this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2024
290 points (98.7% liked)

PC Gaming

8568 readers
1165 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] renegadespork@lemmy.blahaj.zone 191 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That kernel level anti-cheat is really working out well, eh?

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 41 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Kernel level isn’t about stopping cheaters, it’s about gaining system access

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 14 points 6 days ago

Naw, it's about pretending to stop cheaters. It's security theatre, same as the TSA

[–] maccentric@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] kopasz7@lemmy.world 25 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Any mention of data collection in the ToS?

[–] Sas@beehaw.org 6 points 6 days ago

And about putting a buzzword on your game that makes people think they're safe from cheaters

[–] GetOffMyLan@programming.dev 3 points 6 days ago (2 children)
[–] SomethingBurger@jlai.lu 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

It has system access yet doesn't prevent cheating.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Their source comes from it giving system access and that is what they want.

[–] GetOffMyLan@programming.dev 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Why would they want that? Are there any cases of it being abused?

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Yeah why would any mega conglomerate corporate entity want the most valuable and easy to harvest resource on earth

[–] GetOffMyLan@programming.dev 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Computer usage statistics? Score!

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Of course, no unfathomably demonic corporate entity would ever choose to track users and target them like that, to for instance sell products with zero repressions due to a lobbying hate group bribing lawyers to make it legal

[–] GetOffMyLan@programming.dev 1 points 4 days ago

Would be completely illegal in countries with gdpr. I'm a programmer and can tell you every company takes that super seriously.

You have to agree to be tracked. Most people just do it without thinking.

[–] CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml 132 points 1 week ago (15 children)

Honestly, not even mad. Sucks for the victims, but we need hackers poking holes in kernel anticheats. Show the game companies that kernel anticheat is a waste of effort and maybe this horrific plague of gaming will die off.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 45 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Another option is for gamers to quit buying this softslop

[–] JakJak98@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

It's inevitable. You can't make progress without several steps back.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] GammaGames@beehaw.org 73 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Vizor explained that Ricochet uses a list of hardcoded strings of text to detect cheaters and that they then exploited this to ban innocent players by simply sending one of these strings via an in-game whisper. To test the exploit the day they found it, they sent an in-game message containing one of these strings to themselves and promptly got banned.

Vizor elaborates, "I realized that Ricochet anti-cheat was likely scanning players’ devices for strings to determine who was a cheater or not. This is fairly normal to do but scanning this much memory space with just an ASCII string and banning off of that is extremely prone to false positives."

This is insane, they had an automatic script to connect to games and ban random people on loop so they could do it while away

[–] renegadespork@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 1 week ago (1 children)

a list of hardcoded strings

Violating a core programming tenet right off the bat. I wonder how much money Activision payed for this software...

[–] ramjambamalam@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 week ago

We and the hacker have no idea if this list is config driven or truly "hard coded" i.e. a const in the source code. It's hardly an indicator of violating a core programming tenet.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 63 points 6 days ago

So, simply receiving "aim bot" as a whisper (private) message was enough to get permabanned. FUCKING JEE-NIUS ANTICHEAT, GREAT JOB, GUYS!!!

[–] blindbunny@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 17 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Shitting your pants is punk, too.

All the punkest punks shit their pants.

[–] misterdoctor@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

If hacking call of duty is cool, consider me miles davis

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I thought that was the gas station hotdog.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 14 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Is stopping cheaters in most video games even possible?

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (3 children)

It requires the server to verify all inputs. It's doable, path of exile does that and most arpgs. But it leaves them very open to lag and desync issues, most games will prioritize a smooth experience.

Cod is peer to peer I think, clients host the server, very cheap for the company. But obviously you need to give the client a lot more information.

[–] upandatom@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago

I doubt COD is peer to peer anymore. Maybe like 10 years ago. No way they are giving up that much control over the game

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 12 points 6 days ago (1 children)

When I was at my peak effectiveness in Urban Terror, I could hold my own against them...

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 18 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Heh. GTA V used to be fun even when a cheater would show up and because you could just use a rocket launcher on them to keep them ragdolled forever so they couldn't use their cheat menu (or any menu). They'd have to alt-F4 to quit since being ragdolled closes any open menus.

[–] TheDorkfromYork@lemm.ee 5 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Yes, but not through standard methods. Even AI aimbot can be filtered, but the amount of RND required is likely to much for a single studio to bear alone. I believe we are more likely to see neural network trained bots largly replacing real players using an off the shielf model. Just a guess, not an expert.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

There is already a solution using relatively simple analytics and building a profile of the player. It becomes very easy to find cheaters because it is easy to analyze how fast and directionally they aim. It is obvious when someone is using macros for instance or a aimbot.

The problem is this does not require intrusive programs that are essentially spyware for your OS. This is what attracts the big studios to these solutions not their effectiveness.

There is a workable solution but let's be honest. Cheaters are often whales and spend a lot of time and money on the game. It is bad engagement to send them away.

Big studios already recognize this. So to be blunt they allow a certain amount of cheating because they don't want to really solve the problem.

[–] TheDorkfromYork@lemm.ee 3 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I was speaking to the long term, 5-10 year in.the future. Analytics is a current solution and as far as I know works well. I was just talking vaguely about long term problems and solutions.

[–] CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago (3 children)

I think the best thing I’ve heard for long term solutions is to fix a lot of the cheating using server side solutions. In a game like CoD, that means the server doesn’t send you player positions unless you absolutely need to know them.

The other thing honestly is just increasing the investment required to cheat. That could mean that in order to play competitive game modes, you need to have signed in at least once for 4 weeks straight and played the game. Or you need to be a certain level. Issue hardware bans and IP bans to people. Require phone number verification.

What those things do as barriers is actually increase the potency of current detection methods. This should also carry over to accounts. I’m not sure why steams VAC ban system isn’t more popular. As in accounts need to be flagged as a whole when cheating in just one game is found.

There are many solutions but it’s just not a big deal for companies as the prior person said. Plenty could be done to at least make cheating harder and cost more time/money. But that won’t happen

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I’m not sure why steams VAC ban system isn’t more popular. As in accounts need to be flagged as a whole when cheating in just one game is found.

Presumably because this opens players to significantly damaging abuse from server operators. Players aren't the only ones who fuck around.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

I think you were spot on about training a neural network with player data. It is already happening without a doubt.

[–] Defaced@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

But you know, according to EA Linux is worse than guys like this deliberately causing disruptions in service to legit players.

load more comments
view more: next ›