> And look, a tool posted on
> the public forums that lays the foundation for injecting DLLs.
Not to be pendant, but the code for injecting a DLL is not hidden knowledge by any means.
I used the published technique right from Microsoft.

"SDEnternet's idea of security is disabling right click on a website. "
Lol. That's an easy bypass with firefox.

Wrong, NF doesn't encrypt the network communication. It uses a seeded checksums that
prevents simple packet manipulation UNLESS you inject a DLL. And look, a tool posted on
the public forums that lays the foundation for injecting DLLs.

Also, given that you can hear everything under the shroud means that the client is given
all the information it needs for a map hack.

SDEnternet's idea of security is disabling right click on a website.

Again, nice work Shaggs.

To the nay-sayers: You need to cross the line to find out where it is. Like the above
mentioned post, an (functional) aimbot is impossible. A mapmod/nofogmode is also
impossible. And to Shaggs', yes the packets ARE in fact encrypted. o wo

Heirtay ncrptioneay siay isspay oorpay niay asecay.

Load up WPE, you can look for yourself. (I don't recommend you do)

> one could create a bot which detects information from the server (like enemy ship
> location etc.) and adjusts the user values (such as angles of attack) in the outgoing
> packets to give you the "perfect" shot. I am not sure how they guard for this as it
> would be difficult to detect with a very good BB player vs. a bot.

What you described is a general aimbot program that can apply to nearly any online game.
Most games encrypt their communication (including NF I believe), but that won't prevent
dedicated people from hooking into the game code before/after encryption.

Navyfield just by design would be much more immune to an aimbot than say an FPS, becasue
of shell hang time. Shells can be dodged in NF, not in an FPS.

While it may be theoretically possible to build an aimbot for NF (completely unrelated to
NFIgnore), it just wouldn't be worth it because of dodging. AI research isn't good enough
to predict people's motion to counter dodging.


**just so the paranoid don't get confused: this post is off topic, it has nothing to do
with NFIgnore

I would agree. While I may not know the details of the inner workings of the game,
given the server is what is "running the game" (and the client is merely showing the
outcome / sending the intent) sending less packets to client is simple providing the
client with less information.

While I wouldn't consider this malicious, one could create a bot which detects
information from the server (like enemy ship location etc.) and adjusts the user
values (such as angles of attack) in the outgoing packets to give you the "perfect"
shot. I am not sure how they guard for this as it would be difficult to detect with a
very good BB player vs. a bot.

> there are just to many verant's of WTB that's with out the rest of the rubbish that is
> posted at the start of a game.
The latest version ignores case. So, adding a filter for "wtb" will remove "wtb bla bla",
"WTB", "WtB anything", and so on.

I should probably update the screenshot.


> wish it was that simpel and you are droping packets ??? is that not cheating(say you
> was in a game and the other side fluded you with WTB.
From my testing, chat packets do not contain game information. Deleting them does not
affect gameplay at all. I do not see how it could be considered cheating.

> is that the same as the CV problem where you see cv's do a dubbel launch of aircraft)
No.

cool your saying that it will work on
WtB
WTb
wTB that's just for starters
W.T.B
W'T'B
W_T_B
W T B
W-2-B
there are just to many verant's of WTB that's with out the rest of the rubbish that is
posted at the start of a game.
wish it was that simpel and you are droping packets ??? is that not cheating(say you was
in a game and the other side fluded you with WTB. is that the same as the CV problem where
you see cv's do a dubbel launch of aircraft)

good job shaggs, and will keep the whinning threads down as well :P

> However, I would prefer an SDe version built into the game as opposed to
> running third party programs that SDe may or may not support.

I would prefer that as well, but alas I have to work with what I can.