Cheating in chess

[Kevin Thurlow]

"A determined cheater will always find a way.
The point of audio and camera is to weed out opportunistic cheaters or incompetent cheaters."

I'm sure you're right - after all speed cameras deter some from speeding, but not all!

[JustinHorton]

How reliable is the interpretation? Well, we know of quite a few high profile cases, but we haven't heard about any court cases yet. I find that surprising - surely that suggests the evidence in cheating cases is difficult to undermine.

Well that's a very big assumption (it's also a bit wrong, as per the case of Henry Despres) since it's also true that court action is expensive, that the companies may be based in very distant jurisdictions and that they also have the option of backing down if they think legal action may actually occur.

It also tells us literally nothing specific about what other "extra data" they have, and how they are interpreting it.

[Wadih Khoury]

We do know that they also hold:
Time per move
Whether the web page is in focus or not.
Whether you are looking on the same website at the analysis of your game, even with a different ID.

[JustinHorton]

We know they hold the first of those (because we can see it while playing and afterwards) but we don't know if they use it in their analysis or deliberations. Do we know the other two?

[Matthew Turner]

How reliable is the interpretation? Well, we know of quite a few high profile cases, but we haven't heard about any court cases yet. I find that surprising - surely that suggests the evidence in cheating cases is difficult to undermine.

Well that's a very big assumption (it's also a bit wrong, as per the case of Henry Despres) since it's also true that court action is expensive, that the companies may be based in very distant jurisdictions and that they also have the option of backing down if they think legal action may actually occur.

It also tells us literally nothing specific about what other "extra data" they have, and how they are interpreting it.

Justin,
I was thinking more about legal action against the 4NCL, ECF or UKCC, rather than the service providers.

[Wadih Khoury]

We know they hold the first of those (because we can see it while playing and afterwards) but we don't know if they use it in their analysis or deliberations. Do we know the other two?

I suspect yes, but don't have the evidence or links to share. I think there was an interview from the Lichess founder who mentioned them.
I would say with high confidence that they hold these 2 additional parameters. (especially the second one, this catches most incompetent cheaters, but also once caught a dorm who were analysing their friend's game from the same IP)

[JustinHorton]

I was thinking more about legal action against the 4NCL, ECF or UKCC, rather than the service providers.

Ah, OK. Fair enough as far as it goes, but if that's the case we're looking at a far smaller number of people, and questions of cost at least would still apply. I'm not saying we should discount what you're saying, but at the same time, an absence of court cases is not reliable evidence of an absence of errors.

[Roger de Coverly]

I would say with high confidence that they hold these 2 additional parameters. (especially the second one, this catches most incompetent cheaters, but also once caught a dorm who were analysing their friend's game from the same IP)

Providing real time analysis which can be seen by the players is surely facilitating cheating.

[Roger de Coverly]

I was thinking more about legal action against the 4NCL, ECF or UKCC, rather than the service providers.

There seems empirical evidence that a ban or suspension issued or supported by one of the three doesn't apply to the other two.

[Matthew Turner]

I was thinking more about legal action against the 4NCL, ECF or UKCC, rather than the service providers.

There seems empirical evidence that a ban or suspension issued or supported by one of the three doesn't apply to the other two.

I am sure that is true, which is a shame, but I am not sure a cross-organization ban is possible because of legal and GDPR considerations.

[DavidWalker]

We know they hold the first of those (because we can see it while playing and afterwards) but we don't know if they use it in their analysis or deliberations. Do we know the other two?

The lichess privacy policy states that they capture "the number of times the game’s window loses focus" and that they use device "fingerprinting" technology which would allow them to associate different IDs with the devices they log in from.

The chess.com privacy policy states that they capture usage data which includes "the duration of a page visit". They also capture "unique device identifiers" which presumably allows them to associate different IDs with the devices they log in from.

[JustinHorton]

Thanks, that's useful. What are "blurs"?

[Jacob Ward]

Thanks, that's useful. What are "blurs"?

The opposite of focusing a window - switching to a different active window.

[JustinHorton]

It would be interesting to know what assumptions they draw from that.

[Roger Lancaster]

Thanks, that's useful. What are "blurs"?

The opposite of focusing a window - switching to a different active window.

So am I correct in thinking that, if I'm playing in a team competition and before offering a draw want to check how the other players in my team are getting on, that's liable to be seen as one indication of likely cheating?