Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Jagex Bot Detection System.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    The Future.
    Posts
    5,600
    Mentioned
    396 Post(s)
    Quoted
    1598 Post(s)

    Default Jagex Bot Detection System.

    No I didn't write this, I found it on another site aka PB. Some kid leaked it and I saw it and just thought maybe some of you might be interested? Real or fake? Or is it just to screw up our thoughts and make us do what they want? I think our bots are fine :S Apparently there is P-Mod forums aswell where J-Mods check the P-Mod forums more than they do RS- Normal Forums

    Edit: Dammit this is old.. But still being posted on :S Delete pls and remove 1 from my post count.

    Jagex Macroing Detection
    From the RS forums
    Our macro detection system is highly advanced, reminiscent of our efforts to curb rule breakers prior
    to the removal of unbalanced trade. Admittedly, we devote more of our energies towards
    introducing actual game content.
    The use of macros is nevertheless unacceptable, and contrary to popular belief we have not ignored
    the recent outbreak of bot usage. Modern macros however are quite advanced, rarely interact with
    the client, and issue commands the same way players point and click, rotate the camera, etc... We
    presume this sudden leap of sophistication to be due to the fear of being caught with well developed
    accounts, as most macro users seldom use throwaway accounts. Many recent macro users actually
    have comparable gameplay hours to legitimate players.
    [name removed], I don't actually know the very specific details. It's likely that nobody knows the
    entire system to the letter, given the vastness of all of the software involved.
    Firstly, we only issue bans if we can beyond a reasonable that the individual in question has
    committed a violation of the rules. We have stated this to the public quite a bit, and it really is true. I
    wouldn't lose sleep over the bans we've issued at all.
    Our actual detection system monitors player behavior autonomously. As most bot programmers
    have unfortunately and conveniently guessed, it works on a comparison of expected human behavior
    to the observed behavior. Thus, macros that follow a set series of commands would be incredibly
    easy to catch, if they would even be operational. Random camera shifts usually thwart these, and
    finding them is a very rare occurrence.
    We regularly dismantle macros, and the most common approach taken is object recognition with a
    series of programmed responses. One of our very first attempts to counter this was random color
    changes, usually not very noticeable. This turned out to be a failure as object recognition technology
    proved to be far ahead of this eventuality."
    "Unless the appearance of the interface was changed sufficiently enough to make it unusable to even
    a regular player, it was not practical to make the game unrecognizable to a macro program.
    All that we could do was analyze rather than inhibit, so to speak. By determining sets of behaviors
    that are not characteristically human, in "criteria", we would get the alarm from the system if all
    were met.
    The first criteria is quite a bit similar to that of most first person shooter (FPS) games who take steps
    to detect "aimbots." This would be simple movement. Inhumanly fast cursor movements are highly
    suspicious, and consistent patterns of such movements (to discern from some player who gets bored
    and plays with the mouse .) I don't know the actual numbers involved, sorry. Some exceptionally
    skilled players frequently do trigger this, which is why multiple criteria exist.
    The second criteria is the "accuracy" of the clicks. The interface determines exactly where any
    specific click was made, and is further divided into the actual buttons such as the inventory, worn
    equipment, etc...
    Primitive programs typically recognize the object, but click the same spot (often the same pixel.) This
    immediately raises the alarm if it is done consistently. Most programs do not do this, though, but
    rather have an "area of uncertainty" where the click will randomly fall in.
    This is still easy to detect. There is accuracy, and precision. These programs do not replicate human
    precision. Consider the dartboard as an example:
    The goal is to simply "hit it." A human will still aim for the bullseye, to increase the chance of hitting
    the dartboard. Thus hits will be concentrated towards the bullseye, but there will still be hits
    nowhere close, and some misses too.
    A macro does not have human flaws, and can always hit the dartboard. However, if randomized in
    the "area of uncertainty" there is no such pattern."
    This will also raise the alarm. More advanced yet, some macros will actually form concentric regions
    of where the clicks will land. Still, we're always ahead of rulebreakers. Our final line of defense in this
    criteria is to analyze the regions most commonly clicked.
    A macro tends to click in a perfect square, circle, or sometimes the shape of an interface icon.
    Sometimes even the region is randomized. Human behavior is not truly random however. The region
    most commonly clicked is related to placement, which is all I know about this.
    Highly advanced bots have made an attempt to replicate even this, but we have not seen anything
    convincing yet. Admittedly, we're disadvantaged in this aspect, so we cannot fully rely on simple
    movement and accuracy to detect a macro program.
    The next criteria is the actual sequence of actions. A player that decides to cut some trees for logs,
    and sell them for profit actually has a longer list of actions to perform than you'd think. The efficiency
    of which this is completed can be analyzed, and much more easily compared to the behavior of a
    macro programs' attempt to replicate it.
    If each step is merely randomized with the same bounds of uncertainty like virtually all bots seem to
    do today, the actual time it takes to execute the actions in all converges to a specific value! It's
    similar to flipping a fair coin multiple times, and converging to a frequency of outcomes (namely
    50%.) Humans are generally much less consistent, and once the consistency falls within a certain
    range, the alarm is raised.
    One more of many criteria is the effect of total gameplay time. As expected, exhaustion will set in for
    most players and slow down their actions. This is not a completely reliable method, since some
    players have been able to keep up their concentration for remarkably long periods of time."
    "The last criteria I really know of is probably the most obscure and advanced. Human players tend to
    have much better object recognition capabilities than a macro program, and the limitations of the
    procedure can be exploited. While a human may be able to recognize a tree at a very unusual and
    discrete angle, many macros lack this capability, and thus keep the camera angle within a certain
    range. Some fail to change it entirely.
    Macros tend to locate objects that are far out of reach by going close to the area in question, and
    then finding it. Normal players tend to look ahead first.
    There are probably many more techniques employed, and the genius and innovative capability of my
    coworkers is simply amazing. I am very confident in their ability to enforce the rules, and keep RS a
    fair, and equal environment. The detection system is definitely conducive to such, but that is not our
    only method.
    The next is abuse reports. There are many new and better bots, just written, that can avoid at a few
    of the criteria, and not be flagged. The intuition of a human being can never be surpassed, and abuse
    reports give us an all seeing eye that brought many rule breakers to justice. Abuse reports are also
    helpful for locating the archives, and comparing the new behavior of the new macro that was
    previously able to avoid detection. We can update accordingly.
    We highly encourage abuse reporting, and we will not punish players who send in reports with a
    reasonable cause to suspect the player in question is using a macro.
    Circumstances (such as the usual range of playing time) is taken into account as well.

    Source:
    Link
    Last edited by Brandon; 04-21-2011 at 05:07 PM.
    I am Ggzz..
    Hackintosher

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,716
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Quoted
    624 Post(s)

    Default

    I think that's from a year ago :P
    The only true authority stems from knowledge, not from position.

    You can contact me via matrix protocol: @grats:grats.win or you can email me at the same domain, any user/email address.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    6,136
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Quoted
    17 Post(s)

    Default

    Nice read. Thank you.
    SRL is a Library of routines made by the SRL community written for the Program Simba.
    We produce Scripts for the game Runescape.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,766
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quoted
    37 Post(s)

    Default

    Quite an old post, but I lost it. Thanks.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,044
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Quoted
    21 Post(s)

    Default

    Thanks. Was a good read. Even it's old

    ~Home

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Under a bridge
    Posts
    648
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Hey it was good read, plus it poeple read it again they may come up with a new antiban

    ~The evil Troll
    Quote Originally Posted by DD on IRC
    wanted to troll the troll

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Right now? Chair.
    Posts
    8,488
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    12 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ggzz View Post
    No I didn't write this, I found it on another site aka PB. Some kid leaked it and I saw it and just thought maybe some of you might be interested? Real or fake? Or is it just to screw up our thoughts and make us do what they want? I think our bots are fine :S Apparently there is P-Mod forums aswell where J-Mods check the P-Mod forums more than they do RS- Normal Forums

    Edit: Dammit this is old.. But still being posted on :S Delete pls and remove 1 from my post count.

    Jagex Macroing Detection
    From the RS forums
    Free Trade is back
    Our macro detection system is highly advanced, reminiscent of our efforts to curb rule breakers prior
    to the removal of unbalanced trade. Admittedly, we devote more of our energies towards
    introducing actual game content.


    Bots look human to Jagex
    The use of macros is nevertheless unacceptable, and contrary to popular belief we have not ignored
    the recent outbreak of bot usage. Modern macros however are quite advanced, rarely interact with
    the client, and issue commands the same way players point and click, rotate the camera, etc...

    We've made it to 99 many times before
    We
    presume this sudden leap of sophistication to be due to the fear of being caught with well developed
    accounts, as most macro users seldom use throwaway accounts. Many recent macro users actually
    have comparable gameplay hours to legitimate players.

    We do time in jail, they set us free
    [name removed], I don't actually know the very specific details. It's likely that nobody knows the
    entire system to the letter, given the vastness of all of the software involved.
    Firstly, we only issue bans if we can beyond a reasonable that the individual in question has
    committed a violation of the rules. We have stated this to the public quite a bit, and it really is true. I
    wouldn't lose sleep over the bans we've issued at all.

    Angle Detection
    Our actual detection system monitors player behavior autonomously. As most bot programmers
    have unfortunately and conveniently guessed, it works on a comparison of expected human behavior
    to the observed behavior. Thus, macros that follow a set series of commands would be incredibly
    easy to catch, if they would even be operational. Random camera shifts usually thwart these, and
    finding them is a very rare occurrence.

    Tolerance
    We regularly dismantle macros, and the most common approach taken is object recognition with a
    series of programmed responses. One of our very first attempts to counter this was random color
    changes, usually not very noticeable. This turned out to be a failure as object recognition technology
    proved to be far ahead of this eventuality."

    "Unless the appearance of the interface was changed sufficiently enough to make it unusable to even
    a regular player, it was not practical to make the game unrecognizable to a macro program.


    Auto-Ban is only at 100%, except they don't always ban you
    All that we could do was analyze rather than inhibit, so to speak. By determining sets of behaviors
    that are not characteristically human, in "criteria", we would get the alarm from the system if all
    were met.

    Super-Fast Shooting
    The first criteria is quite a bit similar to that of most first person shooter (FPS) games who take steps
    to detect "aimbots." This would be simple movement.

    BoredHuman
    Inhumanly fast cursor movements are highly
    suspicious, and consistent patterns of such movements (to discern from some player who gets bored
    and plays with the mouse .) I don't know the actual numbers involved, sorry.

    Some exceptionally
    skilled players frequently do trigger this, which is why multiple criteria exist.

    Gaussian Mouse
    The second criteria is the "accuracy" of the clicks. The interface determines exactly where any
    specific click was made, and is further divided into the actual buttons such as the inventory, worn
    equipment, etc...
    Primitive programs typically recognize the object, but click the same spot (often the same pixel.) This
    immediately raises the alarm if it is done consistently. Most programs do not do this, though, but
    rather have an "area of uncertainty" where the click will randomly fall in.
    This is still easy to detect. There is accuracy, and precision. These programs do not replicate human
    precision. Consider the dartboard as an example:
    The goal is to simply "hit it." A human will still aim for the bullseye, to increase the chance of hitting
    the dartboard. Thus hits will be concentrated towards the bullseye, but there will still be hits
    nowhere close, and some misses too.

    Correct Mouse / MissClick
    A macro does not have human flaws, and can always hit the dartboard. However, if randomized in
    the "area of uncertainty" there is no such pattern."
    This will also raise the alarm. More advanced yet, some macros will actually form concentric regions
    of where the clicks will land. Still, we're always ahead of rulebreakers. Our final line of defense in this
    criteria is to analyze the regions most commonly clicked.
    A macro tends to click in a perfect square, circle, or sometimes the shape of an interface icon.
    Sometimes even the region is randomized. Human behavior is not truly random however. The region
    most commonly clicked is related to placement, which is all I know about this.

    Lol.
    Highly advanced bots have made an attempt to replicate even this, but we have not seen anything
    convincing yet. Admittedly, we're disadvantaged in this aspect, so we cannot fully rely on simple
    movement and accuracy to detect a macro program.

    Fatigue
    The next criteria is the actual sequence of actions. A player that decides to cut some trees for logs,
    and sell them for profit actually has a longer list of actions to perform than you'd think. The efficiency
    of which this is completed can be analyzed, and much more easily compared to the behavior of a
    macro programs' attempt to replicate it.
    If each step is merely randomized with the same bounds of uncertainty like virtually all bots seem to
    do today, the actual time it takes to execute the actions in all converges to a specific value! It's
    similar to flipping a fair coin multiple times, and converging to a frequency of outcomes (namely
    50%.) Humans are generally much less consistent, and once the consistency falls within a certain
    range, the alarm is raised.
    One more of many criteria is the effect of total gameplay time. As expected, exhaustion will set in for
    most players and slow down their actions. This is not a completely reliable method, since some
    players have been able to keep up their concentration for remarkably long periods of time."

    Reflection
    "The last criteria I really know of is probably the most obscure and advanced. Human players tend to
    have much better object recognition capabilities than a macro program, and the limitations of the
    procedure can be exploited. While a human may be able to recognize a tree at a very unusual and
    discrete angle, many macros lack this capability, and thus keep the camera angle within a certain
    range. Some fail to change it entirely.
    Macros tend to locate objects that are far out of reach by going close to the area in question, and
    then finding it. Normal players tend to look ahead first.
    There are probably many more techniques employed, and the genius and innovative capability of my
    coworkers is simply amazing. I am very confident in their ability to enforce the rules, and keep RS a
    fair, and equal environment. The detection system is definitely conducive to such, but that is not our
    only method.

    Bot-Human interaction
    The next is abuse reports.

    There are many new and better bots, just written, that can avoid at a few
    of the criteria, and not be flagged.
    The intuition of a human being can never be surpassed, and abuse
    reports give us an all seeing eye that brought many rule breakers to justice. Abuse reports are also
    helpful for locating the archives, and comparing the new behavior of the new macro that was
    previously able to avoid detection.


    We can update accordingly. Can they?


    We highly encourage abuse reporting, and we will not punish players who send in reports with a
    reasonable cause to suspect the player in question is using a macro.
    Circumstances (such as the usual range of playing time) is taken into account as well.

    Source:
    Link
    I've made my comments along. Can jagex really beat macro's ?
    RS Macro's have existed...... well nearly as long as runescape itself.
    The Macro's are like a little virus inside of RS, that has not yet died out. They've tried and tried, and somehow macro's still exist everyday because we believe we can get away with it.

    Well can we? I think so.

    ~RM
    Last edited by Sir R. M8gic1an; 04-22-2011 at 02:23 AM.

    I & I know Zion. It is in the spirit, body and mind of every one of us
    RMouse(obj: TMSIObject): boolean;

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,112
    Mentioned
    71 Post(s)
    Quoted
    580 Post(s)

    Default

    RSbot is pretty flawless IMO but it uses injection right? that detection method didnt say anything about that?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,240
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Quoted
    11 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pur3b100d View Post
    RSbot is pretty flawless IMO but it uses injection right? that detection method didnt say anything about that?
    It doesn't use BCEL/reflection anymore
    Click here to find out how to get full screen without members! | Click here to check out my Ultimate Bitmap Tutorial! Edited to work with Simba! |

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,112
    Mentioned
    71 Post(s)
    Quoted
    580 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cycrosism View Post
    It doesn't use BCEL/reflection anymore
    ah could you enlighten me on how RSBot works? i stopped using it cus of that fact.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,042
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Quoted
    14 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pur3b100d View Post
    ah could you enlighten me on how RSBot works? i stopped using it cus of that fact.
    It still uses bytecode injection to gather data from the client. BCEL and ASM are just two Java bytecode libraries that facilitate that process.
    :-)

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    3,716
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Quoted
    624 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir R. M8gic1an View Post
    I've made my comments along. Can jagex really beat macro's ?
    RS Macro's have existed...... well nearly as long as runescape itself.
    The Macro's are like a little virus inside of RS, that has not yet died out. They've tried and tried, and somehow macro's still exist everyday because we believe we can get away with it.

    Well can we? I think so.

    ~RM
    I agree.. jagex said themselves eventually bots will be undetectable and they need player help to find bots and ban them
    The only true authority stems from knowledge, not from position.

    You can contact me via matrix protocol: @grats:grats.win or you can email me at the same domain, any user/email address.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    1,351
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quoted
    72 Post(s)

    Default

    Check this out. The post itself is from 2006, but I doubt Jagex has removed this detection strategy from their client, if not made it better. pplsuqbawlz is the one who found this in the client and posted it if you're wondering.

    Don't believe the hype about them recording your mouse and crap?

    Code:
                    if (MOUSEBUTTON_LAST != 0) {
                        anInt2363++;
                        long when = ((MOUSEPRESS_WHEN - aLong1203) / 50L);
                        aLong1203 = MOUSEPRESS_WHEN;
                        int x = MOUSEPRESS_X;
                        int y = MOUSEPRESS_Y;
    
                        if (x >= 0) {
                            if (x > 764) {
                                x = 764;
                            }
                        } else {
                            x = 0;
                        }
    
                        if (y >= 0) {
                            if (y > 502) {
                                y = 502;
                            }
                        } else {
                            y = 0;
                        }
    
                        int rightclick = 0;
                        if (MOUSEBUTTON_LAST == 2)
                            rightclick = 1;
    
                        if (when > 4095L)
                            when = 4095L;
    
                        int time = (int) when;
                        int loc = y * 765 + x;
                        
                        out.writeFrame(234);
                        out.writeIntInverse((rightclick << 19) + (time << 20) + loc);
                    }
    Mrr. I showeth some pr00f, now bow!
    So yes, macro detection has been part of Jagex's agenda for quite some time now.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •