Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How anti-cheats catch cheaters using memory heuristics

vmcall.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 148 posts

Re: How anti-cheats catch cheaters using memory heuristics

#111

Post by saagarjha »

willis936 wrote: post #95
jessaustin wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The golden rule doesn't apply, because none of the cheaters would complain that there are also other cheaters cheating.

The golden rule always applies. There are not exceptions in criminal law for people who want specific crimes committed against them (ie sexual assault). To further argue the point: if all players were cheating then there would be no competitive advantage to cheating, which eliminates the only reason a subset of players cheat in the first place. Even by skewed standards it violates the golden rule.

> There are not exceptions in criminal law for people who want specific crimes committed against them (ie sexual assault).

Uh, what?

Re: How anti-cheats catch cheaters using memory heuristics

#113

Post by lmilcin »

mnowicki wrote: post #110
lmilcin wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are making mistake by trying to explain somebody elses motives for cheating by using your value system. First, these are not great lengths when all you need to do is download and install an application. Second, some people don't get as much kick from playing a game as from dominating other players. They want to win the game in any way possible, but don't consider winning fairly to be any more satisfying than winn…

I think that's only one subset of cheaters, many people use cheats in non-pvp games or use cheats in a specific server where everyone has the same cheats. It's often just a way to get more replayability out of a game someone really enjoys. In monster hunter, the speedrunning community is migrating to PC because the ability to use cheats to negate the huge amount of RNG present in the game. Cheating is usually looked…

I think the topic of the article is cheaters that compete with other players. Anti-cheats are not really necessary for games where the only person being cheated is the cheater.

I also excluded professional players because the original poster was basically trying to get an answer regarding what kind of person would cheat when there was no extra incentive. Obviously, professional players or players in any games that offer valuable prizes have a real incentive to cheat.

Re: How anti-cheats catch cheaters using memory heuristics

#114

Post by mnowicki »

jerf wrote: post #67
papreclip wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People make cheats for money, for online infamy, and for the challenge of it People use cheats because it makes the game more enjoyable. In FPS, someone can shoot you before you have time to react. In RTS, someone can step out of the darkness with an army that traps yours at just the right moment. Cheats replace those unpleasant experiences with pleasant ones where you ambush the enemy and fight them with an advantag…

"People make cheats for money, for online infamy , and for the challenge of it" In all seriousness, I think there's a non-trivial aspect to it where human psychology is misfiring in the modern era. Certain people, mostly younger, have a drive to show off to potential mates, some more so than others, and superficially, spending lots of time creating cheats like this looks like it's leading to social approval and stand…

I think it's more about the validation received from other peoples giving the cheat-maker an ego boost, which is real to them regardless of whether the people using their cheats are truly giving them any meaningful credit.

That aside, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by social credit, but in some communities the creators of hacks and cheats(at least the people making fun, constructive cheats - not aimbots and the like) are highly esteemed. They are regarded somewhere alongside competitive players/speedrunners but in a more shadowy background roll(which many people may find cooler/more valuable). They also tend to have universal support among the community rather than being on one team or the other like, for example, tournament players.

This is all true in the communities I've witnessed at least, I don't play many esport type games though.

Re: How anti-cheats catch cheaters using memory heuristics

#115

Post by strbean »

lmilcin wrote: post #113
mnowicki wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's only one subset of cheaters, many people use cheats in non-pvp games or use cheats in a specific server where everyone has the same cheats. It's often just a way to get more replayability out of a game someone really enjoys. In monster hunter, the speedrunning community is migrating to PC because the ability to use cheats to negate the huge amount of RNG present in the game. Cheating is usually looked…

I think the topic of the article is cheaters that compete with other players. Anti-cheats are not really necessary for games where the only person being cheated is the cheater. I also excluded professional players because the original poster was basically trying to get an answer regarding what kind of person would cheat when there was no extra incentive. Obviously, professional players or players in any games that of…

Anti-cheat is still a major issue on multiplayer games that are not PVP-centric, like MMOs. In these cases, the negative externalities of cheating are more like a tragedy of commons than griefing. Cheaters and bots screw up the economy and increase competition for training / farming areas, but generally only in aggregate. Much easier to justify than directly ruining someones experience by killing them instantly every time they spawn.

Re: How anti-cheats catch cheaters using memory heuristics

#116

Post by strbean »

jtaft wrote: post #81
ARandomerDude wrote: post #2

Serious question for you gamers out there: Why would a person go to such great lengths to cheat at a video game? Is there a monetary incentive? Otherwise, it seems like a lot of effort just to increase one's standing on a leader board.

I did it to learn about computers and security. It's a form of sport too. Feels good to bend the rules and outsmart your opponent. (Opponent as in security controls, not in-game players). You get a rush when your hack works, and using it in a highly interactive environment makes it all the more fun. From a high level view, you learn: * Fundamentals of computer security * Fundamentals of computers, operating systems,…

In the case of many games (mostly shallow MMOs), it is so much more fun to reverse engineer and break the game than it is to actually play the game.

Re: How anti-cheats catch cheaters using memory heuristics

#117

Post by mnowicki »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #69
ARandomerDude wrote: post #2

Serious question for you gamers out there: Why would a person go to such great lengths to cheat at a video game? Is there a monetary incentive? Otherwise, it seems like a lot of effort just to increase one's standing on a leader board.

Sometimes the game's just too boring and making a bot for it is actually much more fun. I had this experience with some mobile games and their little daily tasks. I realized they were trying to instill a daily login habit in me so I wrote a small client that'd log in and do the tasks. I turned their predatory design into a fun little project. Ironically, due to the way the game was designed the behavior of the bot is…

I feel like there's an important message somewhere in this post

Re: How anti-cheats catch cheaters using memory heuristics

#118

Post by mnowicki »

willis936 wrote: post #56
ianleeclark wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Contemporary society hasn’t morphed in the past 30 years to make the only apparent reasonable escape be multiplayer video games. I don't think that video games need to be the only form of escapism for my argument to hold true. It's a form of escapism that people are taking a part in to avoid the whatever boogeymen exist in the day-to-day. So, while individuals could find themselves in different forms of escapism--d…

I have no argument with that. My issue is with the justification of cheating in video games because of some thing perceived as owed to some players and not others.

I don't think he means it's a valid justification, just a rationalization that is sometimes used, whether valid or not

Re: How anti-cheats catch cheaters using memory heuristics

#119

Post by sevenf0ur »

mnowicki wrote: post #112

How hard would it be to just copy and modify the packets being sent to the anti-cheat servers? Are they sent directly to the anti-cheat server or do they go back to the game server first and then get forwarded from there?

That's the first thing hackers try. The packets are almost certainly encrypted and checksum'ed in a way where tampering is immediately obvious. You end up at the same place - having to modify/hook into the game internals to bypass the anti-cheat.

Re: How anti-cheats catch cheaters using memory heuristics

#120

Post by MarioMan »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #87
withinboredom wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some just want to enjoy the story-telling and skip the bs.

There should be a distinction between single player and multiplayer games. I've absolutely used cheat-engine in single player games. If it was up to me, entering the Konami code would unlock everything in every single player game. Everyone has the right to access content they've purchased in the way and order they see fit. But when you're playing with other people there's really no excuse.

As an interesting counterpoint, consider the Masterpieces (game trials) included in Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Each of these trials contain the full game, but they are all time limited. Cheat codes can be used to disable these time limits. Is it reasonable to claim that owning Brawl gives you the right to access these games in full as well? The answer, at least to me, is not straightforward.
Post reply on HN