Project Smash Script — - Auto Farm- Inf Cash More

Until then, the scripters will keep farming. And the cash counters will keep climbing. Have you used a Project Smash script? Or are you on the anti-cheat side? Drop your thoughts below.

On the surface, it’s just another exploit scene. But dig deeper, and Project Smash has become a fascinating case study in modern Roblox scripting—where game design, anti-cheat cat-and-mouse, and player impatience collide. Project Smash Script - Auto Farm- Inf Cash More

That repetitive loop is the perfect breeding ground for automation scripts. Until then, the scripters will keep farming

If you’ve spent any time in the Project Smash Roblox community, you’ve seen the ads. Discord servers promising “Undetectable Auto Farm,” YouTube videos with flashing thumbnails for “INF CASH,” and script hubs claiming to give you everything for zero effort. Or are you on the anti-cheat side

(Note: This post is for educational and discussion purposes only. Automating Roblox games violates their Terms of Service.)

What’s more interesting is what the Project Smash scripting scene reveals: players will always optimize the fun out of a game if the core loop is pure repetition. The real fix isn’t a better anti-cheat—it’s game design that respects the player’s time.

Comments from our Members

  1. This article is a work in progress and will continue to receive ongoing updates and improvements. It’s essentially a collection of notes being assembled. I hope it’s useful to those interested in getting the most out of pfSense.

    pfSense has been pure joy learning and configuring for the for past 2 months. It’s protecting all my Linux stuff, and FreeBSD is a close neighbor to Linux.

    I plan on comparing OPNsense next. Stay tuned!

    Update: June 13th 2025

    Diagnostics > Packet Capture

    I kept running into a problem where the NordVPN app on my phone refused to connect whenever I was on VLAN 1, the main Wi-Fi SSID/network. Auto-connect spun forever, and a manual tap on Connect did the same.

    Rather than guess which rule was guilty or missing, I turned to Diagnostics > Packet Capture in pfSense.

    1 — Set up a focused capture

    pfSense_Diagnostics_Packet-Capture
    pfSense_Diagnostics_Packet-Capture1400×1226 141 KB

    Set the following:

    • Interface: VLAN 1’s parent (ix1.1 in my case)
    • Host IP: 192.168.1.105 (my iPhone’s IP address)
    • Click Start and immediately attempted to connect to NordVPN on my phone.

    2 — Stop after 5-10 seconds
    That short window is enough to grab the initial handshake. Hit Stop and view or download the capture.

    3 — Spot the blocked flow
    Opening the file in Wireshark or in this case just scrolling through the plain-text dump showed repeats like:

    192.168.1.105 → xx.xx.xx.xx  UDP 51820
192.168.1.105 → xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx UDP 51820

    UDP 51820 is NordLynx/WireGuard’s default port. Every packet was leaving, none were returning. A clear sign the firewall was dropping them.

    4 — Create an allow rule
    On VLAN 1 I added one outbound pass rule:

    image

    Action:  Pass
Protocol:  UDP
Source:   VLAN1
Destination port:  51820

    The moment the rule went live, NordVPN connected instantly.

    Packet Capture is often treated as a heavy-weight troubleshooting tool, but it’s perfect for quick wins like this: isolate one device, capture a short burst, and let the traffic itself tell you which port or host is being blocked.

    Update: June 15th 2025

    Keeping Suricata lean on a lightly-used secondary WAN

    When you bind Suricata to a WAN that only has one or two forwarded ports, loading the full rule corpus is overkill. All unsolicited traffic is already dropped by pfSense’s default WAN policy (and pfBlockerNG also does a sweep at the IP layer), so Suricata’s job is simply to watch the flows you intentionally allow.

    That means you enable only the categories that can realistically match those ports, and nothing else.

    Here’s what that looks like on my backup interface (WAN2):

    pfsense_suricata_minimal_WAN2_rules
    pfsense_suricata_minimal_WAN2_rules2561×3035 511 KB

    The ticked boxes in the screenshot boil down to two small groups:

    • Core decoder / app-layer helpers – app-layer-events, decoder-events, http-events, http2-events, and stream-events. These Suricata needs to parse HTTP/S traffic cleanly.
    • Targeted ET-Open intel –
      emerging-botcc.portgrouped, emerging-botcc, emerging-current_events,
      emerging-exploit, emerging-exploit_kit, emerging-info, emerging-ja3,
      emerging-malware, emerging-misc, emerging-threatview_CS_c2,
      emerging-web_server, and emerging-web_specific_apps.

    Everything else—mail, VoIP, SCADA, games, shell-code heuristics, and the heavier protocol families, stays unchecked.

    The result is a ruleset that compiles in seconds, uses a fraction of the RAM, and only fires when something interesting reaches the ports I’ve purposefully exposed (but restricted by alias list of IPs).

    That’s this keeps the fail-over WAN monitoring useful without drowning in alerts or wasting CPU by overlapping with pfSense default blocks.

    Update: June 18th 2025

    I added a new pfSense package called Status Traffic Totals:

    pfSense_Status_Traffic_Totals
    pfSense_Status_Traffic_Totals1400×1259 93.3 KB

    Update: October 7th 2025

    Upgraded to pfSense 2.8.1:

    image
    image667×909 68.9 KB

  3. I did not notice that addition, thanks for sharing!



Top ↑