I suppose that a legitimate argument for anti-cheat could be griefing, but then the host could just boot the player based on a basic voting system. In general I was curious to see “what’s under the hood” of a kernel-level and a userspace-level anti-cheat service and what are the implicit security risks for an average user.
In general I was curious to see “what’s under the hood” of a kernel-level service and a userspace-level anti-cheat and what are the implicit security risks for an average user.
This answer isn’t very satisfying, but the risk is complete and total. A kernel module can do anything and can hide what its doing.
A userspace anti-cheat has a wider range of risk. For example on Linux you can sandbox it so its quite safe in that case.
On Windows the most common issues user report are things like kernel crashes, corruption, etc. Things that should never happen in kernel space and potentially break an installation. These are honestly amateur projects that don’t belong there.
I think the most compelling for me was something like in MW2 back in the day hacked lobbies fucking up a your stats. Something similar in hd2 could ruin it for some.
In Helldivers 2’s case, say a cheater forces everyone in that mission to max out samples/medals/super credits, it entirely kills the progression and takes away a reason to keep playing unless it’s reverted safely, which then means that mission was pointless because someone else used cheats.
The solution to that is to rework how rewards are calculated, maybe do some sanity checks with the server, not seize super admin control of personal hardware.
I suppose that a legitimate argument for anti-cheat could be griefing, but then the host could just boot the player based on a basic voting system. In general I was curious to see “what’s under the hood” of a kernel-level and a userspace-level anti-cheat service and what are the implicit security risks for an average user.
This answer isn’t very satisfying, but the risk is complete and total. A kernel module can do anything and can hide what its doing.
A userspace anti-cheat has a wider range of risk. For example on Linux you can sandbox it so its quite safe in that case.
On Windows the most common issues user report are things like kernel crashes, corruption, etc. Things that should never happen in kernel space and potentially break an installation. These are honestly amateur projects that don’t belong there.
I think the most compelling for me was something like in MW2 back in the day hacked lobbies fucking up a your stats. Something similar in hd2 could ruin it for some.
In Helldivers 2’s case, say a cheater forces everyone in that mission to max out samples/medals/super credits, it entirely kills the progression and takes away a reason to keep playing unless it’s reverted safely, which then means that mission was pointless because someone else used cheats.
The solution to that is to rework how rewards are calculated, maybe do some sanity checks with the server, not seize super admin control of personal hardware.