[MUD-Dev] strong encryption for authentication

Derek Licciardi kressilac at home.com
Thu Jul 12 22:33:31 New Zealand Standard Time 2001


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Caliban Tiresias Darklock
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2001 09:35:39 -0400, Edward Glowacki
> <glowack2 at msu.edu> wrote:
>> Quoted from Caliban Tiresias Darklock on Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at
>> 08:16:52PM -0700:

>>> Why the hell would you want to encrypt it?

>>  1. Cheating 2. Spying

> So... you don't consider these perfectly legitimate applications
> of player ingenuity?

...

> Now, ALTERING it, I have a problem with. But I tend to think
> that's going to be a minor problem, if it ever crops up at all.

You underestimate the level to which players will go to gain an
advantage over someone.  ShowEQ is a great example.  People would
setup second machines in EQ to see the packets coming in and out.
This revealed waay to much information about the mechanics of the
game in my opinion.  It allowed the construction of Heads Up
displays that gave a significant PvP advantage to those using them.

In Quake, they are used extensively by the cheaters.  Shot proxies,
and other packet sniffing allows players to never miss.  It is this
type of information that I would not want the player to experience
as I feel it dramatically decreases the immersiveness of the game
and cause other players that are 'not in the know' to become upset
with the game.

In a MUD proxies and such could be used to good advantage.  If lag
is killing you while you run from place to place, proxy the packets
in the middle out of the system using a filter.  Less lag means less
downtime.  Sniffers could listen in on nearly anything said in the
game and record it for your own usage.  This includes all
administrative discussions as well as private player discussions.
What about the possibility of someone using a sniffer/repeater to
ruin another players experience(sexual harassment, denial of
service, impersonating an admin)?  With open packets I feel the
problem is just waiting to be had.  Your only protection is that
most people don't feel the thrill of trashing a MUD(EverQuest or UO
is an entirely different matter because there is more fame in the
successful campaign).  Encryption in that case could be a good way
to keep the honest man honest.  Only in that case would I agree with
you that the violators would be small in number.

Derek

_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev



More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list