81–90 of 223 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Holy ….. what a fight you had to do. So glad i hardly play any mulitiplayer shooter games. I’d hate to have my insane Steam library stripped away from me.
His steam library was not restricted, just the game in which he was accused/banned.
Cheating in multiplayer games has become such a huge problem, it has destroyed trust across every major FPS. I am a long time CS player, but I did briefly play one of the new CoD games, before they went crazy with Nicki Minaj skins and bong-guns. A person was so convinced I was cheating, they started doing OSINT on me while still in a match, and they found my old UnKnOwNcHeAtS account as some kind of proof that I am…
Needs to be a law against the taking away of product functionality after the sale, even if it's contractual/EULA. A ban should never take the game away from the owner, and in cases where it does then they need to be refunded (treble damages on top of license, lawyer, and court fees if it takes a judgment to induce the refund). Getting banned on Steam, say, in the sense that all of one's purchases are invalidated shou…
Needs to be a law against the taking away of product functionality after the sale, even if it's contractual/EULA. A ban should never take the game away from the owner, and in cases where it does then they need to be refunded (treble damages on top of license, lawyer, and court fees if it takes a judgment to induce the refund). Getting banned on Steam, say, in the sense that all of one's purchases are invalidated shou…
People play multiplayer games to have fun and interact with others. If you behave badly, be it cheating or otherwise, you should be banned from using the multiplayer service because your behavior impacts other people.
I'm very curious about the jump obfuscation. Maybe somebody who's done more reverse-engineering can answer this for me: a) Are unconditional jumps common enough that they couldn't be filtered out with some set of pre-conditions? b) It seems like finding the end of a function would be easy, because there's a return. Is there some way to analyze the stack so that you know where a function is returning to, then look for…
1. Some jumps will be fake. 2. Some jumps will be inside an instruction. Decompilers can't handle two instructions are same location. (Like jmp 0x1234), you skip the jmp op, and assume 0x1234 is a valid instruction. 3. Stack will be fucked up in a branch, but is intentional to cause an exception. So you can either nop an instruction like lea RAX, [rsp + 0x99999999999] to fix decompilation, but then you may miss an intentional exception.
IDA doesn't handle stuff like this well, so I have a Binary Ninja license, and you can easily make a script that inlines functions for their decompiler. IDA can't really handle it since a thunnk (chunk of code between jmps), can only belong to one function. And the jmps will reuse chunks of code between eachother. I think most people don't use it since there was a bug with Binary Ninja in blizzard games, but they fixed it in a bug report a year or so ago.
A 2-year legal battle with Activision to overturn a false permanent ban. Activision showed up with zero evidence of cheating and lost: https://antiblizzard.win/2025/01/18/my-two-year-fight-agains...
A 2-year legal battle with Activision to overturn a false permanent ban. Activision showed up with zero evidence of cheating and lost: https://antiblizzard.win/2025/01/18/my-two-year-fight-agains...
I get that I might be the one accused of cheating next time. But if that risk is tiny and the cost when it happens is $50 or $100 it sounds a lot more attractive than the alternative.
Also (obviously) I don't care about the account itself. I wouldn't play a game where I aggregate long term stats/items/status/whatever.
In a perfect world you just have private servers where you can have 90% effective anticheat and have humans sort out the rest.
Cheating in multiplayer games has become such a huge problem, it has destroyed trust across every major FPS. I am a long time CS player, but I did briefly play one of the new CoD games, before they went crazy with Nicki Minaj skins and bong-guns. A person was so convinced I was cheating, they started doing OSINT on me while still in a match, and they found my old UnKnOwNcHeAtS account as some kind of proof that I am…
EFT also uses kernel level anti-cheat “Easy Anti-Cheat” (as invasive as what valorant uses (vanguard)). Don’t know why ETF implementation sucks. I’ve been on CS since 1.3, and i think their system is pretty good. Sure you get cheaters sometimes, but it’s not that bad, maybe I’ve been pretty lucky.
Unless you use multiple users on Windows a user space anticheat (or anything you run) can already read all your files and even memory of other processes (Windows provides an API for this), putting it in kernel adds the ability to do so for the other users. Invasiveness isn't really that good of an argument as normal software can already do so much.