this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2024
412 points (99.8% liked)

Linux Gaming

15304 readers
10 users here now

Discussions and news about gaming on the GNU/Linux family of operating systems (including the Steam Deck). Potentially a $HOME away from home for disgruntled /r/linux_gaming denizens of the redditarian demesne.

This page can be subscribed to via RSS.

Original /r/linux_gaming pengwing by uoou.

Resources

WWW:

Discord:

IRC:

Matrix:

Telegram:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 34 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (17 children)

Your core premise is broken. Relying on trusting anything from a remote client cannot possibly result in a fair game.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

Too bad the server at least needs the player input data.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Yes, people can still cheat with a camera and manipulating inputs. There will never be a way around that.

But that's entirely unchanged by adding malware, that, even if it could theoretically work, should be a literal crime with serious jail time attached. Client side validation is never security and cannot resemble security.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There are ways to detect and stop that, but they can and should happen on the server, not on the client.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Only if you're OK banning real people.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There are lots of options such that you can tune your false positive/negative rate. 🤷‍♂️ Tons of ways you can structure this depending on your game's tech.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No options that resemble legitimate or evidence based in any way.

If a computer has the exact same input and output tools as a human, you cannot possibly do better than guessing. It is a literal certainty that you will ban legitimate players doing nothing wrong for being too good if you try, and it's unconditionally not acceptable to do so.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Client side anti-cheat faces similar issues, and there unlike your server you don't control the hardware.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 weeks ago

I'm not sure why you think I'm saying client side is better when I called it malware.

There is no approach that is theoretically capable of doing anything at all to impact a camera and automated inputs, and there is no way of trying to do so that is acceptable. It's simply a reality of online gaming.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)