I think you are spot on: statistical player profiling + controlled environment testing is the good and potentially permanent solution to this problem. In my vi

I think you are spot on: statistical player profiling + controlled environment testing is the good and potentially permanent solution to this problem. In my vision every game creates a model of your behavior/capabilities (server-side). For example, in a fps game it could consider your reaction times, overshoot distance on quick movements, look-around frequency, movement patterns, etc.. When you reach certain level you must certify yourself. That is, you must go to an actual physical location and play in a controlled environment. If your behavior there matches your model you get certified for that level of play and can keep going. If you don't... you get banned. Of course the model would track your progress and ask/force you to re-certify as you keep improving/reach the limits of your current certification. Would this eliminate all cheats? Probably not. However, since you can't play outside of the standard deviation of your controlled-environment capabilities, I would argue that it doesn't matter anymore. To a honest player a cheater would look like "a player having a good day" (which is something that happens and you need to deal with anyway) instead of looking like "a player with superhuman capabilities". The problem with this approach is how to build such controlled-environment certification centers and procedures. This is a big task, but also a big opportunity. It is not that much different from examination centers that already exist in the learning/certification industry. Furthermore, since gaming is such a huge market (and growing) and certification centers don't need to be tied to specific games (they can be a service that games hire and people pay for) the whole ordeal seems doable. So doable in fact that I could see myself investing in a startup having this goal.