Used Processor Leads To Game Ban (heise.de)
- Reference: 0185991006
- News link: https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/26/10/02/1750242/used-processor-leads-to-game-ban
- Source link: https://www.heise.de/en/news/Used-processor-leads-to-game-ban-11471562.html
> Anyone buying used hardware for a gaming PC needs to be careful: not just whether the components are still in order but also what the previous owner did with them. A case on Reddit [2]shows this . Someone installed a used AMD processor, a Ryzen 7 5800X3D, in their PC. Because the previous owner was caught cheating, [3]the new owner cannot start several online games .
>
> The problem was noticed in the first-person shooter "Valorant" from the development studio Riot. Right from the first start, the new owner was kicked out directly, according to their statement. Riot support confirmed that the previous owner had cheated. The processor is therefore on an internal blacklist -- and, with its installation in the PC, now apparently also some other components like the mainboard. Riot support does not remove such entries manually.
>
> In addition to "Valorant," all other PC games from Riot are affected: the strategy game "League of Legends," the auto-battler "Teamfight Tactics," the card game "Legends of Runeterra," the fighting game "2XKO," and likely future titles as well.
Riot's "Vanguard" anti-cheat system traditionally runs deep in the Windows kernel and starts with the PC, but a June 2026 [4]update allows it to launch with a game if security features such as TPM and Secure Boot are enabled.
It's unclear how Riot uniquely identifies processors, though possibilities include hardware fingerprinting based on chip behavior or storing identification hashes in the Trusted Platform Module (TPM), which Vanguard accesses in the newer mode.
[1] https://slashdot.org/~AmiMoJo
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/PCBaumeister/comments/1wqomor/gebrauchte_cpu_erlaubt_kein_valorant/
[3] https://www.heise.de/en/news/Used-processor-leads-to-game-ban-11471562.html
[4] https://support.riotgames.com/en-us/riot/performance/vanguard-pre-check
The Ban Wasn't in the Packets (Score:4, Insightful)
Riot isn't identifying a Ryzen by staring at TCP packets. Vanguard runs on the PC, where it can collect hardware information or request TPM attestation and send the result to Riot. CPUID identifies a processor model, not an individual chip; a CPU-bound firmware TPM is a more plausible explanation for a ban following a used CPU.
Still, this is one Reddit report, not a technical postmortem. We don't know what Riot matched, or whether the buyer's motherboard and drive were blacklisted seperately. Riot's [1]published policy [riotgames.com] also allows requests to review some hardware bans. The used-parts problem may be real, but the confident explanation of how it happened is ahead of the evidence.
[1] https://support.riotgames.com/en-us/riot/penalties/understanding-hardware-id-hwid-bans
Re: The Ban Wasn't in the Packets (Score:1)
Make a cheat to hook the instruction or the return of this instruction on the program - problem likely solved.
Re: The Ban Wasn't in the Packets (Score:1)
the instruction is: CPUID
Re: (Score:1)
CPUID doesn't give you any serialnumber or other unique id.
The TPM module built into modern CPUs does.
Re: (Score:1)
> CPUID doesn't give you any serialnumber or other unique id.
They briefly did in the Pentium 3 era, the confusion lingers as the functionality exists in CPUID but it no longer returns an actual unique value.
Re: The Ban Wasn't in the Packets (Score:2)
Make a bot that pretends to cheat using generated cpu serial numbers. Cause lots of people to get banned
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
> CPUID identifies a processor model, not an individual chip
but the "Protected Processor Identification Number" does identify an actual chip. See: [1]https://www.phoronix.com/news/... [phoronix.com]
Intel got hit with bad publicity when they tried to add serial numbers to CPUID back in the pentium 3 days... So when they stealth re-added the feature years later they changed the name. AMD dutifully copied it.
[1] https://www.phoronix.com/news/AMD-PPIN-Processor-ID-Linux
Re: (Score:2)
> Riot isn't identifying a Ryzen by staring at TCP packets. Vanguard runs on the PC, where it can collect hardware information or request TPM attestation and send the result to Riot. CPUID identifies a processor model, not an individual chip; a CPU-bound firmware TPM is a more plausible explanation for a ban following a used CPU.
TPM wouldn't work because you'd have to transplant it from one motherboard to another. The CPUID instruction gives a lot of information (including serial number) if you ask it the rig
Re: The Ban Wasn't in the Packets (Score:2)
No, most people do not have a motherboard TPM, it's in the CPU.
Re: (Score:1)
> The CPUID instruction gives a lot of information (including serial number)
Not since the Intel Pentium 4, presumably AMD also stopped returning a unique value long ago.
Ryzen 7 have a machne readable serial number? (Score:1)
> CPUID identifies a processor model
I think you meant to say a unique serial number. I believe Ryzen 7 reports those.
Re: (Score:2)
hit nail on the head as modern anti cheat uses the tpm chip that id got banned.
TPM Suspicion Intensifies (Score:3)
> Riot's "Vanguard" anti-cheat system traditionally runs deep in the Windows kernel and starts with the PC, but a June 2026 update allows it to launch with a game if security features such as TPM and Secure Boot are enabled.
Anyone care to once again reassure me how TPM, a system for hiding information from a computer's user regardless of privilege level, can't be used for DRM again?
Re: (Score:2)
No strawman, it happens almost every time I express concern at the possibility of TPM enabling a working DRM system.
Re: (Score:2)
other then tpm has no security as it was hacked long ago, even cheaters know how to bypass it.
Mental note (Score:5, Insightful)
Never by anything from Riot.
Sounds like it's time to invoke defamation laws (Score:2)
They're literally using false accusations as a basis to deprive a customer of something that has been paid for.
Re: (Score:1)
If the product is free then you are the product
Re: (Score:2)
This doesn't really apply to F2P games, the product is the skins and the emotes and the battle passes and such. It's more that most of the players are bycatch, they're casting a big net to catch the whales.
Re: (Score:2)
> They're literally using false accusations as a basis to deprive a customer of something that has been paid for.
Defamation would require that Riot communicate the fact that the user is a cheater to third parties and for that communication to cause measurable reputational harm. Privately denying the user's account/computer access to a game does neither of those things, it's just a shitty thing to do.
Is this legal? (Score:2)
I wonder whether this is legal. Riot has the right to ban players who cheat, but maybe not the right to misidentify them based on the hardware they are using. In this case, since the game is free, there may be no contract of which this is a breach. In the case of a paid game, it seems that it would be a breach of contract.
Was the CPU sold "as is"? (Score:1)
> I wonder whether this is legal.
Sold "as is" could conceivably be interpreted as banned from a game due to prior abuse. Its plausible a lawyer could successfully argue this.
Re: (Score:2)
That would affect the buyer's rights with respect to the seller, not not his rights with respect to the gaming company.
Re: (Score:2)
or dont play games using terrible anti cheat and does not stop cheaters anyways.
Anti-cheat software a liability? (Score:1)
It seems to me that if this software were hijacked it could provide access to core functions that would affect information security and may even open avenues to damage of hardware. No one should be installing this IMO. Am I being overly paranoid?
Re: (Score:2)
nope anti cheat it litterly a rootkit on windows.
Re: (Score:2)
its all from pure dev laziness. they dont want to take the time or money to have good server side anticheat so they just slap the eas rootkit on that all the cheaters will bypass in days.
Valorant (Score:2)
Valorant sounds like a Hegspeth re-specification for military deodorant: "Smells like victory."
Of course (Score:4, Informative)
it's all Riot titles. And of course Riot support won't do anything. The entire company is laziness personified.
Re: Of course (Score:2)
it would be neat if some form of discrimination lawsuit could be made. them saying yep and still refusing to clear the entry is moronic.
kids these days ... (Score:3)
a buddy asked me to install valorant once, valorant in turn prompted me to install some anticheat, which i did, and the anticheat in turn asked me to change some of my bios or uefi settings, can't remember, but it was a hilarous moment: instant uninstall, blacklist developer forever, next. buddy, let's play something else ...