4 ms·

Even if AAA supports Linux, it’s got to be without kernel anticheat. That’s a non starter for myself and many others

grimleech 3mo ago
it's a non starter to even have kernel level anticheat, it's the worst idea pushed on the consumers since browser level drms.
- Gareth321 3mo ago
  I strongly disagree. There have only ever been a handful of data exploits attributable to kernel-level anti-cheats. On the other hand, developers report that they significantly reduce cheating. As someone who plays online games, this is a tradeoff I gladly make. I often feel these comments are made by people whose preferred games are not ruined by cheaters. This is happening right now in Arc Raiders, and it's really sad to watch. The developer, Embark, is now investigating using KLAC to reduce the number of cheaters.
  - allarm 3mo ago
    As someone who doesn't play online games this is not a trade off I gladly make. Fortunately, however, KLAC will never become part of the Linux kernel, because adding it to an open-source system simply doesn't make sense.
    - Gareth321 3mo ago
      If it doesn't, Linux will always be a second-class platform for gaming. Valve is currently working on solutions beyond user-space, and I hope they succeed. I would like to move to Linux but I'm not willing to give up online games, and I hate playing with cheater.
      - allarm 3mo ago
        As I've already said, I don't play online games, and I'm not particularly concerned about all the fuss surrounding anti-cheat measures, so I don't think that suddenly makes Linux a "second-class gaming platform." For the games I do play, it's a first-class platform.
Kuraj 3mo ago
Kernel level anticheat doesn't make sense on Linux because the kernel is open. There's simply no incentive to do that
- debugnik 3mo ago
  An open source kernel doesn't prevent attestation mechanisms. Anticheats on Windows increasingly require Secure Boot, and all others drivers to be signed/whitelisted; they could try to put similar restrictions on supported distros.
  - cwillu 3mo ago
    Yeah, the nightmare scenario. I'm actually a little bit worried that we will look back on the last few years as the Golden Years of Gaming on Linux
  - B-Con 3mo ago
    Yeah, I imagine Linux support would be more like a supported Linux distro rather than generic Linux support. Something like SteamOS but with kernel anti-cheat and secure boot from the start. Big question is whether they can make craching the anti-cheat it hard/unpredictable enough that the publishers will trust it. If the publishers release such a platform and someone releases a live distro that can crack it with 3 mouse clicks, that's a lot of wasted effort. I have no idea how effective the Windows anti-cheat is, but I imagine that Linux tooling in general is going to make it harder to lock a user out of controlling their own machine.
  - frollogaston 3mo ago
    In fact Android has secure boot plus its own stricter thing. Probably the most commonly running software based on the Linux kernel.
aiisjustanif 3mo ago
Thankfully that has been improving [1] and non-kernel is 100% possible today [2] with valve has so much on documentation and support for game and anti cheat developers to accomplish this. [1]: https://www.gamingonlinux.com/anticheat/ https://www.gamingonlinux.com/anticheat/ [2]: https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/steamdeck/proton https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/steamdeck/proton
- zamalek 3mo ago
  Unfortunately many of these developers believe that kernel-level is mandatory (by virtue of believing that it actually works to prevent _all_ cheating, which we know it doesn't).
justaregulanerd 3mo ago
I don't think that will be the case sadly, just because the majority of gamers don't actually know or care about software having root or kernel level access. In a world where Linux becomes mainstream, AAA games will aim for those users, not hobbyists and enthusiasts like us.
- 0x262d 3mo ago
  What is the downside of this if I trust the software provider (eg Riot Games or presumably Valve if this ever comes to Linux)? I have recently come around in support of Riot's anticheat because multiplayer competitive games are so damaged without it, even though I use Linux 95% of the time.
  - frollogaston 3mo ago
    It's hard to trust. I have a spare Windows PC where I install whatever on it, and the EA Javelin anticheat has screwed things up before. Wouldn't be doing that on a computer I care about. Could the kernel have something built in to help with this? Like it can tell a program that nothing else is looking at its memory. And then secure boot attests that the kernel isn't tampered with.
    - seba_dos1 3mo ago
      > And then secure boot attests that the kernel isn't tampered with. That's pretty much a dystopian scenario where you're unable to interact with any network services without using devices with software that's controlled and/or trusted by the service provider. Basically a grave threat to Free Software as a whole, the end of free reimplementations of things you rely on to connect with the society. We already have a glimpse of that on mobile phones controlled by Google and Apple, we don't need more. There are kinds of games that actually rely on anticheats to be viable, but they're in the tiny minority and I don't think they're worth reorganizing the society over. Most just consider it a solution for problems caused by their incompetently designed netcode.
      - 3mo ago
Zetaphor 3mo ago
Exactly, no game is worth installing a rootkit for
eptcyka 3mo ago
Sure, but maybe this is a different battle? First party Linux support is orthogonal to games not using kernel level anti-cheat solutions. Tangentially, I wouldn't use kernel level anti-cheats, but if Valve's solution is indicative of the SotA in userspace anti-cheat solutions, there's a lot of room for improvement.

it's a non starter to even have kernel level anticheat, it's the worst idea pushed on the consumers since browser level drms.

Gareth321 3mo ago
I strongly disagree. There have only ever been a handful of data exploits attributable to kernel-level anti-cheats. On the other hand, developers report that they significantly reduce cheating. As someone who plays online games, this is a tradeoff I gladly make. I often feel these comments are made by people whose preferred games are not ruined by cheaters. This is happening right now in Arc Raiders, and it's really sad to watch. The developer, Embark, is now investigating using KLAC to reduce the number of cheaters.
- allarm 3mo ago
  As someone who doesn't play online games this is not a trade off I gladly make. Fortunately, however, KLAC will never become part of the Linux kernel, because adding it to an open-source system simply doesn't make sense.
  - Gareth321 3mo ago
    If it doesn't, Linux will always be a second-class platform for gaming. Valve is currently working on solutions beyond user-space, and I hope they succeed. I would like to move to Linux but I'm not willing to give up online games, and I hate playing with cheater.
    - allarm 3mo ago
      As I've already said, I don't play online games, and I'm not particularly concerned about all the fuss surrounding anti-cheat measures, so I don't think that suddenly makes Linux a "second-class gaming platform." For the games I do play, it's a first-class platform.

Kuraj 3mo ago

Kernel level anticheat doesn't make sense on Linux because the kernel is open. There's simply no incentive to do that

debugnik 3mo ago
An open source kernel doesn't prevent attestation mechanisms. Anticheats on Windows increasingly require Secure Boot, and all others drivers to be signed/whitelisted; they could try to put similar restrictions on supported distros.
- cwillu 3mo ago
  Yeah, the nightmare scenario. I'm actually a little bit worried that we will look back on the last few years as the Golden Years of Gaming on Linux
- B-Con 3mo ago
  Yeah, I imagine Linux support would be more like a supported Linux distro rather than generic Linux support. Something like SteamOS but with kernel anti-cheat and secure boot from the start. Big question is whether they can make craching the anti-cheat it hard/unpredictable enough that the publishers will trust it. If the publishers release such a platform and someone releases a live distro that can crack it with 3 mouse clicks, that's a lot of wasted effort. I have no idea how effective the Windows anti-cheat is, but I imagine that Linux tooling in general is going to make it harder to lock a user out of controlling their own machine.
- frollogaston 3mo ago
  In fact Android has secure boot plus its own stricter thing. Probably the most commonly running software based on the Linux kernel.

aiisjustanif 3mo ago

Thankfully that has been improving [1] and non-kernel is 100% possible today [2] with valve has so much on documentation and support for game and anti cheat developers to accomplish this. [1]: https://www.gamingonlinux.com/anticheat/ https://www.gamingonlinux.com/anticheat/ [2]: https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/steamdeck/proton https://partner.steamgames.com/doc/steamdeck/proton

zamalek 3mo ago
Unfortunately many of these developers believe that kernel-level is mandatory (by virtue of believing that it actually works to prevent _all_ cheating, which we know it doesn't).

justaregulanerd 3mo ago

I don't think that will be the case sadly, just because the majority of gamers don't actually know or care about software having root or kernel level access. In a world where Linux becomes mainstream, AAA games will aim for those users, not hobbyists and enthusiasts like us.

0x262d 3mo ago
What is the downside of this if I trust the software provider (eg Riot Games or presumably Valve if this ever comes to Linux)? I have recently come around in support of Riot's anticheat because multiplayer competitive games are so damaged without it, even though I use Linux 95% of the time.
- frollogaston 3mo ago
  It's hard to trust. I have a spare Windows PC where I install whatever on it, and the EA Javelin anticheat has screwed things up before. Wouldn't be doing that on a computer I care about. Could the kernel have something built in to help with this? Like it can tell a program that nothing else is looking at its memory. And then secure boot attests that the kernel isn't tampered with.
  - seba_dos1 3mo ago
    > And then secure boot attests that the kernel isn't tampered with. That's pretty much a dystopian scenario where you're unable to interact with any network services without using devices with software that's controlled and/or trusted by the service provider. Basically a grave threat to Free Software as a whole, the end of free reimplementations of things you rely on to connect with the society. We already have a glimpse of that on mobile phones controlled by Google and Apple, we don't need more. There are kinds of games that actually rely on anticheats to be viable, but they're in the tiny minority and I don't think they're worth reorganizing the society over. Most just consider it a solution for problems caused by their incompetently designed netcode.
    - 3mo ago

Zetaphor 3mo ago

Exactly, no game is worth installing a rootkit for

eptcyka 3mo ago

Sure, but maybe this is a different battle? First party Linux support is orthogonal to games not using kernel level anti-cheat solutions. Tangentially, I wouldn't use kernel level anti-cheats, but if Valve's solution is indicative of the SotA in userspace anti-cheat solutions, there's a lot of room for improvement.