4 ms·
I don’t see anything scary here. If a truly secure channel is required — and these are pretty rarely required for games — one might consider TLS instead, and si
by ovao 9y ago
I don’t see anything scary here. If a truly secure channel is required — and these are pretty rarely required for games — one might consider TLS instead, and simply accept the additional overhead.
Unless you’re sending executable and/or private content down the pipe, it’s rarely an issue for game networking stacks to eschew secure exchange entirely.
- gsich 9y agoRarely? I doubt that very much. If you don't encrypt game traffic, people will write packet analyzers that are undetectable by Anticheat, yet still provide some ESP to the cheater.
- ovao 9y agoIsn’t it accurate to say though that encryption is a component of — but not the only property of — secure exchange? Or am I misunderstood?
- blackflame7000 9y agoIn general, you are correct, with other components being the proper handling and usage of keys and disposal of pads, Although if a friend and I met up in a desolate place where he whispers me the secret, I'd argue the exchange was secure without encryption. So if you can exchange a message without anyone else knowing, encryption isn't necessary