this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2024
1445 points (98.5% liked)

Games

32384 readers
1069 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Now if only they could more clearly communicate when games are playable offline.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] corroded@lemmy.world 19 points 6 days ago (8 children)

Why is kernel-level anti-cheat even a thing?

If I was trying to prevent cheating, I'd hash the relevant game files, encrypt the values, and hard-code them into the executable. Then when the game is launched, calculated the hash of the existing files and compare to the saved values.

What is gained by running anti-cheat in kernel mode? I only play single-player games, so I assume I'm missing something.

[–] SkavarSharraddas@gehirneimer.de 15 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Modern cheats for multiplayer games don't modify local files (or attribute values in memory), since the server validates everything anyway. They're about giving you information that's available but not shown in the game (like see-through walls, or exact skill ranges), or manipulate input (dodge enemy damage, easy combos). Those cheat can run in kernel mode (or at least evade detection from user mode), so the anti-cheat needs kernel mode to be more effective.

[–] ysjet@lemmy.world 14 points 6 days ago

since the server validates everything anyway

Oh you sweet summer child.

The server doesn't validate shit, because that takes up CPU cycles on THEIR hardware, which costs them money. A huge part of kernel level anticheat is forcing YOU to pay the cost for anticheat, so they can squeeze a few more pennies out of it. And if your computer gets owned because they installed insecure, buggy malware on your system...? Well, they'll just deny. After all, it's kernel-level, how are YOU going to prove anything?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ampersandrew@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago

They can prevent you from running cheats that other anti-cheats can't detect. For instance, they could modify the value in memory so that your calculated hash always succeeds even when it's modified. This doesn't stop cheating though; it just means cheaters have to use cheat hardware that exists at a layer that even kernel anti-cheat can't detect.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

And then a game gets updated so the hashes don't match and uh oh, everything is fucked. Oh, but we can change the hashes of the files in the executable! Yeah, so can they. People modding shit into the executable is basically a given. Let alone the fact that you'd need to sit through a steam "validation of files" length of time every time you'd need to launch a game (because validation works exactly as you have described).

What is gained is that it has access to more information. Some cheats use an entirely different program / process that reads memory and outputs info that is available to the game but hidden from the player. Like a client needs to know where a person on the other team is to be able to draw their model. So you read that, you put a little box over where they are, and bang you have wallhacks.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] xep@fedia.io 10 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I do everything important like banking etc on a separate device that isn't my gaming PC. This has been quite liberating since I worry less about invasive anti-cheat, drm etc. I realize not everyone wants to do this but it's been a nice compromise.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›