Proctor

@petri999 said in #16:

Only way I would install that would be a virtual machine having only that one thing running there. Like some people used todo on poker sites. I guess the detect and block virtual machines now.
This is a good point. There is actually one scenario where I could imagine running software like "Proctor" on my system: a dedicated VM with clean installation of the OS and minimum software (including a clean instance of a browser, no shared profile or config) with access to only its virtual disk (no host filesystems), microphone and camera needed for the game and access to network limited to only what is needed for online play on that particular site. This VM would be used only for playing online and reverted to the clean snapshot after each use.

If what chess-com claims about "Proctor" is true, they should have no problem with it running in such restricted environment. But all other available information about this kind of tools suggests that they would refuse to work in such setup because they actually require way more control over your system, far beyond their declared scope.

@mkubecek said in #40:
does "fair chess" really mean that much to you?
It means everything to me. More than I can put in words...
And yeah if your bankaccount is on your device you have to watch out
but I do not bank online, I am only online to play chess, and I do dream
about a fair chess world because chess is art

@mkubecek said in #41:

a dedicated VM with clean installation of the OS and minimum software (including a clean instance of a browser, no shared profile or config) with access to only its virtual disk (no host filesystems), microphone and camera needed for the game and access to network limited to only what is needed for online play on that particular site

You can run tails from a pen drive or something similar but why bother? I'll rather just play cheaters and lose.

I don't think you quite understand the implications of giving a random application a complete access to your system and network.
You basically have to treat it as a virus and device as a compromised device. It cannot be in any way connected to the same network as your other devices, you cannot use the device for anything other than the specific purpose. Ever.

One way to look at it is that IT security is a bit like chess. When evaluating a move, you cannot consider only the reply you would want to see or the "normal" or "obvious" reply. The question you have to ask is "What would be the worst possible reply I could get?" (worst for me, that is) and choose your move according to the worst possible outcome of each of them. (And then hope there isn't i reply that would be even worse but you didn't think of it.) When it comes to IT security, it should be the same, i.e. no "hope chess" (let's hope nothing really bad happens) but rather seriously asking what could be the worst thing that could happen. It's always better to assume the worst and be wrong than the other way around.

@Sarg0n said in #1:

What d‘ya think? Over there they seem to use it.

„To make sure players are playing fair, Proctor captures:

The computer's screen
The programs running
Video camera feeds
Audio inputs and outputs“

www.chess.com/proctor
#LichessistheGOAT

I would guess most people will not admit cheating.
I would not enter any online game that ask me to install anything.