Karana is a marked server.

nimblefoot · Post by **nimblefoot** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 12:26 pm

Be careful using Macroquest - even if you never type in /macro *.

I was on my newbish magician camping a static spawn. I use MQ mostly for its play enchancement features. I never use macros unattended, not even trade/skill macros. So yeah, I'm camping the static spawn. I have my pet /guarding on top of where the fellow spawns for convenience when I get a call. (it was nature) About a minute later I come back and find my pet slain and myself sitting where my poor pet was killed. I glanced down at my text bar.

"You have been summoned."

Hmm.

/echo $gm

FALSE

You say, "Okay, what just happened?"
GMMeanie says, "I killed your pet to stop your macros. Continued use of macro software will get you banned."
/sit
/camp
/damnit

I was using the latest CVS, of course. No scripts were running at the time.

I also play an alt on another server and I have never had a problem. It also has a lower population and less GM presence. When on Karana I frequently get disconnected ...and I just realized that I had most likely been spied on on multiple occasions. (lower levels watching me play my necro main for 10+ minutes in obscure zones, not saying much and refusing any help)

Amadeus · Post by **Amadeus** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 12:49 pm

I would have liked to see some screenshots of this.

It is probable that if a GM *really* wanted to know if you're using MacroQuest, they probably have the ability to determine that. As to why he tagged you at that particular time, who knows.... He might have a friend that you pissed off last month or something or you might have been obviously running a macro when one of his friends were around last week ...who knows?

As I and the devs have said many times, you should NEVER use MacroQuest unless you are willing to accept the consequences of being caught. No flaming nimbefoot as he was not complaining or griefing...he was simply informing us (which is good) ...but, just for everyone else's benefit: nothing is more annoying than whining MQ users that got banned..lol

RPZip · Post by **RPZip** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 12:55 pm

That's true, but has anyone else noticed the constant disconnects? I tried disabling MQ and I got rid of all of them.

Which is why I'm not using MQ anymore, since those worry me, a lot. I've had two computers using MQ at once side by side, sharing the same connection, and one without. The two with MQ dropped at the same time, while the one without went on chugging.

tehHax0r · Post by **tehHax0r** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 1:30 pm

he saw you afk sitting on top of a spawn site and "assumed" you were macroing.
then once you did that /echo $gm, it confirmed it for him

cause GMs *can* see the last 10 lines of your text.

nimblefoot · Post by **nimblefoot** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 1:44 pm

Yeah no complaining here. I fully accept the consequences of using MQ, and I really do appreciate everything the developers have done.

I've played for over a week since this happened. I have used MacroQuest the entire time, but on the low-population server. The disparity in enforcement is just confusing (but I love it).

Stogar · Post by **Stogar** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 1:55 pm

cause GMs *can* see the last 10 lines of your text.

Question: They can see -ANY- text OR -SERVER- sent text OR -CLIENT- sent text OR -CLIENT- typed text?

It seems to me that SERVER sent text to you would be yes. CLIENT (you/yourPC) text that is sent out to another player or to /say /auction/shout etc -yes. CLIENT text either type in and no CR or MQ generated text would be -maybe.

I know they could monitor the packets to/from your client, but did they actually build in some sort of client side real time monitoring like VNC/PCAW? I doubt it but who knows.

TI994a · Post by **TI994a** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 2:30 pm

Stogar wrote:I know they could monitor the packets to/from your client, but did they actually build in some sort of client side real time monitoring like VNC/PCAW? I doubt it but who knows.

Aside from being illegal, I doubt SOE would create a real-time client monitoring ability to their software without at least modifying the EULA to the point where your acceptance effectively gave them permission to do so.

- TI

Achy Wrists · Post by **Achy Wrists** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 4:53 pm

About two weeks ago I did /echo $gm in a zone where I knew there was a GM ( he was visible ). I got FALSE back, so don't depend on that, I think it's broken.

EqMule · Post by **EqMule** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 5:08 pm

Code: Select all

void __cdecl fillinevilprocessnames(struct prohibExe *)

I dont really care that multiple ppl has stated that "they" dont scan our processlist, but this call was still in eqgame.exe last time I checked... its from the mapfile and if macroquest.exe is not one of the "prohibExe" I would be surprised...

anyway I havent had the time to actually look into that one and detour it or something, but I NEVER run macroquest.exe lets just say I rename it to something else... so far I dont see any disconnects, but I have seen them when I run macroquest.exe without it renamed... and about $gm being broken, yes its possible, havent tested it for awhile but it was working just fine pre 9th oct patch, will log on and check it later.

dont_know_at_all · Post by **dont_know_at_all** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 5:22 pm

They don't scan our process list. I just checked all the APIs of all the exes and dlls.

Zxeses · Post by **Zxeses** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 5:41 pm

Well its clear they know... somehow. The disconnects (which I have had also only when running MQ) as well as the spot suspentions of people who arnt even using macro's, just running around in the POK for kei, is a demontration that they know.

How?

Amadeus · Post by **Amadeus** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 pm

One report in the past two months does not constitute "clearly they know" in my mind.

When the reports start flooding in, then we'll worry.

Plazmic · Post by **Plazmic** » Mon Oct 13, 2003 10:38 pm

Everyone knows the "/report" command, right?
It sends 10 visible chat lines to the server for storage.

I believe GMs can ask your client for a report ...

DreamKing · Post by **DreamKing** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 12:03 am

Hmm hadn't thought of renaming the exe. Any others that have to be renamed or will it work fine just changing the exe and leaving the others? (ini, etc)

dont_know_at_all · Post by **dont_know_at_all** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 12:30 am

If you wrap your modem in tin foil, they won't be able to look in either.