Yes, for example the client could be forced to use it during official wars. Since there is no linux version and it causes network, cpu and disk lags I hope it won't be needed anywhere...

I thought that if someone tried to enforce poeple to practically stream video of their desktop in full resolution over a network all the time (especially during matches when bandwidth is needed the most to reduce the lag) they would simply get ignored and would fail miserably. And then again, there's no way you can tell if the screenshots are genuine or rendered separately (i.e. a dual core computer with 2 graphics cards would have no trouble "streaming" demo to another program locally and thus generate screenshots of how it would've looked like w/o wallhack for example).

On the other hand, if someone doesn't have a computer powerfull enought to do that, something like this couldn't even run properly.

It still makes no sense to me.

Hmmm it doesn't send screenshots of your desktop, only ingame shots (at least I hope so ... :E). And it's not a stream. It only sends a single screenshot every x minutes, or at least that's how the SSClient worked in CS. And at least for me, a small lag spike (I reckon the upload speed of the screenshot is limited + the image quality dropped down a bit to decrease filesize) is a small price to pay for 100% confirmation that the ppl I play with are not using wallhaxxx. But I guess the biggest problem here would be when your average player tries to connect to Wurst server and gets kicked everytime for not having some weird ass program... Just pick another server from the list. But for matches I would personally recommend this...

Hmmm it doesn't send screenshots of your desktop, only ingame shots (at least I hope so ... :E).

And there is still the question of pics being genuine or not.