Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Moderators: Site Moderators, FAHC Science Team

codysluder
Posts: 1024
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 12:43 pm

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by codysluder »

Nathan_P wrote:The mod's will already have a fair idea as to who punchy is referring to :eo
What does it matter whether they know or don't know. A Mod's job is to Moderate the discussion when it gets out of hand. They don't manage the assignment servers nor do they set the policies, the assignment requirements or the priorities for any project. Everybody probably has a personal opinion about what they consider cheating, including the Mods, but they can't really do anything more than what punchy is doing, calling attention to what he believes is an important issue for the Pande Group to consider changing.
ChelseaOilman
Posts: 1037
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 3:47 pm
Location: Colorado @ 10,000 feet

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by ChelseaOilman »

codysluder wrote:What does it matter whether they know or don't know. A Mod's job is to Moderate the discussion when it gets out of hand. They don't manage the assignment servers nor do they set the policies, the assignment requirements or the priorities for any project. Everybody probably has a personal opinion about what they consider cheating, including the Mods, but they can't really do anything more than what punchy is doing, calling attention to what he believes is an important issue for the Pande Group to consider changing.
Exactly
Punchy
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 1:49 am

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by Punchy »

In my original post, I should have said "nearly 100%" and "nearly 0%" in the first paragraph. If I understand the assignment server weightings correctly (quite possibly I don't), systems with 16 cores or more should get 9% 6901/3/4 or smaller SMP, and 91% 8101.
ChasR wrote:Since memory failed and observation wasn't properly carried out regarding this issue, I reinstalled the temporary drive I was running FAH on and read the log. I installed FAH on July 4th and downloaded a p6903,and subsequently p6901, then got a string of 5 p8101s before removing FAH on July 16.
The p8101 streak started with assignments on July 7-8, so your sample shows 100% p8101 in that time.

I have found quite a few users with 100% p8101 in that period, and a handful with very few p8101s in the same period. p8101s are pretty easy to differentiate from p6903/4 in EOC stats - p8101s typically appear in the 220K-320K point range while the others give 500K-700K credit. For users with fewer systems running, between the credits and the gaps between the credits, you can figure out what they are processing.
KMac
Posts: 31
Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:50 pm

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by KMac »

Adjusting the BIOS of any dual hexacore Intel based motherboard to disable hyper-threading will result in a 12 core machine that reports properly to the AS. It is then eligible for, assigned, and receives P6901-6904 among other BA SMP projects.
This simple modification reduces operating temps while folding in summer heat at a cost of approx 12% production; IMHO that is a much better option than shutting down due to heat. Is a single change in BIOS now considered cheating?
7im
Posts: 10179
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:30 pm
Hardware configuration: Intel i7-4770K @ 4.5 GHz, 16 GB DDR3-2133 Corsair Vengence (black/red), EVGA GTX 760 @ 1200 MHz, on an Asus Maximus VI Hero MB (black/red), in a blacked out Antec P280 Tower, with a Xigmatek Night Hawk (black) HSF, Seasonic 760w Platinum (black case, sleeves, wires), 4 SilenX 120mm Case fans with silicon fan gaskets and silicon mounts (all black), a 512GB Samsung SSD (black), and a 2TB Black Western Digital HD (silver/black).
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by 7im »

At 12% reduction? Is that originally in the 220K-320K point range or the 500K-700K range?
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
patonb
Posts: 348
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:42 am
Hardware configuration: WooHoo= SR-2 -- L5639 @ ?? -- Evga 560ti FPB -- 12Gig Corsair XMS3 -- Corsair 1050hx -- Blackhawk Ultra

Foldie = @3.2Ghz -- Noctua NH-U12 -- BFG GTX 260-216 -- 6Gig OCZ Gold -- x58a-ud3r -- 6Gig OCZ Gold -- hx520

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by patonb »

Being an intel, It's only bout 120-180K
WooHoo = L5639 @ 3.3Ghz Evga SR-2 6x2gb Corsair XMS3 CM 212+ Corsair 1050hx Blackhawk Ultra EVGA 560ti

Foldie = i7 950@ 4.0Ghz x58a-ud3r 216-216 @ 850/2000 3x2gb OCZ Gold NH-u12 Heatsink Corsair hx520 Antec 900
Punchy
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 1:49 am

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by Punchy »

7im wrote:At 12% reduction? Is that originally in the 220K-320K point range or the 500K-700K range?
I would guess he's referring to 12% production reduction in the 6901/3/4 series, because he wouldn't get assigned the p8101s with HT off and would be very close to the edge on completing them before the deadline with HT off anyway. So, that would be the ~500K (on a 2P Intel) credit WUs.
Punchy
Posts: 125
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2010 1:49 am

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by Punchy »

KMac wrote:Adjusting the BIOS of any dual hexacore Intel based motherboard to disable hyper-threading will result in a 12 core machine that reports properly to the AS. It is then eligible for, assigned, and receives P6901-6904 among other BA SMP projects.
This simple modification reduces operating temps while folding in summer heat at a cost of approx 12% production; IMHO that is a much better option than shutting down due to heat. Is a single change in BIOS now considered cheating?
I wouldn't think so. In that case, you're processing with WU with the configuration you told the AS that you had.
Now, if one were to disable HT, download the WU, then re-enable HT to process the WU, IMO that would be cheating.
DoctorsSon
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 5:04 pm

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by DoctorsSon »

I have no dog in this fight, but it reminds me of a quote:

"Improvise, Adapt, Overcome"
-Gunnery Sgt. Tom Highway

I also don't see how it can be cheating when I don't see a list of rules anywhere.
Macaholic
Site Moderator
Posts: 811
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:57 pm
Location: 1 Infinite Loop

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by Macaholic »

DoctorsSon wrote:...I don't see a list of rules anywhere.
A Best Practices FAQ is posted. :)
Fold! It does a body good!™
DoctorsSon
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 5:04 pm

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by DoctorsSon »

Macaholic wrote:
DoctorsSon wrote:...I don't see a list of rules anywhere.
A Best Practices FAQ is posted. :)
Since it wasn't labeled "Rules" I never bothered to read that and I am sure many others haven't either.
Jesse_V
Site Moderator
Posts: 2850
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:44 am
Hardware configuration: OS: Windows 10, Kubuntu 19.04
CPU: i7-6700k
GPU: GTX 970, GTX 1080 TI
RAM: 24 GB DDR4
Location: Western Washington

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by Jesse_V »

DoctorsSon wrote:
Macaholic wrote:
DoctorsSon wrote:...I don't see a list of rules anywhere.
A Best Practices FAQ is posted. :)
Since it wasn't labeled "Rules" I never bothered to read that and I am sure many others haven't either.
Maybe, but at least to me, "Rules" has a negative connotation about it. "Best Practices" seems a better phrasing IMO. Most people shouldn't have a need to check the "legality" of their F@h actions anyway, but its good to read anyway.
F@h is now the top computing platform on the planet and nothing unites people like a dedicated fight against a common enemy. This virus affects all of us. Lets end it together.
Meh_Lay_Lay
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 4:38 pm

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by Meh_Lay_Lay »

6.Donors should not intentionally stop/pause the FAH Client to manipulate the completion time or wuresult upload time of work units.

i pause all the time:/
DoctorsSon
Posts: 56
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 5:04 pm

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by DoctorsSon »

Jesse_V wrote:
DoctorsSon wrote: Since it wasn't labeled "Rules" I never bothered to read that and I am sure many others haven't either.
Maybe, but at least to me, "Rules" has a negative connotation about it. "Best Practices" seems a better phrasing IMO. Most people shouldn't have a need to check the "legality" of their F@h actions anyway, but its good to read anyway.
I agree.
But just like many tweak their system for maximum folding some are bound to tweak the client for maximum ppd.

I just run V7 as it installed itself and tweak the hardware side.
I'm having a good day when my main folding comp hits 30k.
All the other smaller systems add to the daily total though, so I'm happy enough til I convince myself to loosen the wallet for 4P.
7im
Posts: 10179
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:30 pm
Hardware configuration: Intel i7-4770K @ 4.5 GHz, 16 GB DDR3-2133 Corsair Vengence (black/red), EVGA GTX 760 @ 1200 MHz, on an Asus Maximus VI Hero MB (black/red), in a blacked out Antec P280 Tower, with a Xigmatek Night Hawk (black) HSF, Seasonic 760w Platinum (black case, sleeves, wires), 4 SilenX 120mm Case fans with silicon fan gaskets and silicon mounts (all black), a 512GB Samsung SSD (black), and a 2TB Black Western Digital HD (silver/black).
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Re: Detecting and defeating assignment server cheaters

Post by 7im »

Here is the Folding@home rules and policies statement.
How to provide enough information to get helpful support
Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.
Post Reply