Author Topic: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?  (Read 6425 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Allonsy

  • Relentless Teamkiller
  • **
  • Posts: 95
    • View Profile
Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« on: June 26, 2012, 08:49:09 am »
Would using call compile that someone posted on one of my old threads bypass the detection of scripts by BE?
So, in theory, with the bypass available here, and the compiled scripts, one would not get banned?

rule="u"+"s"+"e c"+"a"+"l"+"l compile and string split! this very nice command!:)"
Code: [Select]
_unt = player;
_wp = "M4"+"A1_AIM_SD_camo";
_mg = "30R"+"nd_556x45_StanagSD";
_pl ="M9"+"SD";
_plmg ="15Rn"+"d_9x19_M9SD";
_bk = "DZ_Backpack_EP1";
_wpn = ["NVGog"+"gles","Item"+"G"+"PS","ItemCom"+"pass","Bino"+"cular_Vec"+"tor","Item"+"Map","Item"+"Watch",_wp,_pl];
removeBackpack _unt;
addbak="_unt addB"+"ackpack _bk;";call compile addbak;
_bpk = (unitBackpack _unt);
bpkvpn="_bpk ad"+"dweaponcargo['DMR',1];_bpk ad"+"dmagazinecargo ['20Rnd_762x51_DMR',6];";call compile bpkvpn;
remvpn="rem"+"oveAllW"+"eapons _unt;";call compile remvpn;
addmgz="for '_a' from 0 to 11 do{_unt addm"+"agazine _mg}";call compile addmgz;
addplmg="for '_a' from 0 to 7 do{_unt addm"+"agazine _plmg}";call compile addplmg;
addwpn="{_unt ad"+"dwe"+"apon _x} forEach _wpn;";call compile addwpn;

FrankHorrigan

  • Relentless Teamkiller
  • **
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #1 on: June 26, 2012, 03:02:50 pm »
it won't get detected by BE, i'm pretty sure if that was the question...

mirc00

  • Intentional Cheater
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #2 on: June 26, 2012, 03:30:34 pm »
Why using splitted strings if "call compile" will bypass the script detection by BE?

s0beit

  • Relentless Teamkiller
  • **
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2012, 04:37:55 pm »
Why using splitted strings if "call compile" will bypass the script detection by BE?

because they use string comparison to find blacklisted script data

so
Code: [Select]
addBackpackis not the same as
Code: [Select]
"add"+"Backp"+"ack"

mirc00

  • Intentional Cheater
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #4 on: June 26, 2012, 04:44:35 pm »
Seemed like a bit too easy for me. Shouldn't be that hard to search for those splitted string if they want to, i guess. Can anyone tell me what exactly "call compile" does?

s0beit

  • Relentless Teamkiller
  • **
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #5 on: June 26, 2012, 05:06:15 pm »
Shouldn't be that hard to search for those splitted string if they want to, i guess.

It's not hard to detect something like this, it's just that they have no way to predict where in the string you're splitting. Honestly, Arma2 and BE could detect something like this if they want, but there's no functionality to detect obfuscated strings like this right now. (I mean they COULD add YOUR obfuscated string to a blacklist, but somebody could obviously get past it with another method)

There's also other ways to hide strings.

Can anyone tell me what exactly "call compile" does?

Compile turns the "String" into "Code". Call executes the "Code".

mirc00

  • Intentional Cheater
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #6 on: June 26, 2012, 05:18:40 pm »
Ah okay, thanks for the information on this. So, because you turn a string into code, they can't auto-detect it because they are searching for strings..

s0beit

  • Relentless Teamkiller
  • **
  • Posts: 94
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #7 on: June 26, 2012, 05:59:46 pm »
Ah okay, thanks for the information on this. So, because you turn a string into code, they can't auto-detect it because they are searching for strings..

No, you have to turn a string into code to execute it.

The reason they can't detect it is because they're using a blacklist system, for example, you black list the following:
Code: [Select]
player addEventHandler ["handleDamage",{false}];
INV_BombSpawn
player addWeapon "RPK_74";

Right, so, those specific things are blacklisted. If somebody were to change it to the string and compile method, how would you predict what the string will look like?

You have no idea. There's no way to know unless you're from the future.

mirc00

  • Intentional Cheater
  • **
  • Posts: 27
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #8 on: June 26, 2012, 06:15:12 pm »
I was talking about that, i just expressed myself a bit poorly, sorry. I understand, that when you split "addWeapon" into "a+dd+we+apo+n", it's hard to tell where you splitted it in the end, but i haven't messed around with "call compile" yet, so it's a bit hard for me to understand. I know, based on your explanation, that "call compile" turns a string like "rem"+"oveAllW"+"eapons _unt;" into executable code that you can run on your client. But how does this looks like when you take a look at the server logs on a DayZ-Server? What exactly can admins see, after running above line with "call compile"? I know that, without using this method, admins can clearly see which code you were executing. I hope i got you right.

Coronel_Niel

  • Insane Joker
  • ****
  • Posts: 846
  • Why can't I pick my own profile picture...
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #9 on: June 26, 2012, 07:50:19 pm »
Ah okay, thanks for the information on this. So, because you turn a string into code, they can't auto-detect it because they are searching for strings..

No, you have to turn a string into code to execute it.

The reason they can't detect it is because they're using a blacklist system, for example, you black list the following:
Code: [Select]
player addEventHandler ["handleDamage",{false}];
INV_BombSpawn
player addWeapon "RPK_74";

Right, so, those specific things are blacklisted. If somebody were to change it to the string and compile method, how would you predict what the string will look like?

You have no idea. There's no way to know unless you're from the future.

Deleted  :icon_cry2
"Now we are going to watch my boys do it" - Joopig

Allonsy

  • Relentless Teamkiller
  • **
  • Posts: 95
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #10 on: June 26, 2012, 11:51:50 pm »
So, in theory, using the public bypass in here, with the call compile function, would avoid BE detection and not give a ban, right?

FrankHorrigan

  • Relentless Teamkiller
  • **
  • Posts: 61
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #11 on: June 27, 2012, 02:05:34 am »
public bypass in here- no! It's public! When will you learn people anything that is public is a no go... make your own, that is the reason here that all the Pro's hate to share, the moment they share BE knows this and the method is burned...

EA123

  • Cheater Apprentice
  • *
  • Posts: 17
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #12 on: June 27, 2012, 02:42:40 am »
Is CE still a viable option for bypassing? I honestly have no clue on how to create a bypasser.

Allonsy

  • Relentless Teamkiller
  • **
  • Posts: 95
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #13 on: June 27, 2012, 04:10:04 am »
Is CE still a viable option for bypassing? I honestly have no clue on how to create a bypasser.

That makes 2 of us ROFL

serfma

  • Intentional Cheater
  • **
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Call Compile = Bypass auto-script detection?
« Reply #14 on: June 27, 2012, 04:14:01 am »
Hmm, could someone explain a bit more how this works? The Call Compile and all? :) Just trying to learn. ;)