For some reason I somewhat agree with Pete. ;o. In all fairness, I would like to see some kind of security measure, but I am completely against the idea of using a clientside program to search for background processes.

Well, ok, so I may have had childhood traumas with certain anti-hacking tools used in multiplayer games. Sure, it may not be anywhere near malicious as nProtect GameGuard, PunkBuster or The Warden, but I plain don't like the idea of a background process invading your (my) privacy, even if it's for the better good.

I don't claim to be an expert on security measures, but from my experience with dozens of online multiplayer games, anti-hacking tools can only go so far. These sneaky processes either totally invade your privacy or can be easily bypassed anyway, sometimes both. In fact, the only way to make a completely secure game would be to make everything server-side (aka. a telnet game).

Of course, I have also seen plenty of self-sufficient anti-hacking techniques in my day. In JJ2's context, this would translate to the server keeping track of what the player does (eg. adding 3 ammo to the player when collects one, or zeroing the ammo when he dies), which is prone to lag anyway.

To conclude, I do not approve of any of the counter-hacking measures I have ever experienced. Not to be a spoilsport, I think JJ2 could use one of its own, but I don't think it will benefit that much anyway. As it stands, the best solution would be some sort of OpenJazz2. There is just way too much lag in online JJ2 to be overly dependent on any anti-cheating measures.