5 ms·

I'm not playing any online games that require what is especially a rootkit to be installed on my system. This isn't the first time that anti-cheat software made

I'm not playing any online games that require what is especially a rootkit to be installed on my system. This isn't the first time that anti-cheat software made by Riot has taken stuff too far. Anyone remember when they introduced an anti-cheat measure that would run on ring 0? Why does a video game need so much control over my computer? I can understand these measures being taken in game consoles, but most people use their PCs for a lot of stuff, and most likely store sensitive information that they wouldn't want to risk being exposed to some potencial malicious entity.

dageshi 5y ago
The moment you install any software on your PC you've essentially become exposed to the same risks. For the people who play the game, avoiding cheaters is a big deal. As you say, you have the right not to install or play the game, they're very clear about what they're doing.
vkou 5y ago
You won't install a closed source rootkit, but you will install a closed source self-updating binary blob? That's a weird hill to die on, but it is, of course, your choice.
- josephcsible 5y ago
  The more privileged code is, the more important it is that it's FOSS.
- reitzensteinm 5y ago
  A video game made in good faith will not screw with your machine when it's not running. This is absolutely not remotely true with a root kit which could mess with all sorts of things, especially if you have multiple installed. And it won't be clear what is causing it. It's not a weird view at all, it's perfectly pragmatic.
- eric__cartman 5y ago
  Actually I avoid non-free software as much as possible nowadays. My main use for a Windows partition is for occasional gaming and using that odd piece of software that doesn't have a good replacement that runs under Linux. I understand that propietary things like the graphics drivers are inevitable to install on Windows, but what Riot does with their Vanguard anti-cheat system is crossing a line. If you look up the documentation on how to disable it, this piece of software loads every time your computer boots, and to enable it again the computer has to be restarted, so the kernel module can be loaded again. Most games will load any anti-cheat mechanisms when opening the game and run it only while playing. After you exit out of the game, every single process related to it is killed. This is different from having Vanguard constantly running in the background, with maximum privileges regardless of what you're doing.
marcodiego 5y ago
> I'm not playing any online games that require what is especially a rootkit to be installed on my system. Isn't all anti-cheat systems exactly that? Is there a way to differentiate any proprieatary driver to what you describe?
- josephcsible 5y ago
  The point of invasive client-side anti-cheat is to surveil the user and report back to the game developer. Most proprietary drivers don't do that.
ASalazarMX 5y ago
> Why does a video game need so much control over my computer? The most benign explanation would be the misguided attempt by their system architects to solve the cheat problem by abusing client resources because it was easier. The malign explanations border on conspiracy theories, but benign or malign, I too refuse to allow it. Cheating is a scourge of multiplayer games, but this isn't an acceptable solution.

dageshi 5y ago

The moment you install any software on your PC you've essentially become exposed to the same risks. For the people who play the game, avoiding cheaters is a big deal. As you say, you have the right not to install or play the game, they're very clear about what they're doing.

vkou 5y ago

You won't install a closed source rootkit, but you will install a closed source self-updating binary blob? That's a weird hill to die on, but it is, of course, your choice.

josephcsible 5y ago
The more privileged code is, the more important it is that it's FOSS.
reitzensteinm 5y ago
A video game made in good faith will not screw with your machine when it's not running. This is absolutely not remotely true with a root kit which could mess with all sorts of things, especially if you have multiple installed. And it won't be clear what is causing it. It's not a weird view at all, it's perfectly pragmatic.
eric__cartman 5y ago
Actually I avoid non-free software as much as possible nowadays. My main use for a Windows partition is for occasional gaming and using that odd piece of software that doesn't have a good replacement that runs under Linux. I understand that propietary things like the graphics drivers are inevitable to install on Windows, but what Riot does with their Vanguard anti-cheat system is crossing a line. If you look up the documentation on how to disable it, this piece of software loads every time your computer boots, and to enable it again the computer has to be restarted, so the kernel module can be loaded again. Most games will load any anti-cheat mechanisms when opening the game and run it only while playing. After you exit out of the game, every single process related to it is killed. This is different from having Vanguard constantly running in the background, with maximum privileges regardless of what you're doing.

marcodiego 5y ago

> I'm not playing any online games that require what is especially a rootkit to be installed on my system. Isn't all anti-cheat systems exactly that? Is there a way to differentiate any proprieatary driver to what you describe?

josephcsible 5y ago
The point of invasive client-side anti-cheat is to surveil the user and report back to the game developer. Most proprietary drivers don't do that.

ASalazarMX 5y ago

> Why does a video game need so much control over my computer? The most benign explanation would be the misguided attempt by their system architects to solve the cheat problem by abusing client resources because it was easier. The malign explanations border on conspiracy theories, but benign or malign, I too refuse to allow it. Cheating is a scourge of multiplayer games, but this isn't an acceptable solution.