3 ms·

I completely understand your concerns, however I have a few points that might change your thoughts on this: - Almost all competitive games nowadays have a powe

I completely understand your concerns, however I have a few points that might change your thoughts on this: - Almost all competitive games nowadays have a powerful client side anticheat which is constantly monitoring processes on a kernel level to combat kernel cheats. They use a lot of the same functionalities that Echo does, such as protecting memory. What makes our trusted company different from another trusted company such as Epic Games and their "easy anti-cheat"? The only difference is we're doing these checks using a scanner interface, with absolutely no extra functionality which could be used maliciously by the staff member. When you install Valorant, using this logic, they are "essentially installing rootkits". But they're not rootkits, since it's authorized and an automatic process. - Once the 30 second scan has completed, there is absolutely nothing left on the computer whatsoever. Echo is a single binary, on launch it extracts the .sys kernel driver, creates a service. It then uses that kernel driver throughout the scan. Then on exit, it deletes the service, deletes the .sys and all that is left is the original binary you downloaded. It leaves absolutely nothing left behind, and it does this automatically. With client side anti-cheats which large game companies use, they often require it to be launched on start-up (it may say "you need to restart your computer before playing), this has even more malicious potential. - Everything has malicious potential as soon as you click "Yes" on the UAC menu, trust in the companies is a huge huge part of keeping yourself safe. What if Facebook shares all your personal data randomly? They won't. What if Valorant starts doing malicious stuff with their kernel capabilities? They won't, and neither will we. A computer forensic analysis of memory to look for cheats after they've been deleted is not as effective as a client side anti-cheat would be, however for Minecraft it's much easier because it's difficult to make cheats for it without leaving traces behind. But, it's the same level as risk being asked to use a client side anti-cheat to play on a server than being asked to scan with Echo if the server side anti-cheats show indications.

swiley 5y ago
>Almost all competitive games nowadays have a powerful client side anticheat which is constantly monitoring processes on a kernel level to combat kernel cheats. That's totally ok if the anticheat admins are providing a computer to run the software on and not attacking one the player owns. Again "almost everyone else does it" doesn't make it ok, I don't know why people keep repeating that. >absolutely nothing left on the computer That's nice that it doesn't leave a mess, copying tons of data out of the machine from ring0 probably exposes people to a lot of liability though, that whole thing sounds like a terrible idea but it's still better than the status quo so props to you for clearing that bar. >- Everything has malicious potential as soon as you click "Yes" Yes. That's my point. >What if Facebook shares all your personal data randomly? They won't. Well, it's not random, usually you have to pay for it except on some pretty bad days. That's a great example of why I would universally reject something like this though. You pretty much can never trust someone handing you closed blobs. I'm honestly pretty shocked anyone tolerates this, it sounds pretty similar to random cavity searches when you leave wallmart. Maybe because I'm not a "kid" anymore I wouldn't know what the social scene looks like.
- Josheyr 5y ago
  > That's totally ok if the anticheat admins are providing a computer to run the software on and not attacking one the player owns. Again "almost everyone else does it" doesn't make it ok, I don't know why people keep repeating that. What do you mean by this? You realize almost every competitive ranked game right now has a kernel driver constantly running and monitoring in the background while you play right? Anti-cheats serve a purpose to detect cheats, just like an anti-virus serves a purpose to detect viruses. You seem oblivious to the fact that there is no extra security risk from a client sided scan versus (like with Echo) having a client side anti cheat running while you play (like every game). What point are you trying to make? You keep saying it's a terrible idea but haven't said what's wrong with it... It doesn't copy tons of data out the machine through ring0 and it doesn't expose anyone to anything whatsoever, its almost all on machine and the same goes for most anti-cheats.
- Josheyr 5y ago
  >Yes. That's my point. I agree with your point, even chrome has the power to destroy your PC if they really wanted to (??).

swiley 5y ago

>Almost all competitive games nowadays have a powerful client side anticheat which is constantly monitoring processes on a kernel level to combat kernel cheats. That's totally ok if the anticheat admins are providing a computer to run the software on and not attacking one the player owns. Again "almost everyone else does it" doesn't make it ok, I don't know why people keep repeating that. >absolutely nothing left on the computer That's nice that it doesn't leave a mess, copying tons of data out of the machine from ring0 probably exposes people to a lot of liability though, that whole thing sounds like a terrible idea but it's still better than the status quo so props to you for clearing that bar. >- Everything has malicious potential as soon as you click "Yes" Yes. That's my point. >What if Facebook shares all your personal data randomly? They won't. Well, it's not random, usually you have to pay for it except on some pretty bad days. That's a great example of why I would universally reject something like this though. You pretty much can never trust someone handing you closed blobs. I'm honestly pretty shocked anyone tolerates this, it sounds pretty similar to random cavity searches when you leave wallmart. Maybe because I'm not a "kid" anymore I wouldn't know what the social scene looks like.

Josheyr 5y ago
> That's totally ok if the anticheat admins are providing a computer to run the software on and not attacking one the player owns. Again "almost everyone else does it" doesn't make it ok, I don't know why people keep repeating that. What do you mean by this? You realize almost every competitive ranked game right now has a kernel driver constantly running and monitoring in the background while you play right? Anti-cheats serve a purpose to detect cheats, just like an anti-virus serves a purpose to detect viruses. You seem oblivious to the fact that there is no extra security risk from a client sided scan versus (like with Echo) having a client side anti cheat running while you play (like every game). What point are you trying to make? You keep saying it's a terrible idea but haven't said what's wrong with it... It doesn't copy tons of data out the machine through ring0 and it doesn't expose anyone to anything whatsoever, its almost all on machine and the same goes for most anti-cheats.
Josheyr 5y ago
>Yes. That's my point. I agree with your point, even chrome has the power to destroy your PC if they really wanted to (??).