Right, now get it “generally doable” on a device with phone level specs and universality (plus a three cent cable) and watch online competitive gaming crash to the point where there’s genuinely no rational argument for installing spyware.
Comment on Kernel Anti-Cheat Is an Overreach
Dremor@lemmy.world 19 hours agoThat’s actually what hardware cheaters do (no need for the LLM part). They got a second computer, reading the screen, and a “MITM” device between the controller and the computer running the game to auto-aim.
No level of kernel anticheat can beat that.
pory@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
Dremor@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
They are talking about securing the inputs by basically adding tls beween the two of them, in order to make mitm a lot harder. A little bit more input lag, probably, but at least it will help defend agains prisoned USB devices.
thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 18 hours ago
Right, but it was never claimed to be. Running hardware cheats is extremely costly, compared to simple software cheats. I don’t have the numbers, but we can assume that most cheats are software cheats. And if we could at least (on paper, I know they don’t and never will) eliminate those its already a huge win. No anti cheat will or is even about to block all cheats and cheaters. Its only about to have less of them to a degree of integrity of fun for most players.
It’s a similar calculation the developers and publisher make to block piracy as much as they can, knowing that they won’t block everyone. And I want to stress that I am not in favor of anticheats with the ability to operate on Kernel level rights. Absolutely not! I don’t understand why people downvote all my replies there, by just stating that companies have reasons from their perspective why they use it. Sorry for my little rant. :D
bountygiver@lemmy.ml 7 hours ago
ya there’s a video about someone making a valorant cheat that just reads the pixels around the crosshair and knows when to shoot when you cross any enemy outline, to the computer it’s just a USB display output + mouse