Black Ops 7 Beta: RICOCHET Anti-Cheat Boosts Match Integrity

Activision’s anti‑cheat team says the Black Ops 7 beta delivered an order‑of‑magnitude improvement in match integrity — and if the early numbers hold, players may finally see the kind of cheater‑free experience the franchise has struggled to provide in recent years.

Background / Overview​

Call of Duty has carried a persistent cheating problem for years: visible aimbots, wallhacks and blatant match‑spoiling exploits have driven complaints, bans, and widespread community frustration across multiple titles. That history pushed Activision to invest heavily in its RICOCHET Anti‑Cheat system, a multi‑layered approach that now combines a kernel‑level driver, signature and heuristic detection, and platform‑level attestation using TPM 2.0 and UEFI Secure Boot. The Black Ops 7 beta has been treated as the latest live test of that upgraded posture — and the company has published aggressive claims about how effective it has been so far.
At the same time, publisher and community reporting cover two parallel stories: (1) quick enforcement and strong early metrics from Team RICOCHET, and (2) real player footage and streamer clips showing cheating incidents on day one of the beta. Reconciling those perspectives — and understanding what the published statistics actually mean — is the central task for anyone evaluating whether Black Ops 7 will, in practice, be “cheater free.”

---

What Activision and Team RICOCHET are claiming​

• On social channels and official posts, Team RICOCHET reported that on Day 1 of the Black Ops 7 beta, 97.5% of matches were completely free of cheaters; by Day 5 that figure rose to 98.8%. The team framed this as a steady improvement in detection and enforcement as the beta progressed.
• Separately, Activision has emphasized that 97% of detected cheaters were stopped within 30 minutes of their first sign‑in, and that fewer than 1% of confirmed cheating attempts actually reached a live match — and those that did were rapidly removed. Those numbers have been repeated across the gaming press.
• To support that performance, Activision required TPM 2.0 and UEFI Secure Boot for PC players in the beta and said the same prerequisites will be enforced at launch. The publisher also documented plans for remote attestation (server‑side verification of TPM/Secure Boot state) on launch day to harden validation further.

These are bold, measurable claims — and in public messaging they’re intended to restore player trust. But behind the headlines, the numbers require careful context.

---

How the numbers should be read (and their limits)​

What the percentages actually say​

The way RICOCHET’s statements are phrased is important: they report the fraction of matches that were “completely clean” and the fraction of detected cheaters stopped within a time window. Those are useful operational metrics, but they don’t fully describe how many cheaters attempted to play, or how many successful but undetected cheats may exist.

• A high percentage of “clean matches” can still be consistent with a non‑trivial number of cheaters if the sample of matches is large or if cheaters tend to bunch into certain lobbies.
• “97% of detected cheaters stopped within 30 minutes” measures enforcement speed for known detections — it does not, by itself, measure the detection coverage (how many cheaters go entirely undetected).

Several outlets and analysts have made the same methodological point: the published percentages are encouraging but incomplete without raw counts, error margins, and clear definitions of what “detected” and “clean” mean in practice. Treat the claims as a strong signal of progress, not a mathematical guarantee of total elimination.

False negatives, false positives, and edge cases​

No anti‑cheat is perfect. Kernel‑level detections and TPM‑based attestation raise the bar for cheat vendors, especially for kernel or boot‑time cheats. But adaptive cheat authors can and will innovate, finding new injection points or distribution methods.

• False negatives (cheats that evade detection) are still possible, especially for bespoke or tightly controlled hack communities.
• False positives (legitimate players flagged) are a well‑known risk for aggressive heuristics, and kernel drivers can interact poorly with unusual system configurations (driver conflicts, virtualization, custom kernels).

Activision’s messaging emphasizes rapid iteration: the beta is being used to tune detection models and remove resellers. That iterative approach is sensible, but the community will need sustained, verifiable results over months (not just a five‑day beta window) to rebuild full confidence.

---

The TPM 2.0 + Secure Boot angle: what changed and why it matters​

What Activision requires​

Activision made TPM 2.0 and UEFI Secure Boot a precondition for the Black Ops 7 beta (and for launch), and it documented steps and requirements on its support site. The rationale is straightforward: Secure Boot blocks unsigned early‑boot components and TPM-backed attestation provides a hardware root of trust that anti‑cheat systems can (remotely) validate. That combination hugely raises the cost and complexity for kernel‑level and pre‑OS cheat tools.
The publisher’s blog also announced plans for remote attestation at launch — meaning servers will verify the machine’s boot state with cryptographic evidence rather than relying solely on local client reports. Remote attestation is more stringent, harder to spoof, and represents a significant escalation in enforcement capability.

The practical tradeoffs​

The technical benefits are real: better signals for integrity checks, fewer kernel cheats, and faster identification of compromised clients. But the costs fall on legitimate players and platform diversity:

• Many older PCs, some custom rigs, and certain multi‑boot or Linux/Proton setups will be blocked until users enable fTPM/PTT or convert MBR disks to GPT and enable UEFI Secure Boot.
• Converting a system from MBR to GPT or changing firmware settings can trigger BitLocker recovery prompts and other support headaches if not handled carefully.
• Handheld and Linux users (Steam Deck, custom kernels, or unsigned modules) face uncertain compatibility; publishers’ kernel‑level anti‑cheat measures are notoriously difficult to reconcile with Proton and Linux gaming.

Activision and other publishers have a user education burden here: clear instructions, preflight checks built into launchers, and robust support will be essential to avoid friction and legitimate player exclusion.

---

Community reaction: day‑one cheating clips vs. the enforcement data​

Public clips of cheating in the beta aired almost immediately — streamers and players posted visible instances on day one, prompting frustration and disbelief that the system could already be foolproof. Those incidents were widely covered (and shared) across social platforms. At the same time, Activision responded that many of those accounts had already been actioned by the time clips spread and pointed to the rapid enforcement figures in their RICOCHET posts.
This is a familiar dynamic: concentrated highly‑visible incidents (a streamer’s game ruined by a hacker) make for sharp negative impressions even when the broader telemetry shows the majority of matches are intact. The real test will be longer‑term durability — whether cheat vendors can keep pace with RICOCHET’s updates and whether enforcement remains consistently fast as the game scales to millions of players.

---

Technical strengths of the current approach​

• Platform‑anchored attestation (TPM + Secure Boot): raises barriers to kernel/boot‑time cheats that used to be the most pernicious and persistent vectors.
• Remote attestation at launch: server‑side verification of boot state is a stronger guarantee than trusting local client claims.
• Faster time‑to‑ban: Activision’s metrics claim most detected cheaters are removed within 30 minutes, limiting their impact on matches when detection works.

Those elements together represent a meaningful improvement in defensive posture compared with historical cycles where detection and enforcement lagged behind cheat development.

---

Key risks and weaknesses to watch​

1) Measurement and transparency gaps​

Public numbers are compelling but incomplete. The company has not published raw incident counts, sample sizes, or the statistical methodology behind “clean match” calculations. That makes independent verification difficult and fuels healthy community skepticism. Journalists and analysts have repeatedly urged more transparency — for instance, revealing how many unique cheat accounts were seen, how many matches were sampled, and which enforcement signals were triggered.

2) Exclusion and access friction​

Mandatory TPM/Secure Boot will exclude or complicate access for some legitimate players (older hardware, dual‑boot systems, Steam Deck/handheld PCs). Support volumes and BIOS/firmware guidance will need to be well‑staffed at launch, or players will face frustrating blocks that damage goodwill. The long‑term risk is a tradeoff between platform integrity and inclusivity.

3) Cheater vendor adaptation​

Cheat authors are an adaptive adversary. As enforcement tightens, cheat vendors can migrate to new techniques, obfuscation, or targeted low‑volume private products that evade signature‑based detection. Sustained success requires continuous investment, rapid telemetry analysis, and the ability to bring legal and market pressure to disrupt cheat vendors. Activision’s recent takedowns of many cheat resellers is encouraging, but history shows the cat‑and‑mouse cycle rarely ends quickly.

4) System and driver stability​

Kernel‑level anti‑cheat drivers historically cause system instability on fringe configurations. That creates a simultaneous technical and PR problem: players who experience crashes due to anti‑cheat drivers will be vocal, even if they are a small minority. Mitigating this requires rigorous testing across many hardware combinations and fast hotfixes for driver‑related regressions.

---

What players and PC admins should do now (practical checklist)​

• Check TPM and Secure Boot quickly:
• Run tpm.msc to confirm TPM state.
• Run msinfo32 and verify BIOS Mode = UEFI and Secure Boot State = On.
• If you’re using MBR, validate and convert to GPT with mbr2gpt.exe only after suspending BitLocker.
• Update firmware and drivers:
• Apply latest UEFI/BIOS updates from your motherboard or laptop vendor to resolve fTPM/PTT compatibility issues.
• Use vendor‑recommended GPU drivers for the beta/launch.
• Back up and prepare BitLocker recovery:
• Save your BitLocker recovery key to avoid data loss during firmware conversions or Secure Boot changes.
• If you run Linux, Steam Deck, or custom kernels:
• Expect potential incompatibility; plan to use a Windows drive or a dedicated Windows test machine if you want to play at launch.
• Report suspicious players with evidence:
• Community reports and clip submissions still help detection models improve; use in‑client reporting and official channels.

This checklist reflects both Activision’s published guidance and community‑tested mitigation steps.

---

The release date confusion — verify before you plan​

Some reports — including the Windows Central piece you shared — referenced a November 17 launch date for Black Ops 7. That conflicts with Activision’s official site and repeated industry reporting, which list November 14, 2025 as the launch day. Activision’s announcement posts and store pages, plus major outlets such as Gematsu and GamesRadar, consistently show November 14 as the published release date. Treat the November 17 date as a discrepancy in the Windows Central text rather than the official schedule. Always rely on publisher storefront pages and the callofduty.com launch notice for final release timing.

---

Independent corroboration: who’s saying what​

• Activision / Call of Duty blog: Official update on RICOCHET, TPM/Secure Boot requirement, and a roadmap to remote attestation at launch. This is the canonical technical posture and the source of the enforcement claims.
• PC Gamer / PCGamesN / other outlets: Independent reporting that repeats Activision’s enforcement metrics while offering appropriate caveats about what the metrics show and do not show. These outlets also note the visible day‑one cheating clips and the context that some systems were only partially enabled during beta testing.
• Community snippets and aggregated beta reporting (forums, Reddit, WindowsForum files): provide on‑the‑ground troubleshooting, user experiences with enabling TPM/Secure Boot, and community concerns about exclusion, privacy and telemetry. These community documents highlight common user problems and practical workarounds.

Using multiple independent sources shows consistent themes: the technical approach (TPM+Secure Boot+RICOCHET) is confirmed by Activision and covered by reputable outlets; the enforcement numbers are widely reported but not exhaustively documented; and community reaction mixes cautious optimism with skepticism about long‑term durability and concerns about access friction.

---

Verdict — cautious optimism, but the fight isn’t over​

Activision’s early metrics for Black Ops 7’s beta represent real progress: platform‑level attestation, faster time‑to‑ban, and the promise of server‑side verification are all material advances in anti‑cheat posture. If RICOCHET’s performance scales and the remote attestation system performs reliably at launch, the player experience could be markedly better than recent cycles. Independent reporting from major outlets supports the headline claims while offering healthy caveats.
That said, the headline percentages should be read with caution. Without raw figures and transparent methodology, percentages risk overstating confidence. The key questions that remain:

• Will detection coverage remain high as cheat vendors adapt?
• Can Activision manage the support and accessibility fallout from mandatory firmware checks?
• Will kernel‑level anti‑cheat stability be acceptable across diverse hardware?
• Will the company sustain the investment and legal/market pressure needed to disrupt cheat resellers long‑term?

Short answers: the foundation is stronger than before; long answers depend on follow‑through, transparency, and sustained enforcement.

---

What success looks like in the months after launch​

• Stable, low complaint volume about blatant cheats in mainstream playlists.
• Clear public telemetry reports from Activision that include raw counts or methodological explanations (this builds trust).
• Diminishing market viability for mass‑market cheat resellers (fewer “undetected” products being sold openly).
• Accessible, well‑documented support flows for players blocked by TPM/Secure Boot requirements, and reasonable accommodations for edge cases where possible.

If those conditions appear, the claim that Black Ops 7 is “almost entirely cheater free” will have moved from a marketing narrative to a defensible reality.

---

Final takeaways​

• Team RICOCHET’s beta numbers (97.5% → 98.8% cheater‑free matches; 97% of detected cheaters stopped within 30 minutes) are powerful and encouraging signals of progress. Those claims are documented by Activision and widely reproduced by outlets across the web.
• The anti‑cheat strategy depends heavily on TPM 2.0 + Secure Boot + RICOCHET and will require many PC players to enable firmware features or update their systems. Activision has published support guidance and emphasized the requirement for beta and launch. That approach raises accessibility and support tradeoffs that the company must manage.
• Visible day‑one cheating clips show the social cost of any remaining gaps in detection. Rapid enforcement helps, but community trust will depend on longer‑term durability and transparency.
• There is a small but important factual discrepancy between some press pieces on launch timing; official Activision pages and major outlets list November 14, 2025 as the launch date, so rely on publisher channels for scheduling.

The trajectory is promising: technical hardening at the firmware level paired with fast enforcement can materially reduce cheating. But durable success requires continued engineering investment, legal action against vendors, transparent reporting, and careful handling of the accessibility and privacy concerns that come with platform‑level attestation. If Activision sustains the posture they’ve described in the beta and follows through on remote attestation and support, Black Ops 7 could mark a significant turning point in Call of Duty’s long battle against cheaters.

---

Source: Windows Central Black Ops 7 might be almost entirely cheater free it seems

 

[ChatGPT]

Activision says the Black Ops 7 beta delivered a meaningful drop in cheating, with Team RICOCHET reporting that nearly 99% of matches were cheater‑free by the end of the beta — a result the company frames as the strongest beta anti‑cheat performance in Call of Duty history.

Background​

Call of Duty has been locked in a protracted arms race with cheat developers for years: blatant aimbots, wallhacks, and resilient cheat marketplaces have repeatedly disrupted public matches and frustrated the player base. The RICOCHET Anti‑Cheat program — a combination of a kernel‑level detection driver, signature and heuristic scanning, and platform‑level attestation — has been Activision’s principal response. Recent policy and technical escalations tied to Black Ops 7 push that posture further by combining RICOCHET with hardware attestation through TPM 2.0 and UEFI Secure Boot.
The Black Ops 7 beta acted as a live stress test. Activision published day‑by‑day metrics showing steady improvement — starting near 97.5% of matches being clean on Day 1 and rising to roughly 98.8% by Day 5 — and capped the public narrative by saying the beta finished at approximately 99% cheater‑free. Those figures were repeated across major industry outlets and aggregated reporting.

---

What Activision actually reported​

The headline numbers​

• Nearly 99% of matches were cheater‑free by the end of the weeklong Black Ops 7 beta, according to Team RICOCHET’s summary.
• Related metrics published during the beta show 97.5% clean matches on Day 1, increasing to 98.8% by Day 5 — the company used this to demonstrate daily improvement.
• Team RICOCHET also reported that the median detection time for cheaters who made it into the player pool was three matches, and other enforcement figures touted that a large majority of detected cheaters were banned rapidly after first sign‑in.

These are operational metrics — useful for measuring detection speed and enforcement cadence — but they are not, by themselves, a complete audit of total cheater activity. The community and analysts have repeatedly pointed out that a high percentage of “clean matches” can coexist with undetected cheating if detection coverage isn’t total, or if cheaters concentrate in particular lobbies. Activision’s published numbers are encouraging, but they leave out raw counts, sample sizes, and the exact definitions used for "cheater" and "clean match."

The technical levers Activision emphasized​

• TPM 2.0 + UEFI Secure Boot: RICOCHET’s latest rollout requires TPM 2.0 and Secure Boot on PC to help block kernel/boot‑time cheat techniques and enable stronger server‑side attestation. Activision’s own support documentation and the public beta notes confirm these requirements were enforced for the beta and planned for launch.
• Machine learning detection enhancements: Activision says it has put new ML systems into RICOCHET, training models on millions of hours of Black Ops 6 gameplay to better distinguish human aiming behavior from automated scripts and to speed wall‑hack detection. That training data claim has been repeated in coverage.
• Legal action and marketplace pressure: The company has continued issuing cease‑and‑desist letters and targeting cheat vendors — a parallel market disruption strategy that Activision says has closed down multiple cheat providers since the Black Ops 6 era.

---

How this is different from prior cycles​

Why TPM + Secure Boot matters (and what it actually does)​

TPM 2.0 provides a hardware root of trust; Secure Boot prevents unsigned code from running during early boot. Combined with server‑side remote attestation (cryptographic verification that a machine booted in a known, secure state), those features raise the bar for cheat authors who previously relied on kernel drivers, boot‑time injections, or unsigned early boot modules. In plain terms, the anti‑cheat team can be more certain that a client hasn’t been tampered with at the highest privilege levels. Activision documented these as intentional additions starting with Season 05 and strengthened for the BO7 beta.
Battlefield 6 and other modern titles have adopted similar platform‑level prerequisites, which makes this an industry trend rather than a one‑off. Practical reality: many Windows 11 systems already meet TPM/Secure Boot expectations, but older rigs, custom multi‑boot setups, and some Linux/handheld devices face compatibility hurdles. That has produced real world friction in the beta, forcing some motherboard vendors to issue BIOS firmware updates to normalize fTPM/PTT behavior.

RICOCHET’s evolution and ML​

Activision’s RICOCHET has been updated iteratively: kernel driver improvements, memory and signature detection, and now machine learning models designed to separate human aiming variability from deterministic scripts. The company claims its ML model was trained on millions of hours of gameplay telemetry from Black Ops 6 to reduce false positives and sharpen aimbot/wallhack detection. That reliance on telemetry‑driven ML is a meaningful step because it enables pattern recognition beyond simple signature matching, but it also introduces the usual ML caveats: model bias, edge cases, and the risk of adversarial adaptation by cheat authors.

---

Strengths: What to praise about the approach​

• Raising the technical bar: Kernel‑level detection plus hardware attestation makes classic kernel‑mode and early‑boot cheats far harder to operate at scale. That increases the development cost for cheat vendors and reduces the number of mass‑market cheat products that are viable.
• Faster enforcement: Activision’s reported metrics show detection and removal getting faster through the beta window — a key practical improvement. If most detected cheaters are removed within minutes or a few matches, the visible damage to public matches is greatly reduced.
• Market pressure on cheat sellers: Legal action and targeted cease‑and‑desist campaigns have already disrupted a number of cheat providers, shrinking open marketplaces and forcing some resellers offline. This reduces accessibility to off‑the‑shelf cheats and buys defenders time.
• Telemetry‑driven ML: Machine learning can generalize across behaviors, detecting anomalous patterns that aren’t covered by signatures. Well‑trained models can catch subtle patterns of automation without relying solely on brittle fingerprints.

---

Risks and downsides: Where the approach can fail or backfire​

1) Measurement gaps and publicity risks​

Activision’s percentages are operationally impressive, but they lack transparent methodology. The company hasn’t published raw counts, confidence intervals, or the precise definitions used for “cheater” and “clean match.” Without those disclosures, independent verification is limited and community skepticism will persist. Journalists and analysts note that a claim like “99% cheater‑free” must be read as a signal of progress, not a mathematical guarantee of elimination.

2) Excluding legitimate players​

Requiring TPM 2.0 and Secure Boot will block some real, paying customers: older motherboards, custom boot setups, certain handheld PCs, and Linux/Proton players can be left out. Converting MBR→GPT, enabling Secure Boot, or updating fTPM firmware can trigger BitLocker recovery flows and other system management events that confuse and anger users. The rollout already generated BIOS firmware updates from vendors and a flood of support queries during the beta.

3) False positives and system stability​

Kernel‑level anti‑cheat has historically produced stability issues on unusual hardware combinations. Aggressive heuristics or poorly tested driver updates can crash legitimate machines, and driver crashes are loud PR problems even if they affect a small subset of users. Similarly, overly aggressive ML detection risks false positives that can land innocent players in bans or restrictions. Those incidents undermine trust faster than a missed cheater does.

4) The cat‑and‑mouse reality​

Cheat authors adapt. Closed, private cheats and bespoke toolchains can still exist outside mass‑market detection, and adversarial actors may shift toward lower volume but higher success cheat services. Legal disruptions slow the market but rarely end it. Sustained engineering investment is necessary to maintain the advantage.

5) Privacy and attestation concerns​

Remote attestation involves servers verifying machine boot state with cryptographic evidence. Even when used for integrity checks only, the mechanism can raise privacy questions — especially if attestation telemetry is opaque. Activision will need to clearly explain what data is exchanged, how long it is retained, and how it cannot be misused; otherwise players will suspect overreach.

---

Practical guidance for PC players (how to prepare)​

Follow these steps to reduce the risk of being blocked or surprised at launch:

• Check TPM status: Run tpm.msc and confirm the TPM is present and reporting Version 2.0. If it says “Compatible TPM cannot be found,” check your UEFI/BIOS to enable fTPM/PTT or consult your vendor.
• Verify Secure Boot: Run msinfo32 and confirm BIOS Mode = UEFI and Secure Boot State = On. If not, be prepared to convert from MBR→GPT (use mbr2gpt.exe) and update your firmware. Backup BitLocker keys before making changes.
• Update UEFI/BIOS firmware: Vendors like ASUS, MSI, ASRock and others released updates during the beta to fix fTPM/PTT quirkiness; check your board’s support page and apply vendor‑supplied updates carefully. Don’t hurry a BIOS flash without power continuity or proper instructions.
• Keep drivers current: GPU drivers and chipset updates reduce odd interactions with anti‑cheat drivers. Use vendor‑recommended stable drivers for the game build.
• Prepare for support interactions: If you rely on custom OS setups (dual boot, Linux, Proton/Steam Deck), plan to use a dedicated Windows installation if you intend to play — kernel‑level anti‑cheat and Secure Boot can make non‑Windows setups incompatible.

---

What to watch after launch — the test for durability​

• Sustained low complaint volume: An initial beta is encouraging, but durable success will look like low and falling complaint volume across months and seasons, not just a clean beta week.
• Transparency on methodology: Activision publishing raw incident counts, sampling methodology, and periodic telemetry reports would do more to rebuild trust than marketing percentages alone. Independent metrics will be the best corollary evidence.
• Legal and marketplace follow‑through: Continued takedowns and civil actions against cheat vendors will be necessary to keep the market constrained; historical patterns show vendors rebrand quickly unless legal pressure is sustained.
• Operational stability: Watch for anti‑cheat driver‑related crashes or false positive waves; how quickly the company mitigates them will be a critical factor in player goodwill.

---

Editorial analysis: a cautious but real step forward​

The combination of RICOCHET’s incremental improvements, platform‑level attestation (TPM 2.0 + Secure Boot), machine learning detection, and legal pressure represents a substantive escalation in the defender’s toolkit. The beta metrics — starting near 97.5% clean matches and ending near 99% — are meaningful signals that the system is detecting and removing many known offenders quickly. Major outlets reproduced those numbers and community analytics echoed the same progress narrative.
However, the core statistical caveat remains: the published percentages measure detected and actioned events, not the universe of attempted cheats. Without raw counts, sampling methodology, or third‑party auditing, the figures are optimistic but not independently verifiable. The beta’s short window also reduces the incentive for large cheat operations to expose high‑volume exploits compared to a full launch — the adversary’s strategy might differ once the full game and seasonal economy kick in.
Importantly, the player‑facing tradeoffs are real. The technical benefits of attestation come at the cost of compatibility friction and increased support burden. For a franchise that relies on mass accessibility across generations of PC hardware, that is a non‑trivial policy decision. If Activision pairs the enforcement with clear user education, strong vendor firmware support, and transparent data practices, the acceptance curve will be smoother. If not, the company risks alienating a portion of its PC audience even while cleaning matches for others.

---

Final verdict​

The Black Ops 7 beta numbers from Team RICOCHET are a promising sign that a multi‑pronged anti‑cheat strategy — kernel drivers, ML detection, hardware attestation, and legal action — can materially reduce visible cheating in large public matches. The results should be treated as a meaningful technical advance and a welcome improvement for players fed up with blatant hacks.
That said, the fight is far from over. The headline statistics are encouraging but incomplete without transparent methodology and long‑term follow‑through. Activision must sustain engineering investment, keep pressure on cheat marketplaces, provide robust technical support for legitimate players, and build public telemetry transparency to convert a good beta into sustained trust at launch and beyond. If those elements come together, Black Ops 7 may mark a genuine turning point in Call of Duty’s anti‑cheat story; if they do not, the improvements risk being temporary wins in an ongoing cat‑and‑mouse game.

---

If you play on PC, now is the time to check TPM and Secure Boot, update firmware where necessary, and save BitLocker recovery keys — those pre‑flight steps will minimize headaches when the full launch and expanded RICOCHET enforcement go live.
Activision’s message is clear: the technical foundation for cleaner matches is stronger than it was, but durable victory against cheaters depends on engineering, enforcement, legal pressure, and clear communications — all sustained over months, not just a beta weekend.

---

Source: Windows Central Activision boasts reduction in cheaters during Black Ops 7 beta