LEAVU development phase, coding MPCD graphics

[Moa]

It is possible to get the location of a loaded class (I knew it must be possible since the JVM classloader is designed with security in mind, another reason I like Java).

 

URL url = MFD.class.getProtectionDomain().getCodeSource().getLocation();

 

Once you have the URL you can compute a digest and send it to the server.

 

The classloader also verifies signed and sealed JARS when loading.

 

Someone would have to be pretty determined to go through all the hassle to defeat this, and still only end up with the same information about their own aircraft as if they'd written a local LUA script.

[GGTharos]

It's okay if a helper app which must run locally is required - the idea is that if you run LEAVU2 on your laptop, it is a trusted version of LEAVU, and the LUA is able to verify it (nevermind the mechanism used by LUA, that'll be another thing altogether - it can be a call to small java helper app).

[Moa]

It's okay if a helper app which must run locally is required - the idea is that if you run LEAVU2 on your laptop, it is a trusted version of LEAVU, and the LUA is able to verify it (nevermind the mechanism used by LUA, that'll be another thing altogether - it can be a call to small java helper app).

 

Just because the 'helper' was written in Java and uses JAVA APIs doesn't mean that the SUN JVM is required. The Java can be compiled to native using GNU GCJ to produce a native executable (can even statically link libraries to reduce the chance of tampering or deployment problems, eg. the niceness that is the monolithic Putty SSH program).

[GGTharos]

I don't think that will be required, but works for me. :)

[3Sqn_TomAce]

I've been discussing some form of validation/handshake approach, GG suggested

some ideas but we found flaws in them all.

 

The issue is how does the Game server tell the datalink, datalink server or leavu

that it is allowed or not allowed? Automatically?

 

I cannot think of anything...

 

The setup looks like this :

 

A user installable client that adjusts export.lua file name/folder name/ or replaces the file every xx seconds with blank copy, the client handshakes with the server when Lomac loads otherwise a kick command is initiated on the server using tools already built by Yoda/others. This wouldn't be 100% but would be a start.

 

I'm sure we have talented I.T. people in the community who can Help Yoda and GG make this mod even better by coming up with a solution to this key issue better then I can so flow with the knowledge pilots please.

[Grimes]

 

You don't seem to grasp the fact that this gives people the chance to view things others can't and will never see, comparisons to HOTAS and TIR are moot as they are alternate forms of input/output. Your tool opens things up to the chosen few.

 

I've been catching up on this topic, and I understand many of the pros and cons arguments regarding it. I'm not going to lie, I like mods. I like them when they change gameplay, and I like them when they are total conversion, I even like it when someone comes up with a creative way to enhance the gameplay experience.

 

Take ATC. Its 3rd party, server hosts have to download it and run it. But nothing is stopping them from running it and not telling anyone but their BFFs. That would be labeled a cheat by most here, but it wouldn't be obvious what exactly they are doing, now would it? It gives the pilots an information advantage yes, but they still need to capitalize on it with their own skills, decisions, and inputs.

 

But could one argue that what LEAVU appears to be is an alternate to what VOIP and accidental teamwork provides. In case you are wonder accidental teamwork is an instance that exists in most multiplayer games, it occurs when a teammate performs an action with no communication or prior intent to help another teammate in some immense way. Its usually an instance of timing, luck, or just blindly killing the first bad guy you see. The reason I bring this up is I think its something that occurs much more often when data link is present. If you watch a tacview of a match of 10 vs 10, all lonewolves are playing, one team has EWR providing datalink with the Russian birds, the other doesn't have a EWR with the same aircraft selection. (Also note they don't play like most idiots do) Even if the team with EWR doesn't say a word over chat, they will be much more combat effective at fighting than the other team would be.

 

But do I understand the mod correctly that the vanilla version benefits 1 aircraft, for only the users with it installed, and it only adds in Datalinking information that is similar to EWR with Russian a/c except the datalink is shared ONLY between F-15s on a side rather than a single radar station?

[Groove]

I strongly encourage some of you to debate in a adult manner on this topic!

 

I don't want to see no more personal insults and cheat accusations! Either you can behave and debate the pros and cons or i will help you to behave...

[A.S]

. I have a Java program that can read TacView data in real time ('encrypted' or not) and project on a Google Map for my points scoring system.

 

This "problem" i have been preaching long time ago - thx for coming out in public, noone else confirmed it yet, even knowing about it .

That is one reason why we do not allow lua-export in TCL TEAM vs TEAM BVR matches...or/and generally.

 

I am currently trying to read all the posts here, trying to "find" an idea how to make this great work of Yoda (which it is somehow) workable in secure ways and type in same time.

 

The problems i currently see are those:

 

Yes LEAVU can only see what your system does, but i have no gurantee that it cant be modified easily to "see more" I dont know in how far this could be limited server sided.

 

The next bigger problem i see is the fact, that it is not a built-in game feature, meaning not part of the core.

It is like going to DARPA (in this case lockonfiles prolly) and asking for an upgrade for the systems in fear the "enemies" might have bought that upgrade too. And DARPA replies..."oh sorry, but we do still work for the russian version, there was not need for us to develope it yet".

 

I do appreciate the work of all modders and application programers, oh yes i do. This is crucial drive in communities, especially sims.

But there is undenyable a huge question about consequences.

Today it could be "in background running app nr1", tomorrow you have App2 running in background...etc etc...all 3rd party EXTERNAL tools not meant to be part of the sim. Black Market armoring!!

 

Im also aware that not every indepentend work made by various people can be instantly implemented in the game itself, even though DCS also might appreciate the work of external projects.

Therefore the only solution is the ability to block all those things ingame already.

But even then you have the problem that Wingman 1 shares files over net running a tool with Wingman 2 independent of server settings.

Sever Lua OFF, but mr. X and mr. Y have datalink or internet info link.

 

Not everyone, who is flying lockon has mates or is part of Squadrons. Who are they supposed to share "datas" with inflight?

 

Regretfull i have to say thereforer, that this application is a huge risk as it was for the "real-time TAcview issue" ,

not because it would be a huge advantage to see in your radar what is painted by your wingmen only

- like it is in Falcon and good Pilots would still know how to give right calls and make right decissions without having the wingman´s "dots" on their own radar - but the risk,

 

• that this tool is easily to modify for more data readout.
  
• that is can be used over net independent from server settings as a common secret second background network
  
• that it is not official part of the game and therefore not for use for all pilots. It is not a global feature.
  
• it is a program written to have more advantage then those who prefer to fly 2.0 blank
  

..makes me sorry to say, but under those conditions it is pure blank hardcore cheating !!

Edited December 4, 2009 by A.S

[Case]

As CyBerkut noted before, the issue of whether or not Yoda should continue with LEAVU is a moot point, as the code and the idea is out there and people can take advantage over it. It would not matter if Yoda were to keep parts of the code closed or were to remove functionality, because that could be added by someone else.

 

The only real solution to this problem is having ED implement some sort of server based flag that allows or disallows clients to the server to use the exported OWNSHIP data. Only if this is disallowed can anyone be certain that players are not sharing information between each other in an automated fashion.

 

It would be great if the flag could even have multiple options, where you could set it to export no OWNSHIP data at all, all OWNSHIP data, or OWNSHIP data but without the targets seen on the radar. The latter would allow LEAVU users to use the datalink to relay their own positions between each other.

[A.S]

Correct, it makes no sense to develope LEAVU and later on another application what secures the flaws and avoids missusage.

 

Only way is having the server enforcing the clients to have exports off or limited. No other way around. The game-core itself must ensure security right on.

 

People should more focus on flying rather then tweaking....me slowly starts to think.

Edited December 4, 2009 by A.S

[159th_Viper]

I think Viper may have been referring to what limitations your software sets to this. Or at least that is what I am interested in.

 

Indeed!

 

Here we have a Mod that is attempting to Model/Implement In-Game a function that was to date 'lacking' in the SIM. It is therefore Imperative that one is well-versed with the Operational Parameters of the subject you are intending to Model to ensure an Accurate In-Game representation of the system, no?

 

I mean - I would assume that the Datalink has limitations, be it Technical, Atmospheric.....Hell, I admit I have not a clue and as such must rely solely on the Authors for said Validation. It is however Imperative that whatever Limitations/Technical Foibles the RL-Counterpart suffers from, the Virtual system must Replicate - Stands to Reason, surely. The Absence of said Info to date is admittedly a wee bit worrisome.

 

Be that as it may, and casting no Aspersions on the work of the Authors to Date, lets contemplate the following Scenario with the following Quote in Mind -

 

Improved flight performance for player-controlled aircraft

 

Having due regard to Service Ceiling and Rate of Climb for the Eagle, SU and Mig respectively we all know that the Eagle outperforms the latter comprehensively and would in all probability be represented as such In-Game with the advent of LockOn 2.0 (Goodness knows there have been enough moaning about the performance of the Eagle to date already :P)

 

You are now left with a Group of Virtual Eagle Pilots (LEAVU-enabled) that upon Mission-Start scramble a Four-Ship and Zoom to Angels 50 or as high as they can operate, which we can all assume is Higher and Faster than their Counterparts......Call them the Sentinels if you wish. They are perched on high looking down, Virtually Untouchable by virtue of the Inherent Flight Characteristics of the Eagle, with LEAVU granting them and their Entire Flight with a Gods-Eye view of the Entire Theater of Operations.

 

Below and Cloaked in the Guise of 'Stealthiness' by virtue of NEVER having to utilize their Radar are the rest of the Eagle Flight, receiving the LEAVU information from the Sentinels high above and Prosecuting Targets with Impunity - Call them the Reapers.

 

To Compound the scenario, you have the Sentinels on Station and Near Untouchable transmitting Data to all Linked Players irrespective of their position in Theatre and Relevant Status by virtue of a Secondary Monitor.

 

Granted - In all probability a Sentiment borne from my Mind Only. It is however a Scenario Catastrophic to contemplate! And that from a Fighter's perspective. Imagine the Vunerability of the Bomber-Boys in an AA/AG Server.......

 

 

Again - No disrespect intended at all to the Authors concerned. A lot of Respect for the Ingenuity, Perseverance and Talent that has been brought to Bear. Am just worried that Subjective Belief will Cloud the Very Real Objective Considerations that have to be dealt with prior to any type of Implementation In-Game.

[A.S]

Hehe, good read/typing :smartass:

[Groove]

This debate shows us something very interesting. It shows us what lies ahead of us with any upcoming DCS Fighter Modules.

 

There is no fairness in the real life world of fighters. I eager to see the debate in a hypothetical scenario where people start whining why Fighter "A" is so much better in BVR than Fighter "B", and how unfair it is while flying online...

[Kuky]

Look, with all due respect Yoda, what you are doing is admirable, no doubt... you are creating something that is lacking in the game and should be part of the F-15 ability... I have no problems with Eagle being what it is and doing it can...

 

But, I do see 2 very large negatives because of it:

 

One is that unless you (and by you I don't mean you personally, but anyone who decides to do same or similar for other aircraft) do the same for other aircraft and bring them to same level of ability of their real life counterparts you are creating a very large and unrealistic imbalance... from this perspective you are not really helping achieve your goal, you are doing it only half way... because if say only 2 of you go against 2-3 MiG's you can take them out easy because in every way (realistic and non realistic) the Eagle is in advantage. It will have advantage of realistic aspect (better missile, range, altitude etc) but non realistic aspect (the strenght of the enemy is not gonna be anywhere near of its real counterpart). Alright I think I have messed up my thoughts here but I hope you know what I mean.

 

Second thing is let's say someone else started working on same thing for the MiG-29 and one day (but who knows when) they create datalink for it.... there are now two options... if they create something that real life counterpart does not have they are creating an unrealstic tool and they start cheating... if anyone finds out about it we're gonna end up in same cheating accusations and we'll be back at 1.12 disapointment... they might end up telling others about what they have done or they might not... you will not know if they don't.

 

So in short, you get unrealstic advantage and opened door to cheats or more unrealstic mods and tools... honestly I don't know which one is worse...

 

And finally one good thing that might happen is with this datalink available it might enable little more team work from those single pilots... but then again I am not so sure about this because looking at how people fly with existing EWR datalink, they still fly like singletons only they are more deadly because they can sneak up on unsuspected enemy.

 

So, I really do see a strong need for control of such ability (of what you're making) and it really should be secure and readily available and mentioned on every server it's used... it would be unfair to have it used for for your own flight only because this way you would be excluding others from this. Maybe channels for radio freq like in DCS would solve this.

 

Lastly, unless russian aircraft get brought up to their propper abilities (and please don't talk how weak they are giving bad status of export variants that didn't even have any upgrades for years) the game will be unballanced, but not for the gaming balance sake, rather for real life aircraft balance, or should I say their relative streanghts.

 

1. This software has to be made secure and server should be able to enable or disable it.. unless it becomes part of the game

2. Russian counterparts need to be brought to same level of ability of their real life counterparts

[Groove]

Maybe we should start a poll which should try to clarify if people interested in:

 

A) Realistic A2A MP.

 

B) Balanced A2A MP.

 

Personally im all for A...

[Kuky]

I am for A also because even with more advanced aircraft there are still ways to defeat it... GCI with EWR and numbers ;)

[Grimes]

Realism is simulated. Balance is achieved through the mission creation, players in game and the aircraft they choose to fly.

[159th_Viper]

This debate shows us something very interesting. It shows us what lies ahead of us with any upcoming DCS Fighter Modules....

 

With one Major Difference. I assume that any subsequent Systems-Implemenatation to Fighter Modules would be to the Game Code and as such above reproach/unable to be modded/tweaked by 3rd Party Software, no?

 

 

.....There is no fairness in the real life world of fighters. I eager to see the debate in a hypothetical scenario where people start whining why Fighter "A" is so much better in BVR than Fighter "B", and how unfair it is while flying online...

 

Provided that Players have the Assurance from ED that the said Fighters are Modelled Properly with the requisite Highest Degree of Fidelity and accords in all Relevant Specifications with their RL Counterparts.....If this is Indeed the case......then all 'Whining' will quickly be quelled. We are after all Mature Adults willing to accept the Realities. It is when things do not accord that 'Whining' becomes justified :)

 

Sure, there will be complaints - 'Tis the Nature of things....One would however see that the Natural Order of Balance will prevail in that Servers will Cater for Like.

[EtherealN]

2. Russian counterparts need to be brought to same level of ability of their real life counterparts

 

As Yoda has stated several times there is nothing stopping this. Indeed it is what he wants this application to do. The issue is that he, as a hobbyist, cannot do all of it at the same time. But since it is open source anyone with a bit of coding skill can do it.

 

Of course it would be nice if there was a way to be sure of whether people are using the application or not - if nothing else then to know what you are up against. But I really cannot understand the sentiment shown by some that this shouldn't be done in the first case. They want an application to get a more realistic depiction of aircraft capabilities when they fly, and that's well within their rights.

[Kuky]

I really cannot understand the sentiment shown by some that this shouldn't be done in the first case. They want an application to get a more realistic depiction of aircraft capabilities when they fly, and that's well within their rights.

 

The sentiment (including me) that this thing should not be released as is, is because Yoda has said it cannot be controled by the server, it wont be part of the sim and anyone can use it and code what they like...

[Groove]

Viper, do you really think the discussion would be another if something similar to LEAVU would be implemented into Fighter A because it's avaiable in the real jet and Fighter B would lack such a feature. Im quite sure the discussion will be very similar.

[RvEYoda]

But do I understand the mod correctly that the vanilla version benefits 1 aircraft, for only the users with it installed, and it only adds in Datalinking information that is similar to EWR with Russian a/c except the datalink is shared ONLY between F-15s on a side rather than a single radar station?

 

Neg Grimes. LEAVU is nto a mod for a specific aircraft.

LEAVU is a software to develop external avionics panels, like touch buddy.

 

I started by making instruments for F-15, more specifically something MFD-like.

Althrough it is designed primarily for F-15 ( and possible A-10 ), you could

(at this point at least) still use it for any AC, although it would look quite strange.

[Kuky]

What about TWS and ability to simultaniously engage 2 contacts with R-77 on MiG-29S, is this gonna be part of MiG-29S ability, or are we gonna hear from people how this doesn't exist and doesn't matter what flight manuals say they know better?

Edited December 4, 2009 by Kuky

[EtherealN]

But if the server is limited in such a way that only the information that the aircraft itself detects can be exported the doomsday scenario you see isn't all that likely. From what I have understood it won't be possible to tweak it in such a way that it'll automatically and always show all enemy positions unless the server is set up in such a manner that this would be possible through tacview-style apps anyhow.

 

This isn't god-mode and it is my understanding that the server can be set up such that you cannot gain omniscience through this application.

[RvEYoda]

Yes, LEAVU can only export what you see in your cockpit.

This information is shared with other people over the Datalink Server.

 

The Datalink server is a separate software that has nothing to do with lockon

or anything else, could be used as a chat server if you wanted to :P