Ask HN: What prevents Microsoft from adding a 'secure mode' to combat cheating? • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: What prevents Microsoft from adding a 'secure mode' to combat cheating?

#11

Post by beaconstudios » Thu, Nov 08, 2018, 2:07 PM UTC

rasz wrote: post #10

How about you rewrite your program instead? you should never ever trust the client. Validate output, dont send more data than necessary (player positions etc).

I never understood why this isn't the case already for competitive games. I'm not a game dev so I don't know if there are hidden complexities but for e.g. a game like CS:GO with a small number of moving parts, couldn't the server only send positions to a player if they are liable to be able to see the other person, in a manner similar to occlusion culling and spatial partitioning? That would at the very least prevent wallhacks beyond a short distance, and some level of validation on inputs would prevent speedhacks, spinbots etc. I'm guessing the limitation is on the amount of work the server would have to do?

Re: Ask HN: What prevents Microsoft from adding a 'secure mode' to combat cheating?

#12

Post by drivebyops » Fri, Nov 09, 2018, 1:13 AM UTC

beaconstudios wrote: post #11

rasz wrote: post #10

How about you rewrite your program instead? you should never ever trust the client. Validate output, dont send more data than necessary (player positions etc).

I never understood why this isn't the case already for competitive games. I'm not a game dev so I don't know if there are hidden complexities but for e.g. a game like CS:GO with a small number of moving parts, couldn't the server only send positions to a player if they are liable to be able to see the other person, in a manner similar to occlusion culling and spatial partitioning? That would at the very least prevent…

This already happens, spinbots and speedhacks aren’t a thing anymore.

The current hacks are aim triggers, aim lock, aim/spray assist, and some close proximity wallhack.

The cheats calculate the recoil spread and auto lock to enemy heads. It’s obviously not as a bad as before with client side bullets, but it is still a problem.

Re: Ask HN: What prevents Microsoft from adding a 'secure mode' to combat cheating?

#13

Post by beaconstudios » Fri, Nov 09, 2018, 12:49 PM UTC

drivebyops wrote: post #12

beaconstudios wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood why this isn't the case already for competitive games. I'm not a game dev so I don't know if there are hidden complexities but for e.g. a game like CS:GO with a small number of moving parts, couldn't the server only send positions to a player if they are liable to be able to see the other person, in a manner similar to occlusion culling and spatial partitioning? That would at the very least prevent…

This already happens, spinbots and speedhacks aren’t a thing anymore. The current hacks are aim triggers, aim lock, aim/spray assist, and some close proximity wallhack. The cheats calculate the recoil spread and auto lock to enemy heads. It’s obviously not as a bad as before with client side bullets, but it is still a problem.

is that a recent innovation? I haven't really played CS regularly for about a year, but before then when I'd overwatch I saw quite a few cases of blatant long-distance wall hacks - people looking directly at an opponent's head through a wall from spawn to spawn.

I'm not sure how you could feasibly prevent the remaining hacks server-side as they're nigh-indistinguishable from player skill, if the hacks supply some non-determinism/jitter so you're not instantly snapping to a player's head when they're behind you.