3 ms·

I see. The problem is the server needs to know all of the values it expects. And if the server knows the values a cheat can figure them out too. For example, a

I see. The problem is the server needs to know all of the values it expects. And if the server knows the values a cheat can figure them out too. For example, a cheat could hook OS functions and report on values in certain memory regions (e.g . the games loaded .text as some cached values). Same with reading heap locations, hook the memory read functions. Computing a hash doesn't have to be emulated, though, right? A cheat can just compute it with whatever data /should/ be there for the game state. This also means the questions the server can ask of the client are ones it can somehow model. So, this is imposing potentially restrictive requirements on any server software if it needs a non trivial mapping of the client's memory. I have chased down a lot of really bizzare and non-deterministic packers and cheat software like this and ultimately you can only make things so difficult due to Rice's theorem. To truly detect cheating you would practically have to run all the computations my computer is running, at which point you might as well just stream the game to me instead of letting me install it and run it on my computer. These sort of "check for a known good state" things can almost always defeated by appropriate function hooking. Ultimately, my computer is a hostile environment for your game and I have complete control of it. The traps a client running can only be so elaborate. I do agree things like this will take some time and increase the skill required to take them apart, but you would be surprised at how much harder some CTF competition reversing problems are compared to a scheme like this, I think.

RussianCow 8y ago
I think what you are getting at is that it's impossible to 100% fully prevent cheating. This is true, but I don't think that's the goal; the goal is to make it difficult enough that it's not worth the effort. The value gained from cheating in a video game is low enough that the vast majority of people would not be willing to go through such lengths to do so.
- paulmd 8y ago
  The average user doesn't have to go to such lengths, they just subscribe to a cheat company that does. That's literally how it works today. Cheats are big business.
  - RussianCow 8y ago
    Okay, but my comment still stands: You don't need to make it impossible, just hard enough that it's not worth the effort. This applies whether we're talking about individuals or companies. As an aside, I don't know anything about the market for game cheats. Do people really pay a significant amount of money for that?
    - paulmd 8y ago
      People are diligent enough to crack Denuvo's wall-of-VMs approach for free, even though it takes 6-12 months of work to do it. How much effort do you think people will put into it when there's money on the line? People pay enough money for cheats that cheat makers have their own pretty intense DRM set up to make sure they get paid. You're probably looking at $10/month for something entry level, going up to $50 or $100/mo for something exclusive (that will take longer to get you banned).
- matheusmoreira 8y ago
  > The value gained from cheating in a video game is low enough Many people made serious money botting MMORPGs and selling gold. It's so prevalent it accelerates the inflation of the in-game currency. If people make it too difficult to hook into the client, cheat developers can always reverse engineer the network protocol and make their own custom client. This bypasses all client-side annoyances. They might even create a headless client that can be run on servers.

RussianCow 8y ago

I think what you are getting at is that it's impossible to 100% fully prevent cheating. This is true, but I don't think that's the goal; the goal is to make it difficult enough that it's not worth the effort. The value gained from cheating in a video game is low enough that the vast majority of people would not be willing to go through such lengths to do so.

paulmd 8y ago
The average user doesn't have to go to such lengths, they just subscribe to a cheat company that does. That's literally how it works today. Cheats are big business.
- RussianCow 8y ago
  Okay, but my comment still stands: You don't need to make it impossible, just hard enough that it's not worth the effort. This applies whether we're talking about individuals or companies. As an aside, I don't know anything about the market for game cheats. Do people really pay a significant amount of money for that?
  - paulmd 8y ago
    People are diligent enough to crack Denuvo's wall-of-VMs approach for free, even though it takes 6-12 months of work to do it. How much effort do you think people will put into it when there's money on the line? People pay enough money for cheats that cheat makers have their own pretty intense DRM set up to make sure they get paid. You're probably looking at $10/month for something entry level, going up to $50 or $100/mo for something exclusive (that will take longer to get you banned).
matheusmoreira 8y ago
> The value gained from cheating in a video game is low enough Many people made serious money botting MMORPGs and selling gold. It's so prevalent it accelerates the inflation of the in-game currency. If people make it too difficult to hook into the client, cheat developers can always reverse engineer the network protocol and make their own custom client. This bypasses all client-side annoyances. They might even create a headless client that can be run on servers.