3 ms·
I think I understand the theory. If I was a cracker though, I would think that patching out the system clock calls (in order to prevent DRM checks) would have a
by daenz 5y ago
I think I understand the theory. If I was a cracker though, I would think that patching out the system clock calls (in order to prevent DRM checks) would have a lot of game-breaking unintended side-effects (animations, other time-based mechanics, etc). And if that was the case, it would be a perfect place to trigger the DRM calls, since a cracker couldn't patch the system time calls without breaking the game.
tehbeard (another comment in this thread) makes a point that maybe not attaching the DRM calls to the clock makes it easier to hide them, since a cracker would probably be looking for a time-based trigger.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- dognotdog 5y agoA game’s animation and other in-game timing functions are very unlikely to be based on wall-time, instead typically relying on monotonic counters that are higher resolution, less overhead, and not potentially adjusted backwards or forwards while the game is running. Thus, disabling wall-time accesses for a crack should have little influence on game timing and animations.
- daenz 5y agoThat makes sense to use monotonic counters for game mechanics. I think the point still stands in that case though: if the DRM calls were tied to the same time source as the animation system, you couldn't patch one without breaking the other.
- robertlagrant 5y agoThat's assuming you couldn't selectively patch the calls, but yes, sounds as though it would be harder.