4 ms·
Deobfuscation and Analysis of Ring-1.io
- direwolf20 8mo agoVideo game companies should lobby for a DMCA–style law against cheating.
- hollow-moe 8mo agoHow in the world can any sane person see how DMCA got off rails and suggest another one for any kind of purpose ???
- bayindirh 8mo agoNo. That's too soft. We should go one step further and make computers immutable appliances the moment any game is installed, or maybe out of the box. macOS, Windows and Linux has the technology. Why wait? Kill general purpose comp^H^H^H^H^ communism right now! Protect the children, save the capit^H^H^H^H nation!
- not_a9 8mo agoAlways a treat to see these people’s articles. Game hacking is wild - though in this case, wouldn’t enforcement of Secure Boot do the trick?
- mafriese 8mo agoFrom the conclusion > Importantly, this work also highlights the defensive implications of such techniques. While Secure Boot and firmware integrity mechanisms would prevent this attack chain when correctly enforced, the explicit requirement for users to disable Secure Boot demonstrates how social and usability tradeoffs continue to undermine otherwise effective platform defenses.
- Hikikomori 8mo agoValorant and Battlefield 6 does require secure boot and they do not sell their cheat for those games. Though there are still cheats available for those games, in particular using DMA hardware. You connect the DMA PCIe card to a laptop/pc with USB, then it can read any memory on the game PC and display a radar on the laptop screen. They even sell mouse and hdmi/dp mergers, these allow the laptop to show an ESP overlay over your game and aimbotting by sending mouse inputs.
- not_a9 8mo agoI am aware, but thank you. However, DMA seems to still be far from making your cheat invincible against anticheats.
- hrimfaxi 8mo agoI got a refund for battlefield 6 after finding out it requires secure boot (the error was not helpful in figuring that out though).
- arcfour 8mo agoThere are a number of Microsoft-signed drivers that have vulnerabilities in them that can be exploited allowing kernel-level access (memory read/write primitives, etc.) - they would load fine under Secure Boot - and, indeed, malware already has exploited this before. This does make cheating harder, and does make it a cat-and-mouse game where signatures are revoked and they move on to a new driver, but the fact of the matter is - there are a ton of drivers out there and some of them will always be vulnerable in some way. To this end, I think focusing on client-side anti-cheat at all is a lost cause.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- cancername 8mo agodidn't expect an analysis of a cheat from them, interesting technical bits though.
- kuschku 8mo ago> The client should be treated as untrusted. All the real classification logic belongs server-side where it can’t be tampered with. That's such a hilarious quote, as it explains exactly why client-side anti-cheat is silly in the first place.
- charcircuit 8mo agoIf PCs caught up to Mac in terms of hardware security you would be able to use remote attestation to be able to detect tampering.
- kuschku 8mo agoPlease read https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html as to why that's a horrible idea
- charcircuit 8mo agoI don't understand. Because someone wrote fiction about Linux and debuggers being somehow made illegal we should allow cheaters to ruin multiplayer gaming?
- arcfour 8mo agofTPMs and attestation/endorsement, Boot Guard, Secure Boot etc. have existed for years. They are just now beginning to be discussed/used for anti-cheat. I still think the ideal solution is server-side data analysis, however.
- charcircuit 8mo agoThe APIs and such exist but due being an open ecosystem, proper security that cheaters can't bypass will take a while to become standard since random OEMs will not care about security unless you force them.
- Hikikomori 8mo ago