The Limitations Of Client-Side Save Data Protection
Bypassing Client-Side Protections
Hackers use various methods to exploit the trust clients place in servers to modify or access protected save data. Packet inspection allows hackers to identify save data packets moving between client and server and alter them to inject malicious payloads. Intercepting unencrypted traffic provides access to read and write save files directly. Client emulator attacks mimic valid save requests to extract data from servers.
Ways Hackers Exploit Client Trust
Clients generally trust that servers will properly secure any sensitive save data they provide. However, flaws in server-side protections allow hackers to gain access to and manipulate this data. Common exploits include SQL injection attacks that allow running queries directly on the server database, cross-site scripting that injects malicious scripts into web traffic, and brute force attacks that guess login credentials through rapid guessing.
Packet Inspection to Modify Data
Save data sent between client and server is contained in network data packets. Hackers can use man-in-the-middle attacks to intercept these packets as they move through the network. Deep packet inspection examines the low-level contents and extracts any save data. Hackers can then modify this data before forwarding the packets to the destination. Encryption provides some protection against inspection and modification but has limitations.
Intercepting Clear-Text Traffic
When save data is transmitted unencrypted in clear text, hackers can directly read and write save files as they observe network traffic. Weaknesses in the Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) wireless encryption standard allow savvy hackers to crack wireless networks. Once access is gained, hackers can use packet sniffing tools to intercept save requests and their unencrypted payloads containing all save data fields. No client-side protection remains once the data is taken directly.
Client Emulator Attacks
Sophisticated hackers have created client emulator tools that imitate the save data requests made by valid game clients. The emulator mimics the client’s authentication credentials and protocols to fool the server into thinking save requests are legitimate. Any data returned by the server is now in control of the hackers. Emulation attacks can be automated to scrape player save data from games en masse through illegitimate queries.
Securing Save Data
While no single technique can fully protect save data, layers of security help identify and block common hacking approaches. Encrypting data payloads during transmission protects the data while in transit. Hashing and salting the data protects integrity and makes decryption exponentially harder. Random data padding and segmentation make successful inspection less likely by obscuring save data locations.
Encryption Methods
Strong encryption applied to all save data payloads renders intercepted data useless to hackers without the decryption key. Asymmetric public key infrastructure uses separate public and private keys for encryption and decryption respectively. This ensures only servers can decrypt data sent by clients. The Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) symmetric algorithm provides high security with relatively low processing overhead for real-time save data transmission.
Hashing and Salting Passwords
Password data merits extra protection due to its high value to hackers. One-way cryptographic hashing algorithms like BCrypt transform passwords into fixed-length digests that cannot be reversed to find the original password. Salting each password with a random value before hashing foils rainbow table attacks that match hashes to common passwords. Proper password security minimizes the threat from compromised login credentials.
Obfuscation Techniques
Protecting visibility into save data itself can reduce exposure to informational attacks. Padding save data with random bits to fixed lengths, regardless of true content size, helps mask where meaningful information resides within payloads. Segmenting data across multiple smaller packets instead of one large packet obscures the total data volume and core contents from packet inspection.
Multi-layer Authentication
Requiring multiple proof points helps verify valid clients and users beyond reused credentials. Multifactor authentication might combine a password with a one-time code sent to a verified device to ensure hackers cannot access accounts by guessing passwords alone. Device fingerprints, IP reputation checks, and other contextual signals further validate legitimacy of client save requests.
Common Exploits
Attackers have an extensive toolkit to try cracking client-server environments. Common exploits target known vulnerabilities that remain surprisingly widespread due to uneven patching. SQL injection and cross-site scripting attacks manipulate inputs handled poorly by backends. Brute force cracks take advantage of rate limiting weaknesses. Social engineering tricks users into surrendering access.
SQL Injection
SQL database systems power most save game data storage needs due to their flexibility and power. But improper input validation allows specially crafted input strings to break out of data contexts and execute malicious SQL commands directly on the backend database. Retrieving, modifying or deleting save data circumvents client-side protections when given direct database access.
Cross-site Scripting
Persisted cross-site scripting vulnerabilities allow hackers to inject scripts into core site files or databases. These scripts then execute in the browser of any visiting player to extract sensitive save data or access tokens. While not directly harmful to the server, compromised client contexts put all player data at risk once injected scripting traps player cookies, tokens or saves.
Brute Force Attacks
Online brute force attacks leverage automation to guess player passwords through rapid trial-and-error. Lists of common and compromised passwords combined with powerful computing resources allow cracking weak passwords in hours or less. Rate limiting restrictions balances security against blocking legitimate users but often fail to impede determined attackers. Once account access is gained, associated save data is compromised.
Social Engineering
Even strong technical protections remain vulnerable to social engineering attacks manipulating human cognitive biases and trust. Phishing emails, fake notification prompts and prize offers trick unsuspecting players into surrendering login credentials granting full account access. Technical solutions mainly protect against automated attacks while user education counters social engineering risks.
Building Robust Defenses
End-to-end security requires protecting access points and network traffic while also securing data storage servers against exploit. Input filtering stops injection attacks affecting backend databases. Updated server frameworks patch known system-level vulnerabilities. Audits catch uneven edge protections across expanding attack surfaces represented by complex web applications and APIs.
Input Validation and Sanitization
Validating all inputs into web facing forms, query parameters, API calls counters injection attacks with malicious inputs. Whitelist allowlists restrict inputs to known safe formats and values, blocking potentially dangerous options. Sanitization libraries cleanse all user input of unauthorized code elements ensuring only pure expected data reaches backend databases.
Layered Server-side Protections
Core server vulnerabilities provide juicy targets for hackers when found. Keeping server frameworks and languages updated with all latest security patches raises the effort required for exploit. Additional middleware like Web Application Firewalls add inspection capabilities to detect attack patterns missed by core servers. API gateways manages and controls access to microservices composing modern web backends.
Updated Libraries and Frameworks
While major languages like PHP and Node.js receive significant scrutiny, vulnerabilities discovered in third-party libraries and frameworks often fly under the radar. Weaknesses anywhere in connected systems undermine all layers built on top. Maintenance tracking all dependencies and updates for security advisories ensures tight closure of data access risks.
Security Audits and Penetration Testing
Business logic flaws remain a hidden threat in complex bespoke applications despite other protections. White-hat security audits inspect custom code paths for lapses from best practices in access controls or state management logic around save data. Controlled penetration testing goes further to uncover vulnerabilities in production configurations missed in staging.
Creating a Data-Centric Security Model
Focusing controls around access points like servers and networks is necessary but insufficient. True defense-in-depth protects the data itself whether at rest or in motion. Data-level techniques assume breach and limit damage from undiscovered exploits. Save data itself should remain secure regardless of the integrity of systems touching it during storage and transport.
Protect Data Itself, Not Just Access Points
Network encryption shields data in transit but leaves data vulnerable at endpoints if decrypted. Strong hashing one-way transforms data requiring the matching password or key to reverse. Homomorphic encryption allows computing on encrypted cyphertext data without exposing the decrypted plaintext. Data self-protects without relying on trusted environments.
Focus on Confidentiality, Integrity, Availability
The CIA security triad provides a model balancing needs around data. Confidentiality protects against unauthorized visibility with encryption. Integrity verifies against tampering via cryptographic hashes. Availability ensures access whenever needed through resilient infrastructure. All three angles must hold to fully secure sensitive save information from exposure by an attacker.
Assume Breach, Plan Response Strategy
Pragmatic security planning assumes protections will fail at some point despite best efforts. Breach response strategies plan resilience under compromise limiting damage or preventing catastrophic cascading failures. Multi-layered controls give time to detect, isolate and recover compromised components. Cryptographic keys securely held offline enable rebuilding encrypted data stores.
Ongoing Patches, Monitoring and Adaptation
Vigilance is essential to staying ahead of hackers endlessly probing defenses. Unpatched vulnerabilities pose immense risk when found. Intrusion detection systems paired with analytics identify suspicious access patterns that may signal foul play. Regular reevaluation of controls keeps pace with emerging techniques on both sides in the unrelenting red queen’s race.
