Hack-proof Synchronization Protocol for Multi-player Online Games



Modern multi-player online games are popular and attractive because they provide a sense of virtual world experience to users: players can interact with each other on the Internet but perceive a local area network responsiveness. To make this possible, most modern multi-player online games use similar networking architecture that aims to hide the effects of network latency, packet loss, and high variance of delay from players. Because real-time interactivity is a crucial feature from a player’s point of view, any delay perceived by a player can affect his/her performance [16]. Therefore, the game client must be able to run and accept new user commands continuously regardless of the condition of the underlying communication channel, and that it will not stop responding because of waiting for update packets from other players. To make this possible, multi-player online games typically use protocols based on “dead-reckoning” [5, 6, 9] which allows loose synchronization between players.


Network Latency Game Session Game Server Network Time Protocol Outgoing Packet 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Banavar H, Aggarwal S, Khandelwal A (2004) Accuracy in dead-reckoning based distributed multi-player games. In: Proceedings of NetGames 2004, Portland, August 2004, pp 161–165Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baughman NE, Levine BN (2001) Cheat-proof playout for centralized and distributed online games. In: Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM. IEEE, Piscataway, pp 104–113Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Counter Hack (2007) Types of Hacks. http://wiki.counter-hack.net/CategoryGeneralInfo
  4. 4.
    DeLap M et al (2004) Is runtime verification applicable to cheat detection. In: Proceedings of NetGames 2004, Portland, August 2004, pp 134–138Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Diot C, Gautier L (1999) A distributed architecture for multiplayer interactive applications on the internet. In: IEEE Networks magazine, Jul–Aug 1999Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Diot C, Gautier L, Kurose J (1999) End-to-end transmission control mechanisms for multiparty interactive applications on the internet. In: Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, IEEE, PiscatawayGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Even Balance (2007) Official PunkBuster website. http://www.evenbalance.com
  8. 8.
    Feng WC, Feng WC, Chang F, Walpole J (2005) A traffic characterization of popular online games. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 13(3):488–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gautier L, Diot C (1998) Design and evaluation of mimaze, a multiplayer game on the Internet. In: Proceedings of IEEE Multimedia (ICMCS’98). IEEE, PiscatawayGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jamin S, Cronin E, Filstrup B (2003) Cheat-proofing dead reckoned multiplayer games (extended abstract). In: Proc. of 2nd international conference on application and development of computer games, Hong Kong, 6–7 January 2003Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lee FW, Li L, Lau R (2006) A trajectory-preserving synchronization method for collaborative visualization. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 12:989–996 (special issue on IEEE Visualization’06)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lenker S, Lee H, Kozlowski E, Jamin S (2002) Synchronization and cheat-proofing protocol for real-time multiplayer games. In: International Worshop on Entertainment Computing, Makuhari, May 2002Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lo V, GauthierDickey C, Zappala D, Marr J (2004) Low latency and cheatproof event ordering for peer-to-peer games. In: ACM NOSSDAV’04, Kinsale, June 2004Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mills DL (1992) Network time protocol (version 3) specification, implmentation and analysis. In: RFC-1305, March 1992Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    MPC Forums (2007) Multi-Player Cheats. http://www.mpcforum.com
  16. 16.
    Pantel L, Wolf L (2002) On the impact of delay on real-time multiplayer games. In: ACM NOSSDAV’02, Miami Beach, May 2002Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schachte P, Corman AB, Douglas S, Teague V (2006) A secure event agreement (sea) protocol for peer-to-peer games. In: Proceedings of ARES’06, Vienna, 20–22 April 2006, pp 34–41Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Simpson ZB (2008) A stream based time synchronization technique for networked computer games. http://www.mine-control.com/zack/timesync/timesync.html
  19. 19.
    Soh S, Webb S, Lau W (2007) Racs: a referee anti-cheat scheme for p2p gaming. In: Proceedings of NOSSDAV’07, Urbana-Champaign, 4–5 June 2007, pp 34–42Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    The Z Project (2007) Official HLGuard website. http://www.thezproject.org
  21. 21.
    Wikipedia (2007) Category: Anti-cheat software. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Anti-cheat_software

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringThe Chinese University of Hong KongHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations