5 ms·

This is really the endgame of cheating and anti cheat wars. The anti cheat has to basically become root kits. I wonder if they will eventually offer a unprotect

This is really the endgame of cheating and anti cheat wars. The anti cheat has to basically become root kits. I wonder if they will eventually offer a unprotected server to people who refuse to install the root kits or not.

daneel_w 5y ago
It's interesting; their anti-cheat already is a root kit that runs as a ring-0 (or lower?) kernel module in Windows, yet they keep having to ban cheaters every month. But this goes beyond root kits. It's now apparently acceptable to operate arbitrary applications on users' PCs even when not playing the game. Utter spyware.
- fsdjkflsjfsoij 5y ago
  > yet they keep having to ban cheaters every month It's not perfect but the cheaters generally get banned fairly quickly and it's far better than the alternative. I've played tons of games of Valorant at Radiant (the highest rank) and it's extremely rare to even run into someone that I suspect is cheating. In comparison, I get extremely blatant cheaters in about 25% of my games of CS and far more than that in CoD: Warzone.
  - tentacleuno 5y ago
    > and it's far better than the alternative There is, of course, a substantial issue re: privacy with this approach. A ring-0 driver can essentially do everything the system can (it's running in kernel mode). It's a two-sided coin.
    - fsdjkflsjfsoij 5y ago
      Basically everything of interest on the average user's computer can be obtained without a ring-0 driver. Riot's incentive for the driver is extremely clear and it's not in their financial interest to abuse it.
      - daneel_w 5y ago
        Yes and no. In the case of e.g. Windows 10, without a kernel module, access depends on UAC specifics.
- jeroenhd 5y ago
  The very dedicated cheaters use special PCIe hardware to alter and monitor memory through DMA, there's always a step up. The only way to prevent cheaters is to control the hardware. With modern Xbox and PlayStation being basically a PC that you control with a controller, I can imagine a future where you buy special online gaming consoles that you control with mouse and keyboard to play competitive games. Even that can be foiled, of course, because hardware can be manipulated as well, but it's the furthest PC gaming will go. What I wonder about it why people put so much effort into cheating. I don't see how playing more than a few games with an aimbot is any fun. What are these people even getting out of it? Is it just having their name on a board somewhere?
  - mise_en_place 5y ago
    You don’t even need special hardware. The hacker will use a bootkit to load driver to read and write memory. Vanguard is trivial to bypass.
  - Strom 5y ago
    > What are these people even getting out of it? Is it just having their name on a board somewhere? Based on my observations (during 20k+ hours of playtime in multiplayer games), I don't think a leaderboard is even necessary. It often seems to be more about asserting dominance. Very simple and very primal. No deep thoughts, just imposing your will over others. It's satisfying. [1] -- [1] Of course there's a spectrum of reasons one might have to cheat. Some might be temporary cheaters who are just curious about the possibilities, others might be aiming for a specific prize in a contest. With the dominance angle I'm characterizing a certain kind of obsessive regular cheater.
  - jamesgeck0 5y ago
    Xbox and PlayStation games can already use keyboard and mouse. Not many developers make use of them. Partially because consoles aren't installed used at a desk, partially because the difference in precision between a controller and a mouse makes it difficult to balance competitive games.
indigochill 5y ago
> This is really the endgame of cheating and anti cheat wars. I'm of the opinion the eventual endgame is game streaming like Google Stadia (though I don't think Google Stadia itself is the final answer). Can't compromise a local client if there is no local client. > I wonder if they will eventually offer a unprotected server to people who refuse to install the root kits or not. Absolutely not, for one simple reason: that segment of their audience is insignificant to the bottom line.
- genocidicbunny 5y ago
  Camera pointed at screen with some image recognition and a bit of code to synthesize controller/kbm input. No need for compromising any sort of local client. Wouldn't be terribly hard to make a little rpi-based solution to sell. As long as there's money to be made, cheating will continue. In fact, making it harder to cheat in games can make it more lucrative to develop cheats for them.
  - eertami 5y ago
    > In fact, making it harder to cheat in games can make it more lucrative to develop cheats for them. Sure, but I don't see how that's a bad thing. More lucrative means higher prices means fewer cheaters can afford it.
- digitallyfree 5y ago
  There is still the possibility of computer vision based cheats, but a streamed game would pretty much make current cheats impossible. Even with a hardened OS specifically for running games (I think this has been proposed before) or a locked-down game console it is still possible, albeit difficult, for someone to exploit it.
  - justinlloyd 5y ago
    Have built computer vision based bots for Diablo III, World of Warcraft, Bookworm (make words from letters), a real-life Scrabble solver on a phone, a real-world jigsaw puzzle solver on a phone, various online poker games, a proctored online test and a match 3 game on an iphone. Computer vision cheating is surprisingly easy and just getting easier.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

daneel_w 5y ago

It's interesting; their anti-cheat already is a root kit that runs as a ring-0 (or lower?) kernel module in Windows, yet they keep having to ban cheaters every month. But this goes beyond root kits. It's now apparently acceptable to operate arbitrary applications on users' PCs even when not playing the game. Utter spyware.

fsdjkflsjfsoij 5y ago
> yet they keep having to ban cheaters every month It's not perfect but the cheaters generally get banned fairly quickly and it's far better than the alternative. I've played tons of games of Valorant at Radiant (the highest rank) and it's extremely rare to even run into someone that I suspect is cheating. In comparison, I get extremely blatant cheaters in about 25% of my games of CS and far more than that in CoD: Warzone.
- tentacleuno 5y ago
  > and it's far better than the alternative There is, of course, a substantial issue re: privacy with this approach. A ring-0 driver can essentially do everything the system can (it's running in kernel mode). It's a two-sided coin.
  - fsdjkflsjfsoij 5y ago
    Basically everything of interest on the average user's computer can be obtained without a ring-0 driver. Riot's incentive for the driver is extremely clear and it's not in their financial interest to abuse it.
    - daneel_w 5y ago
      Yes and no. In the case of e.g. Windows 10, without a kernel module, access depends on UAC specifics.
jeroenhd 5y ago
The very dedicated cheaters use special PCIe hardware to alter and monitor memory through DMA, there's always a step up. The only way to prevent cheaters is to control the hardware. With modern Xbox and PlayStation being basically a PC that you control with a controller, I can imagine a future where you buy special online gaming consoles that you control with mouse and keyboard to play competitive games. Even that can be foiled, of course, because hardware can be manipulated as well, but it's the furthest PC gaming will go. What I wonder about it why people put so much effort into cheating. I don't see how playing more than a few games with an aimbot is any fun. What are these people even getting out of it? Is it just having their name on a board somewhere?
- mise_en_place 5y ago
  You don’t even need special hardware. The hacker will use a bootkit to load driver to read and write memory. Vanguard is trivial to bypass.
- Strom 5y ago
  > What are these people even getting out of it? Is it just having their name on a board somewhere? Based on my observations (during 20k+ hours of playtime in multiplayer games), I don't think a leaderboard is even necessary. It often seems to be more about asserting dominance. Very simple and very primal. No deep thoughts, just imposing your will over others. It's satisfying. [1] -- [1] Of course there's a spectrum of reasons one might have to cheat. Some might be temporary cheaters who are just curious about the possibilities, others might be aiming for a specific prize in a contest. With the dominance angle I'm characterizing a certain kind of obsessive regular cheater.
- jamesgeck0 5y ago
  Xbox and PlayStation games can already use keyboard and mouse. Not many developers make use of them. Partially because consoles aren't installed used at a desk, partially because the difference in precision between a controller and a mouse makes it difficult to balance competitive games.

indigochill 5y ago

> This is really the endgame of cheating and anti cheat wars. I'm of the opinion the eventual endgame is game streaming like Google Stadia (though I don't think Google Stadia itself is the final answer). Can't compromise a local client if there is no local client. > I wonder if they will eventually offer a unprotected server to people who refuse to install the root kits or not. Absolutely not, for one simple reason: that segment of their audience is insignificant to the bottom line.

genocidicbunny 5y ago
Camera pointed at screen with some image recognition and a bit of code to synthesize controller/kbm input. No need for compromising any sort of local client. Wouldn't be terribly hard to make a little rpi-based solution to sell. As long as there's money to be made, cheating will continue. In fact, making it harder to cheat in games can make it more lucrative to develop cheats for them.
- eertami 5y ago
  > In fact, making it harder to cheat in games can make it more lucrative to develop cheats for them. Sure, but I don't see how that's a bad thing. More lucrative means higher prices means fewer cheaters can afford it.
digitallyfree 5y ago
There is still the possibility of computer vision based cheats, but a streamed game would pretty much make current cheats impossible. Even with a hardened OS specifically for running games (I think this has been proposed before) or a locked-down game console it is still possible, albeit difficult, for someone to exploit it.
- justinlloyd 5y ago
  Have built computer vision based bots for Diablo III, World of Warcraft, Bookworm (make words from letters), a real-life Scrabble solver on a phone, a real-world jigsaw puzzle solver on a phone, various online poker games, a proctored online test and a match 3 game on an iphone. Computer vision cheating is surprisingly easy and just getting easier.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]