←back to thread

We outsmarted CSGO cheaters with IdentityLogger

(mobeigi.com)
379 points mobeigi | 1 comments | 16 Oct 24 18:18 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
snarfy ◴[16 Oct 24 19:21 UTC] No.41862807[source]▶
For UT2004, you can ban by player GUID (a hash of the CD key) or IP. With the game abandoned by Epic, a number of key generators have cropped up, which makes GUID bans useless. IP bans only go so far with VPNs costing $2 these days.

The main solutions we have today are IP ban + VPN blocking using a database of known VPN subnets and adding them all to the firewall, and a similar fingerprinting technique which scans their folder structure of certain system folders.

replies(12): >>41862963 #>>41863123 #>>41863371 #>>41864302 #>>41864313 #>>41864340 #>>41864577 #>>41865500 #>>41865762 #>>41866999 #>>41867262 #>>41885146 #
ghxst ◴[16 Oct 24 19:51 UTC] No.41863123[source]▶
This still leaves you wide open to cheaters using mobile data tethering and proxies. Have you considered more advanced network analysis? It's one of the areas I have an interest in (professionally and personally) so if you want any suggestions let me know.
replies(3): >>41863193 #>>41863298 #>>41866117 #
kelnos ◴[16 Oct 24 20:00 UTC] No.41863193[source]▶
> This still leaves you wide open to cheaters using mobile data tethering and proxies

Is latency going to be good enough on mobile data (especially if they're also using proxies) for a FPS, though? Sure, they're using cheating software, but I wouldn't be surprised if the software gets the information it needs to cheat too late often enough for it to be useful.

replies(4): >>41863281 #>>41863764 #>>41864336 #>>41868058 #
1. Sayrus ◴[16 Oct 24 20:07 UTC] No.41863281{3}[source]▶
Assuming obvious cheat, even 100ms or 200ms latency is unbeatable by a human. Especially since the cheat doesn't need time to aim.

Even for non-obvious use-cases, it's hard to beat the advantage provided by knowing the position of players.

On my own hotspot, I have less than 30ms of latency.