, wouldn't it make more sense to do something like 2 or 3 user ID's per IP address rather than 1 user ID per IP per week?
The former would still allow for homes with multiple users, yet control the number of accounts one user could create (those with dynamic IP's not included).
The later, and current method would screw one all but one user in a home with multiple users for the first week. Additionally, It would not limit the number of user ID's for any one person, dynamic IP or not. Granted it would depend on the persons desire to wait another week to make another account, but It's not like creating an account is going to be a grueling ordeal.
Controlling smurfs are a legitimate concern for anyone who runs or administrates a server. Although perhaps not as big of an issue in a construction mod (not knocking construction, things are just generally more calm and low key), I know it's a legitimate issue for =Rebels= and others.
There may be larger issues in implementing my suggestion as opposed to the current solution. I have no idea of the logistics, but I would like to hear your thoughts.
You realise they could create 3 accounts, change their IP and create 3 more and so on and so on. I'm not gonna calculate how huge a problem this could create, and yes... their are those that would waste their lives doing this just to piss off some admins!
You realise they could create 3 accounts, change their IP and create 3 more and so on and so on. I'm not gonna calculate how huge a problem this could create, and yes... their are those that would waste their lives doing this just to piss off some admins!
Yeah, I understand that. The problem is that people with dynamic IP's are going to do that anyway. Under my idea or under the original, those with dynamic IP's can create as many accounts as they want. However, with mine people with static IP's are limited to 3. While under the original, those with static IP's can have up to 52 a year.
Why not give the admins ability to ban by MAC address? Ban by account is one thing, that person can just make another. Ban by MAC address then well, you're pretty much screwed.
This will also allow Lord Thyth to ban hackers/exploiters forever.
Oh, here's another idea.. account creation based on MAC address rather than IP. This will allow people to create more than one account on multiple computers so their families can play.
The way that would work is that the client would send that kind of data to the account creation server which then stores it for reference so whenever that person tries to make another account on that computer it'll say, "Sorry, you've reached your maximum account limit for this week. Please try again next week."
I'm sure something like that would work since you're already hard-coding everything else on the client and server end.
Why not give the admins ability to ban by MAC address? Ban by account is one thing, that person can just make another. Ban by MAC address then well, you're pretty much screwed.
This will also allow Lord Thyth to ban hackers/exploiters forever.
This would work for me also, assuming it is a viable option for thyth.
This would work for me also, assuming it is a viable option for thyth.
Right, as I see it your IP address is like a phone number. Anyone can change their phone number. However your MAC address is like your social security number, or criminal record, it'll haunt you for the rest of your life if you screw up.
Yes it is possible to spoof a mac address.
Pretty much possible to spoof anything.
Should maybe do - 1 account per IP with account aliases - or sub accounts.
Kind of like character accounts for a MMORPG.
im pretty sure that rule for mmorpgs and the like only exist for anti cheat purposes... in terms of multiple logging in, so id say there should be a 5 acc limit for mac address' so people who only have once computer but quite a few log ins can all play... its like drm, its a good idea, but it dont half piss you off
If not, how can we detect MAC addresses at the individual server level?
Clearly there is some misunderstanding about how Internet level routing works. MAC addresses are used for OSI Layer 2 transmission within a subnet. Once you send data out of your network gateway, routing is handled on OSI Layer 3 (IP), and MAC addresses are rewritten by every router in every hop between the source network and the destination network. If you take a packet sniffer, and listen to all traffic you get from the Internet on your home LAN, all of the source MAC addresses will be the MAC address of your gateway/router/firewall.
Because if we can't, we would have to apply to the community server admins for every ban.
Not something I would want to get mixed up in, nor would community server admins, I imagine.
That would be extremely easy to abuse, and it would be difficult from an administration standpoint to verify reasons that game server admins claim for bans.
But hey, if there's a practical way to do it, no problemo, give players 1 GUID per week for each computer.
The most practical way to do it is limit account creation by IP address. The vast majority of the client side code is open source. Any account limitation that requires verification on the client side is doomed to fail.
If account abuse becomes a serious problem, then a web-of-trust sort of system could be built on top of an IP/account correlator. I've already mentioned before (somewhere in this thread) that an IP rate limitation is a first step, and I have further ideas to mitigate abuse of accounts should abuse become a serious problem.
Comments
^ AWSOME!
~Syn~
There just hasn't been any releases yet :-)
Also, I hate your signature. can you change the colours of the image?
And maybe re-size it a little bit?
Much appriciated!
I've attached a tentative teaser of the login screen you'll see right when the game is launched if you've already got an account. It could change a bit before the release, but it should give you a general idea.
For accounts that aren't stored locally, the drop-down menu has an option that pushes the password box down and adds a username entry field.
~Syn~
I like it. Keep up the good work.
Thank You
MysticWarrior
And point of interest: We're a day closer to release! ;p
When it comes to the IP limiter and creating user ID's, wouldn't it make more sense to do something like 2 or 3 user ID's per IP address rather than 1 user ID per IP per week?
The former would still allow for homes with multiple users, yet control the number of accounts one user could create (those with dynamic IP's not included).
The later, and current method would screw one all but one user in a home with multiple users for the first week. Additionally, It would not limit the number of user ID's for any one person, dynamic IP or not. Granted it would depend on the persons desire to wait another week to make another account, but It's not like creating an account is going to be a grueling ordeal.
Controlling smurfs are a legitimate concern for anyone who runs or administrates a server. Although perhaps not as big of an issue in a construction mod (not knocking construction, things are just generally more calm and low key), I know it's a legitimate issue for =Rebels= and others.
There may be larger issues in implementing my suggestion as opposed to the current solution. I have no idea of the logistics, but I would like to hear your thoughts.
Yeah, I understand that. The problem is that people with dynamic IP's are going to do that anyway. Under my idea or under the original, those with dynamic IP's can create as many accounts as they want. However, with mine people with static IP's are limited to 3. While under the original, those with static IP's can have up to 52 a year.
This will also allow Lord Thyth to ban hackers/exploiters forever.
The way that would work is that the client would send that kind of data to the account creation server which then stores it for reference so whenever that person tries to make another account on that computer it'll say, "Sorry, you've reached your maximum account limit for this week. Please try again next week."
I'm sure something like that would work since you're already hard-coding everything else on the client and server end.
This would work for me also, assuming it is a viable option for thyth.
Right, as I see it your IP address is like a phone number. Anyone can change their phone number. However your MAC address is like your social security number, or criminal record, it'll haunt you for the rest of your life if you screw up.
Oh, I updated my post just above yours.
If not, how can we detect MAC addresses at the individual server level?
Because if we can't, we would have to apply to the community server admins for every ban.
Not something I would want to get mixed up in, nor would community server admins, I imagine.
But hey, if there's a practical way to do it, no problemo, give players 1 GUID per week for each computer.
Pretty much possible to spoof anything.
Should maybe do - 1 account per IP with account aliases - or sub accounts.
Kind of like character accounts for a MMORPG.
Clearly there is some misunderstanding about how Internet level routing works. MAC addresses are used for OSI Layer 2 transmission within a subnet. Once you send data out of your network gateway, routing is handled on OSI Layer 3 (IP), and MAC addresses are rewritten by every router in every hop between the source network and the destination network. If you take a packet sniffer, and listen to all traffic you get from the Internet on your home LAN, all of the source MAC addresses will be the MAC address of your gateway/router/firewall.
That would be extremely easy to abuse, and it would be difficult from an administration standpoint to verify reasons that game server admins claim for bans.
The most practical way to do it is limit account creation by IP address. The vast majority of the client side code is open source. Any account limitation that requires verification on the client side is doomed to fail.
If account abuse becomes a serious problem, then a web-of-trust sort of system could be built on top of an IP/account correlator. I've already mentioned before (somewhere in this thread) that an IP rate limitation is a first step, and I have further ideas to mitigate abuse of accounts should abuse become a serious problem.