[BUG] the party is just getting started.

[businessdeveloper69]

we've been wrong about this.

here's what i found: it's NOT about multi-account. It's about datacenter/cloud IP detection.

i saw users saying that they've been banned for using one single acc, i got to thinking that if their req weren't routed and no smart distribution was used and ideally they've not bypassed using accs why are they getting banned?

what google's multi layer security system has is ip detection, google is not detecting multiple acc from same ip, its detecting multiple reqs from an ip that is NOT your home. you see, Websites can identify through IP database that this is a Datacenter IP, not a real user's home network. Many websites will reject Datacenter IP requests.

we need a Residential proxy system, still researching on this

[businessdeveloper69]

right now google is seeing the api calls from its cloud datacenter and assuming its a bot, our current traffic is direct, we need to reroute it to one same ip for one single acc(this is imp), and those req should match the cloud api
even im confused a bit and this is still a theory...

wait, i found a flaw in this, still cant be detected, something is wrong

[businessdeveloper69]

// The proxy identifies itself like this:
headers: {
'User-Agent': 'antigravity/1.16.5 linux/x64',
'X-Goog-Api-Client': 'google-cloud-sdk vscode_cloudshelleditor/0.1',
'Client-Metadata': {
ideType: 6, // ← Google KNOWS this is Antigravity proxy
platform: ...,
pluginType: ...
}
}

what google sees is: "This is NOT the official Antigravity app. This is someone using a third-party proxy tool. BAN."

Header Spoofing (What Changes)
javascript
// You MODIFY the proxy code to send DIFFERENT headers:

// OAuth stays SAME (still using their shared client - this is the weakness)
const OAUTH_CONFIG = {
clientId: 'antigravity-shared-client-id.apps.googleusercontent.com', // UNCHANGED
clientSecret: 'shared-secret-xyz...'
};

// Headers CHANGE (pretend to be something else)
const headers = {
'User-Agent': 'Mozilla/5.0... Chrome/123.0.0.0', // ← Pretend to be browser
'Client-Metadata': { ideType: 1 } // ← Pretend to be official web app
};

// Result:
Your account → OAuth with SAME shared client → But headers say "I'm official app"

[businessdeveloper69]

Here are the critical fingerprinting signals that expose this as a third-party proxy:
OAUTH IMPLEMENTATION (oauth.js lines 69-90)
Custom OAuth callback port (51121) - Real IDE uses integrated auth
PKCE state validation - Appears legitimate but timing correlation between auth and requests reveals proxy

Deterministic session IDs: Hashed from message content (SHA256, first 32 chars) - Real IDE generates random UUIDs
No message correlation: Sessions can be replayed/predicted knowing the user message

STREAMING PATTERNS (streaming-handler.js, message-handler.js)
Both use identical retry logic with hardcoded backoff tiers
Timing fingerprint: MAX_RETRIES=5, SWITCH_ACCOUNT_DELAY_MS=5000, FIRST_RETRY_DELAY_MS=1000 - Consistent across requests
Account cycling pattern is algorithmically detectable (round-robin vs. sticky selection)

KEEPALIVE ANOMALY (session-keepalive.js - CRITICAL)
Background API calls every 5±60 seconds (line 172)
Calls only 2 actions: fetchAvailableModels (weight 3), loadCodeAssist (weight 2) - Predictable pattern
Non-streaming requests to Antigravity endpoints with Client-Metadata headers
EXPOSES MULTI-ACCOUNT SETUP: Pings all enabled accounts concurrently (lines 258-277) - Real IDE has 1 account

IP CORRELATION (server.js)
Single IP per proxy instance - Hundreds of requests from same IP with no IDE session switching
API Key validation (lines 94-123) - Real IDE uses OAuth tokens
No per-user IP rotation

TO DO:
Analyze all detection vectors in outgoing requests to Google Cloud Code API
Create src/utils/fingerprint.js — Request fingerprint randomization module
Randomize User-Agent version strings within realistic range (10 recent versions)
Vary X-Goog-Api-Client identifiers (3 realistic patterns)
Vary request ID prefixes (4 patterns: agent-, chat-, req-, empty)
Vary request types (agent, chat, completion)
Per-instance consistency (like a real IDE session would)
Reset capability for fingerprint rotation
Update src/constants.js — Dynamic ANTIGRAVITY_HEADERS and getAntigravityHeaders()
User-Agent version randomized per proxy startup
X-Goog-Api-Client varied per instance
Backward compatible (static constant still works)
Update src/cloudcode/request-builder.js — Use randomized fingerprints
requestType varied per instance
requestId prefix varied per instance

@badrisnarayanan this is based of an older version but can you review this

[mochadwi]

so basically, this ways we can safely use antigravity account right? since the openclaw stuff, I rarely use antigravity, as most of the coding task I delegated it to the openclaw server, it will be so sad if i cannot use antigravity "models". I only have 1 account to use

[mumernisar]

lol... bro is not taking the day off @businessdeveloper69 ... idk what hes talkin about... but hes definitely onto something!... I was just about to try this & then saw the big warning message so i came here :D

[businessdeveloper69]

some more reasons they can detect or may add in future : upstream can see which OAuth client_id minted/refreshes tokens and how. If your flow uses a different OAuth client than the official IDE, that’s an extremely strong signal. In this repo, there’s an embedded OAuth client config (see src/constants.js), which is a potential provenance giveaway.

Refresh patterns: non-human refresh cadence, too-frequent refreshes, refreshes from many IPs, refresh bursts across many accounts.
Behavioral usage: 24/7 usage, high concurrency, uniform prompt sizes, identical timing patterns, tool-call patterns—providers don’t need headers to detect automation-like rhythms.
Missing/invalid device attestation: if the official client uses any form of device binding/attestation internally, pure HTTP replay can look “not from the real client” even with perfect TLS/JA3.

[madebyshaurya]

Looks like some commits are being made, should I test? Lmk, I am ready to take one for the team to test (I have google ultra acc)

[aryansharma1305]

Looks like some commits are being made, should I test? Lmk, I am ready to take one for the team to test (I have google ultra acc)

i am also waiting for the same so that i can start working upon my projects for the same

[mochadwi]

Looks like some commits are being made, should I test? Lmk, I am ready to take one for the team to test (I have google ultra acc)

I don't think new commits address this yet :( @madebyshaurya

[businessdeveloper69]

Looks like some commits are being made, should I test? Lmk, I am ready to take one for the team to test (I have google ultra acc)

how? u pay 20k per month??

[ychampion]

Update: Set max usage per account to 40%. This ensures 5 hour rate limit refreshes and lesser quota exhaustion, use more pro accounts but don't hit 100% quota (abuse)

[madebyshaurya]

Looks like some commits are being made, should I test? Lmk, I am ready to take one for the team to test (I have google ultra acc)

how? u pay 20k per month??

20k? I have google ultra family acc.

[mochadwi]

Update: Set max usage per account to 40%. This ensures 5 hour rate limit refreshes and lesser quota exhaustion, use more pro accounts but don't hit 100% quota (abuse)

how to apply this changes? @ychampion