Talk:COMP 3000 Essay 2 2010 Question 4 - Revision history

Sschnei1: /* Discussion */

2010-12-02T00:39:21Z

Discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:39, 2 December 2010
Line 290:		Line 290:

	- I did some modification in critique and moved it to the front page. - [[User:Jbaubin\|Jbaubin]]		- I did some modification in critique and moved it to the front page. - [[User:Jbaubin\|Jbaubin]]

			- Great. I apologize that I did not manage to get more written. Other courses kept me occupied. - [[User:Sschnei1\|Sschnei1]]

Jbaubin at 16:49, 1 December 2010

2010-12-01T16:49:02Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:49, 1 December 2010
Line 288:		Line 288:

	- Sure post some modifications. What I meant in the first part is, that the game has an internal recording mechanism to record a 1:1 video of your in-game screen, which can be replayed from in-game itself. I thought it's useful to put in, but if it's unnecessary for the paper, then we can take it out.		- Sure post some modifications. What I meant in the first part is, that the game has an internal recording mechanism to record a 1:1 video of your in-game screen, which can be replayed from in-game itself. I thought it's useful to put in, but if it's unnecessary for the paper, then we can take it out.

			- I did some modification in critique and moved it to the front page. - [[User:Jbaubin\|Jbaubin]]

Jbaubin at 16:13, 1 December 2010

2010-12-01T16:13:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:13, 1 December 2010
Line 193:		Line 193:
	AVM's are extremely effective against two types of cheating, that which gives incorrect networking messages and the one that has to be loaded with the game. This is the perfect world for tournaments competition type of game, but in a real world this wouldn't be of much use. Games get patched, users download add-ons for the game, etc. Every patch or add-ons would require a new AVM which is unreasonable for the amount of people playing the game. A solution brought from the team was to disable the right to install anything on the AVM. As this could work in a tournament environment, a normal users at home would not be pleased with this limitation.		AVM's are extremely effective against two types of cheating, that which gives incorrect networking messages and the one that has to be loaded with the game. This is the perfect world for tournaments competition type of game, but in a real world this wouldn't be of much use. Games get patched, users download add-ons for the game, etc. Every patch or add-ons would require a new AVM which is unreasonable for the amount of people playing the game. A solution brought from the team was to disable the right to install anything on the AVM. As this could work in a tournament environment, a normal users at home would not be pleased with this limitation.

	AVM's will not in any way catch any bug or exploit in a program that a malicious user could exploit, as the exploit would appear on both user/monitor systems and perform the same.		An AVM's will not in any way catch any bug or exploit in a program that a malicious user could exploit, as the exploit would appear on both user/monitor systems and perform the same.

	// more Critiques		// more Critiques

Jbaubin at 16:12, 1 December 2010

2010-12-01T16:12:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:12, 1 December 2010
Line 187:		Line 187:
	Additional Critiques:		Additional Critiques:

	While the paper does test a slightly larger ~~then~~ one to one scenario, it certainly does not test in a 1:16, 1:32~~, 1:~~64 ~~or much higher scenario that~~ would ~~likely exist~~ in ~~a real world application~~.		While the paper does test a slightly larger than one to one scenario, it certainly does not test in a real world environement where 16,32 or even 64 players would be playing in the sametime.

	~~In order to keep~~ a ~~lower~~ overhead, ~~spot checking~~ is ~~necessary~~, and ~~leave a chance of a fault going undetected in a worst case~~.		Spot checking can be used for applications that require snapshots every x seconds. Even if this way remove a lot of overhead and data storage, it only verify if the applications or user is working as intended every x second. Thus, someone could find the patern of those snapshots and render the AVM inutile.

	More and more programs are using more then one cpu core, which cannot be efficiently deterministically logged at this time. Fortunately it has been shown to be possible if with a large overhead, and could potentially be reasonable at a later date.		AVM's are extremely effective against two types of cheating, that which gives incorrect networking messages and the one that has to be loaded with the game. This is the perfect world for tournaments competition type of game, but in a real world this wouldn't be of much use. Games get patched, users download add-ons for the game, etc. Every patch or add-ons would require a new AVM which is unreasonable for the amount of people playing the game. A solution brought from the team was to disable the right to install anything on the AVM. As this could work in a tournament environment, a normal users at home would not be pleased with this limitation.

	~~The paper repeatedly claims that AVM's could be used for arbitrary applications but only ever shows evidence of one, counterstrike.~~

	AVM's are ~~only~~ extremely effective against ~~one type~~ of cheating, that which gives incorrect networking messages~~. While it was shown in~~ the ~~paper~~ to be ~~effective at catching current cheat programs that require installation on~~ the ~~VM, those could be evolved to exist on~~ the ~~hostmachine~~, ~~and avoid the issue of~~ a ~~AVM entirely. Further, since an AVM~~ wouldn't ~~even catch installing a cheat program as faulty without disabling installation while in~~ use, ~~no installation/updating can go~~ on ~~while~~ the ~~program is~~ in ~~use~~, ~~which may~~ not be ~~desirable~~.

	AVM's will not in any way catch any bug or exploit in a program that a malicious user could exploit, as the exploit would appear on both user/monitor systems and perform the same.		AVM's will not in any way catch any bug or exploit in a program that a malicious user could exploit, as the exploit would appear on both user/monitor systems and perform the same.

Sschnei1: /* Discussion */

2010-11-30T13:22:55Z

Discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:22, 30 November 2010
Line 290:		Line 290:
	So should we remove the last point?		So should we remove the last point?
	Also, the second and third paragraph in the Critique does not critique really anything but more states the contribution in the paper, should we keep it?		Also, the second and third paragraph in the Critique does not critique really anything but more states the contribution in the paper, should we keep it?

			- Sure post some modifications. What I meant in the first part is, that the game has an internal recording mechanism to record a 1:1 video of your in-game screen, which can be replayed from in-game itself. I thought it's useful to put in, but if it's unnecessary for the paper, then we can take it out.

Jbaubin: /* Discussion */

2010-11-29T23:14:33Z

Discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:14, 29 November 2010
Line 289:		Line 289:
	"		"
	So should we remove the last point?		So should we remove the last point?
			Also, the second and third paragraph in the Critique does not critique really anything but more states the contribution in the paper, should we keep it?

Jbaubin: /* Critique */

2010-11-29T23:12:50Z

Critique

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:12, 29 November 2010
Line 175:		Line 175:
	// first part of my writing; this is just part1 [[User:Sschnei1\|Sschnei1]] 00:35, 24 November 2010 (UTC)		// first part of my writing; this is just part1 [[User:Sschnei1\|Sschnei1]] 00:35, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

	~~For~~ the comprehension of the reader~~, it is important of a paper/article/essay to have a good overview/layout~~. The introduction clearly describes what the reader has to expect in the following pages, especially what problems are addressed and how they are solved.		The layout of the paper is primordial for the comprehension of the reader. The introduction clearly describes what the reader has to expect in the following pages, especially what problems are addressed and how they are solved.

	This paper gives multiple examples about advantages and disadvantages in an AVM. A good example is "Cheat Detection". Cheaters use programs to go around the original game code to gain an major advantage over other players. Since an AVM is generic in cheat detection it has a wider support for detecting cheats than most of the other cheat detection algorithms. The logs give the game the function to replay the game. Thus, players using AVM can see the way other players play by replaying the game with the player's log.		This paper gives multiple examples about advantages and disadvantages in an AVM. A good example is "Cheat Detection". Cheaters use programs to go around the original game code to gain an major advantage over other players. Since an AVM is generic in cheat detection it has a wider support for detecting cheats than most of the other cheat detection algorithms. The logs give the game the function to replay the game. Thus, players using AVM can see the way other players play by replaying the game with the player's log.
Line 181:		Line 181:
	The negative side is that the player might have to suffer from the AVM. Everything is being logged and stored on the hard drive, which takes a lot amount of space. In the example in the paper it is 148mb per hour after compression. This reduces the fps. Additionally, the connection to the AVM increases the ping time to the server.		The negative side is that the player might have to suffer from the AVM. Everything is being logged and stored on the hard drive, which takes a lot amount of space. In the example in the paper it is 148mb per hour after compression. This reduces the fps. Additionally, the connection to the AVM increases the ping time to the server.

	~~The test case for the~~ AVM ~~was using it to detect people using cheats~~ in the ~~popular~~ online game Counter-Strike. They were using “Dell Precision T1500 workstations, with 8 GB of memory and 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7 860 CPUs”[pg 10]. These machines are considerably more high powered than the system requirements of Counter-Strike, which are “500 MHz processor, 96 MB RAM”[10]. A 10 year old game [10] should use fewer resources on a Dell Precision T1500 workstations. In comparison, newer games consume far more resources than Counter-Strike giving it less room to run the AVM. A 13% slowdown [pg 12.] in a game where you are only getting 30 to 40 fps is a pretty noticeable slowdown. This is very detrimental to the game play because having over 60fps is the optimal performance.		As a proof of concept, they used their AVM in the online game Counter Strike and tried to detect online cheats. They were using “Dell Precision T1500 workstations, with 8 GB of memory and 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7 860 CPUs”[pg 10]. These machines are considerably more high powered than the system requirements of Counter-Strike, which are “500 MHz processor, 96 MB RAM”[10]. A 10 year old game [10] should use fewer resources on a Dell Precision T1500 workstations. In comparison, newer games consume far more resources than Counter-Strike giving it less room to run the AVM. A 13% slowdown [pg 12.] in a game where you are only getting 30 to 40 fps is a pretty noticeable slowdown. This is very detrimental to the game play because having over 60fps is the optimal performance.

	In the paper the authors state that the AVM will only generate an extra 5ms of latency. While this does not seem like a lot the measurement was taken over a LAN with all the computers connected to the same switch [pg. 12]. This sample does not accurately represent real life situations and therefore lacks external validity, since many of these online games are played over the internet with the participants sometimes not even on the same continent; the latency overhead of the AVM would certainly increase due to the added distance. [12]		In the paper the authors state that the AVM will only generate an extra 5ms of latency. While this does not seem like a lot the measurement was taken over a LAN with all the computers connected to the same switch [pg. 12]. This sample does not accurately represent real life situations and therefore lacks external validity, since many of these online games are played over the internet with the participants sometimes not even on the same continent; the latency overhead of the AVM would certainly increase due to the added distance. [12]

Jbaubin at 22:13, 29 November 2010

2010-11-29T22:13:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:13, 29 November 2010
Line 281:		Line 281:

	-Hay. I got a bit to add to your Critique section section. Its mostly expanding on your last paragraph and a bit on how the tests were performed. ill post my stuff later tonight, I just need to find some sources for my argument.--[[User:Pcox\|Pcox]] 01:06, 25 November 2010 (UTC)		-Hay. I got a bit to add to your Critique section section. Its mostly expanding on your last paragraph and a bit on how the tests were performed. ill post my stuff later tonight, I just need to find some sources for my argument.--[[User:Pcox\|Pcox]] 01:06, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

			-I read through critiques and will post some modification. I was wondering the last point of critique says that the author didn't mention recording the game. In page 2 they did, and
			"However, replay by itself is not sufficient to detect faults on a re-
			mote machine, since the machine could record incorrect
			information in such a way that the replay looks correct,
			or provide inconsistent information to different auditors
			"
			So should we remove the last point?

Sschnei1: /* Critique */

2010-11-29T17:35:31Z

Critique

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:35, 29 November 2010
Line 198:		Line 198:

	AVM's will not in any way catch any bug or exploit in a program that a malicious user could exploit, as the exploit would appear on both user/monitor systems and perform the same.		AVM's will not in any way catch any bug or exploit in a program that a malicious user could exploit, as the exploit would appear on both user/monitor systems and perform the same.

			// more Critiques

			For their use case, the authors did not state that in counterstrike the user can record a demo of his current game. Some online playing leagues require every player to record his own demo and upload it to the website, where every person in the league can watch it. Without this demo the team lost the match immediately.
			Additionally, some leagues require the player to start an extra program (e.g. Electronic Sports League WIRE), which checks the programs running in the background. It also takes random snapshots of the current player and compresses all information into a file and uploads it to one of the server in the online league, where it can be checked by any player.

	==References==		==References==

Sschnei1: /* Critique */

2010-11-29T13:06:08Z

Critique

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:06, 29 November 2010
Line 185:		Line 185:
	In the paper the authors state that the AVM will only generate an extra 5ms of latency. While this does not seem like a lot the measurement was taken over a LAN with all the computers connected to the same switch [pg. 12]. This sample does not accurately represent real life situations and therefore lacks external validity, since many of these online games are played over the internet with the participants sometimes not even on the same continent; the latency overhead of the AVM would certainly increase due to the added distance. [12]		In the paper the authors state that the AVM will only generate an extra 5ms of latency. While this does not seem like a lot the measurement was taken over a LAN with all the computers connected to the same switch [pg. 12]. This sample does not accurately represent real life situations and therefore lacks external validity, since many of these online games are played over the internet with the participants sometimes not even on the same continent; the latency overhead of the AVM would certainly increase due to the added distance. [12]

	~~Additonal~~ Critiques:		Additional Critiques:

	While the paper does test a slightly larger then one to one ~~scenereo~~, it certainly does not test in a 1:16, 1:32, 1:64 or much higher ~~scenereo~~ that would likely exist in a real world application.		While the paper does test a slightly larger then one to one scenario, it certainly does not test in a 1:16, 1:32, 1:64 or much higher scenario that would likely exist in a real world application.

	In order to keep a lower overhead, spot checking is necessary, and leave a chance of a fault going undetected in a worst case.		In order to keep a lower overhead, spot checking is necessary, and leave a chance of a fault going undetected in a worst case.

	More and more programs are using more then one cpu core, which cannot be efficiently ~~deterministicly~~ logged at this time. Fortunately it has been shown to be possible if with a large overhead, and could potentially be reasonable at a later date.		More and more programs are using more then one cpu core, which cannot be efficiently deterministically logged at this time. Fortunately it has been shown to be possible if with a large overhead, and could potentially be reasonable at a later date.

	The paper ~~repeatively~~ claims that AVM's could be used for ~~arbituatry~~ applications but only ever shows evidence of one, counterstrike.		The paper repeatedly claims that AVM's could be used for arbitrary applications but only ever shows evidence of one, counterstrike.

	AVM's are only extremely effective against one type of cheating, that which gives incorrect networking messages. While it was shown in the paper to be effective at catching current cheat programs that require installation on the VM, those could be evolved to exist on the hostmachine, and avoid the issue of a AVM entirely. Further, since a AVM wouldn't even catch installing a cheat program as faulty without disabling installation while in use, no installation/updating can go on while the program is in use, which may not be desirable.		AVM's are only extremely effective against one type of cheating, that which gives incorrect networking messages. While it was shown in the paper to be effective at catching current cheat programs that require installation on the VM, those could be evolved to exist on the hostmachine, and avoid the issue of a AVM entirely. Further, since an AVM wouldn't even catch installing a cheat program as faulty without disabling installation while in use, no installation/updating can go on while the program is in use, which may not be desirable.

	AVM's will not in any way catch any bug or exploit in a program that a malicious user could exploit, as the exploit would appear on both user/monitor systems and perform the same.		AVM's will not in any way catch any bug or exploit in a program that a malicious user could exploit, as the exploit would appear on both user/monitor systems and perform the same.