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

Thank You, Valve

kinduff.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 458 posts

Re: Thank You, Valve

#161

Post by txdv »

Rooster61 wrote: post #28

I dig most of this article, and I do applaud the work Valve is doing for the Linux gaming ecosystem, but I draw a line at supporting kernel level anti-cheat drivers. That trend in gaming bothers me to no end, and I refuse to knowingly install a game that features one. The presence of 15 year old script kiddies using aimbots does NOT IN ANY WAY justify having kernel level control over my machine, Linux or otherwise. V…

With all the machine learning we have, game makers could train models to spot hackers. The hacking patterns were obvious even during counter strike 1.6 days. Maybe they got more subtle?

I don't play a lot of FPS, but In Dota2 I see a bunch of hackers where the replay literally shows you how they do not even react with their mouse to a threat that appears suddenly but still manage to cast a spell somehow. I don't even think that machine learning is needed to detect that kind of hack.

Re: Thank You, Valve

#162

Post by [deleted] »

busterarm wrote: post #82
dagw wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I played competitive video games seriously I would absolutely want them to take cheating seriously and take any necessary measure to stop it. At the same time I think they should also make the most serious kernel/driver level anti-cheat software optional. If you don't to want to install it you can still play the game, just not on any of the 'pro' servers. Think of it a bit like doping tests in sports. As long as y…

The serious cheats in competitive games these days don't rely on hacking the game anymore. They use a separate computer connected taking your HDMI out as an input and then controls your mouse and keyboard inputs. They use ML models and OpenCV. You watch the second computer's monitor and it draws huge boxes around things you shoot and it assists your aim. It doesn't even have to be a PC game, you can do the same with…

[deleted]

Re: Thank You, Valve

#163

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

yepthatsreality wrote: post #127
JamesMcMinn wrote: post #58

I am very excited by the Steam Deck and have paid for my place in the queue (hopefully some time this year). I am a long time desktop Linux user, however I also game and have either had to dual boot, or more recently, game inside a Windows VM because of DRM and unsupported games. The biggest issue I can can see with the Steam Deck, or more specifically, Linux on the Steam Deck, is Microsoft's Game Pass. It simply wil…

First people complain that no one will use Linux because theirs no hardware. Then they complain they can’t use Linux because of the software support. We now have both and now people won’t use Linux because Microsoft acquired studio’s games will only run on Windows? That moving goal post doesn’t look good for the Switch or PlayStation platforms then.

I mean, there are a lot of reasons not to use Linux still, just because Valve solved a few of them doesn't make any of the others illegitimate. I mean, christ, the desktop user experience is still pretty goddamned terrible, and the only reason I'm personally considering switching in the near future is that Microsoft is working hard to make Windows even worse.

Re: Thank You, Valve

#164

Post by dagw »

charcircuit wrote: post #150
oauea wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never trust the client. Trying to install a rootkit on your users' computers won't change the reality of client-server security.

We have to trust the client to an extent. How can a server tell if a player clicked their mouse or if a triggerbot did?

The officially approved mouse timestamps and signs the click using a hardware embedded cryptographic key (only slightly joking).

Re: Thank You, Valve

#165

Post by jowsie »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #135
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average cheater is most certainly not investing in thousands of dollars of hardware to run intense AI models on a second high power machine. These are mostly theoretical hacks. The average cheater is paying $10-50 for cheat software. You may not like the anti-cheat software, but it works against the most common cheats. I think they could have an opt-out league that doesn’t require anti-cheat but remains separate.…

You don't need thousands of dollars of hardware. You need one (1) Raspberry Pi 4, plus an HDMI capture card and a Raspberry Pi Zero to act as fake mouse/keyboard. You can totally do that for $50. (Probably less if you use an Arduino clone instead of a Raspberry Pi Zero.) Heuristic software works against the most common cheats. Standard anti-piracy tricks work against the most common cheats. Kernel-level anticheat is…

You're still talking about a bunch of work and effort. The people aimbotting in CSGO aren't doing it because they love hard work and a challenge.

Re: Thank You, Valve

#166

Post by azemetre »

alexb_ wrote: post #5
iamricks wrote: post #3

Considering Valve is private, it's very impressive what Gaben has accomplished (and everyone who works there).

Valve is probably only able to do all this stuff BECAUSE it is private. Public companies are concerned more with what pushes up numbers for 1 quarter and keeps shareholders happy than anything else.

Well that and literally owning the money printing machine known as Steam (a gaming marketplace where you can not only buy games, but sell skins, avatars, and other pictures for your profile; Valve takes their cut in every transaction).

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Valve generates multiple billions+ in revenue annually.

Re: Thank You, Valve

#167

Post by CaptainZapp »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #144
oauea wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never trust the client. Trying to install a rootkit on your users' computers won't change the reality of client-server security.

I agree, and I think that like DRM anti-cheat is generally a customer-hostile losing battle. The big problem is that companies are trying to solve a social problem (cheating) with a technological solution and, predictably, failing. Partly this is motivated by profit: if you required online gamers to be real verifiable people, with all suspected cheating was judged by a human being, and bans were permanent and landed…

> I agree, and I think that like DRM anti-cheat is generally a customer-hostile losing battle. The big problem is that companies are trying to solve a social problem (cheating) with a technological solution and, predictably, failing.

I don't disagree with your general take, but you can't accuse Valve Anti Cheat of being a failure.[0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valve_Anti-Cheat

Re: Thank You, Valve

#168

Post by Drew_ »

busterarm wrote: post #82
dagw wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I played competitive video games seriously I would absolutely want them to take cheating seriously and take any necessary measure to stop it. At the same time I think they should also make the most serious kernel/driver level anti-cheat software optional. If you don't to want to install it you can still play the game, just not on any of the 'pro' servers. Think of it a bit like doping tests in sports. As long as y…

The serious cheats in competitive games these days don't rely on hacking the game anymore. They use a separate computer connected taking your HDMI out as an input and then controls your mouse and keyboard inputs. They use ML models and OpenCV. You watch the second computer's monitor and it draws huge boxes around things you shoot and it assists your aim. It doesn't even have to be a PC game, you can do the same with…

While there are convincing looking proof of concepts for computer vision based cheats, I haven't seen anything to suggest that this approach is used meaningfully anywhere. And considering the millions of cheat bans that get processed in mainstream games to this day, I think its safe to assume most cheaters aren't using anything sophisticated.

Re: Thank You, Valve

#169

Post by steadyready »

parkingrift wrote: post #125
busterarm wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The serious cheats in competitive games these days don't rely on hacking the game anymore. They use a separate computer connected taking your HDMI out as an input and then controls your mouse and keyboard inputs. They use ML models and OpenCV. You watch the second computer's monitor and it draws huge boxes around things you shoot and it assists your aim. It doesn't even have to be a PC game, you can do the same with…

This is why anti-cheat should be performance based. Build a model based on the way that verified elite players play the game, and their performance. Compare “normal” players against the model and look for outliers. Manually review accounts that look suspicious. Cheat behavior is obvious. Ridiculous long distance accuracy. Weird movement. Weird map awareness. Weird awareness of other players. Etc.

They did make one. It was called FairFight[1] and was mainly used by EA in the Battlefield franchise. It also was a dumpster fire: bans were applied to legit players all the time, moderators were overwhelmed and manual review took too long and many times resulted in nothing.

Behavioural anti-cheats are not the answer. Implementations are crap and under-developed, and I don’t blame them: you would need tremendous (server-sided) power to correctly process the models considering how complex multiplayer games are, and it just isn’t worth the investment and complexity to them.

It’s just cheaper to pay rootkit developers (like EAC or BattlEye) and knowingly infect client devices. Hell, their drivers are even WHQL signed by Microsoft. And when false positives hit? Just blame the anti-cheat vendor. Potential HR problem dodged.

[1] https://www.i3d.net/products/hosting/anti-cheat-software/

Re: Thank You, Valve

#170

Post by Andrew_nenakhov »

The only thing I miss on GNU/Linux is a good alternative to CheatEngine, with popular game scripts from FearlessRevolution.org - creative use of such scripts can tremendously improve (single-player) gaming experience.

For example, I used to give a huge population boost to computer opponents in Rome: Total War, so they would be able to field big armies for me to crush. Without it they quickly depleted their manpower pool and after the initial clash the game turned into a tedious mopping.

Post reply on HN