[teravor]

    > AI does not complete CAPTCHAs like humans. If you look across all the data of humans and AI completing CAPTCHAs, you start noticing differences in features like error patterns. Our recent paper found statistically significant differences across sequential click patterns, direction changes, and overselection behavior - features that define how a participant, agent or human, would solve the CAPTCHA problem

putting aside the possibility that if bot makers wanted to they could work on these problems, if you need to perform statistical analysis in a captcha setting you have already failed. bots don't stick to a given session persistently so there is no useful profile to form. at best you may improve on IP reputation scores (and they probably already do) but that doesn't help much.

[sylware]

Exactly, nowadays, the main usage of "capcha" is more about to force down on user the whatng cartel web engines more than anything else.

It is like windows kernel anti-cheat which are more to please microsoft at making games not running on linux based OS... and kernel anti-cheat seems to be actively exploited by hackers.

Put up a human team tracking the IPs of those bots and work with network operators. The hard part is to notify the people of the compromised IPs.

[hhh]

Kernel anti-cheat (KMAC) is an effective tool when used effectively and invested in (see Vanguard), but it only works when you are consistent and the team working on it are interested and capable. Creating terrible KMAC happens all the time, and gets treated as a one-and-done thing which will always be defeated. You have to continually watch the cheat market and work actively against it.

It works, and Valorant with Vanguard is the highest quality example we have. Competitive games deserve to be taken seriously and should have the best attempt at ensuring integrity, and not written off as a wasteful effort to keep Linux users out.

https://playvalorant.com/en-us/news/dev/vanguard-hits-new-ba...

[sylware]

You are very mistaken: what "works" (see below) here is an invested and permanent team, not a kernel anti-cheat.

Effectiveness, yes, at giving hackers easy kernel an...access.

And trying to spot cheaters using external AI based hardware: you may have a chance with data collection on servers (no need of kernel access).

It is so much obvious, I am even wondering all that is made-up to give easy kernel access to some "services", seriously.

And it seems such games are still rid of cheaters.

[hhh]

Valorant reports ~1% of games having a cheater. Apex Legends self-reported over 10x that.

[sylware]

It is not related to th kernel anti-cheat: it is to have permanet and dedicated team to deal with that.

My english is so bad?

[teravor]

if you are actively engaged why do you need kernel level access? you can always sneak a subtle remote execution pathway into your game so you can reliably run userland code at will. kernel level cheats will escape direct detection but you can always hot patch your game engine in such a way that their memory reading patterns will give them away through cache timings.

[conartist6]

I just don't fill them out anymore. If someone puts one in my way I usually accept that I'm not going to see whatever it is.