this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2024
39 points (100.0% liked)
games
20441 readers
389 users here now
Tabletop, DnD, board games, and minecraft. Also Animal Crossing.
-
3rd International Volunteer Brigade (Hexbear gaming discord)
Rules
- No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, or transphobia. Don't care if it's ironic don't post comments or content like that here.
- Mark spoilers
- No bad mouthing sonic games here :no-copyright:
- No gamers allowed :soviet-huff:
- No squabbling or petty arguments here. Remember to disengage and respect others choice to do so when an argument gets too much
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Even under the best circumstances where the ring0 anti-cheat developer is not malicious - which I'm absolutely not convinced is always true, mind you - they can be exploited by bad actors to take control of your system via privilege escalation. This isn't even just a hypothetical, it's already happened with basically all that are commonly in use - EAC, GameGuard, BattlEye, XignCode3 all come to mind. It's just bad opsec to run games that use them. You could be doing everything else right with securing your machines and network, and it won't matter. It's leaving the back door open.
I don't think it would be possible tbh. You are correct in that security through obscurity is the only way these client-side solutions work. There are some amateurish open source anti-cheat frameworks but with the source available everything is easily disabled or bypassed. The only true solution to cheating that isn't invasive is implementing robust server side checking and active human (or hell, even AI could be used for this...) monitoring of anomalous player activity.