this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2024
193 points (97.5% liked)

Asklemmy

43940 readers
377 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.one 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They do do a lot of verification on the server side. Since unreal introduced their server-side-lagged-approval networking model, all local movement and most shooting can be retracted by the server.

But what a ring 0 level driver is looking for is other software, like aimbots, modified assets (transparent walls, custom shaders etc) etc. To be able to detect all that it needs to be level 0.

What I would trust more is if Microsoft acquired one of these companies and worked across the industry to root cheating out. Giving some random company ring 0 access feels completely off to me.

[–] Zangoose@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Couldn't aimbots be picked up as odd movement and be detectable on a server though? Kind of similar to how those "not a robot" checks can tell if a human is clicking on the box just by looking at the movements of the cursor.

In addition, things like textures and game-modifications could be picked up in part by things like checksum verification to make sure the client is unmodified (assuming the files are modified on the disk and not in memory)

I feel like most client-side changes like see-through walls or player highlighting make themselves pretty obvious when aggregated over multiple games. A good user-reporting system could probably catch most of these.

I definitely agree though, allowing multiple random companies to install ring 0 rootkits should not be the norm. Honestly, even a Windows-level anticheat would be problematic because it would only worsen the monopoly Microsoft has on competitive games as a platform. A new solution would need to be cross-platform or else it would only be marginally better than what already exists.

[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.one 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Aimbots dont need to do a lot to provide advantage at the highest level. Moving “perfect aim” from 1x1 pixel to 3x3 pixels, but with 33% probability would provide a huge advantage and be undetectable.

Modified assets cannot be verified unless you lock the system down, like an Xbox. On a PC? No way. You can combat it by sitting in ring 0 (which is what anti cheat software does) but you couldn’t just check some checksums.

In terms of aggregating data and spotting something like see-through walls, there isn’t the statistical method to discern between great intution built over years of playing the same map and having see through assets.

I used to work in AAA game development, across most of low level (graphics, networking, memory, assets etc) so unfortunately I know this problem is nigh on impossible to solve unless you have a locked platform.