Steam games will now need to fully disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages (www.gamingonlinux.com)
from ampersandrew@lemmy.world to games@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 19:44
https://lemmy.world/post/21452661

Now if only they could more clearly communicate when games are playable offline.

#games

threaded - newest

Retro_unlimited@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 19:45 next collapse

That’s awesome! GTA V just screwed everyone on Linux! What a rug pull.

conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works on 30 Oct 20:07 collapse

Adding kernel malware after the fact should entitle every single owner who requests one to a full refund no matter how long has passed.

TipRing@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 20:15 next collapse

Full agree. I do want some kind of policy for games that introduce anti-cheat both during early access and after release. Bricking a game you paid for should offer some sort of recourse.

ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca on 30 Oct 20:42 next collapse

That should be any update if you can’t play the previous one

CaptDust@sh.itjust.works on 30 Oct 21:53 next collapse

I’d really like Valve to take an official policy on post-release changes that break games, but for what it’s worth they have not given me any hassle with refunds in these scenarios.

nekusoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de on 30 Oct 22:22 next collapse

Yup. If it’s important enough that devs now have to add a disclaimer on the store page, surely devs shouldn’t be allowed to circumvent that by adding it later. Since SteamDeck customers are affected by this the most, it’s weird that this isn’t already a rule, particularly for games that are SteamDeck verified.

theneverfox@pawb.social on 01 Nov 05:20 collapse

That’s a bit much… It’s just not possible to guarantee that as a developer

Software is a living thing, and anything useful is made up of layer after layer of ever shifting sand. We do our best, but we are all at the mercy of our dependencies. There are trade-offs, there are bugs we can do nothing about, and sometimes moving forward means dropping support for platforms that are no longer “cheap” enough to afford while also working on the game

I love this though. I also like the idea of requiring access to earlier builds.

These mitigate anti consumer practices - dropping support for a platform is more likely to be a technical trade-off or unintentional consequence though

ad_on_is@lemm.ee on 01 Nov 19:16 collapse

I do agree with the part where software moves, dependencies yada, yada… I’m a developer myself.

But… this is different. They eliminated a perfectly working game, where they didn’t have to invest a minute of labor to get it working on Linux. The only thing they had to provide was the .so-file (for EAC) when publishing to Steam… Valve did all the work to make EAC compatible on Linux, yes, on user-level… but still… it fucking worked.

Punishing an entire userbase, because other assholes (assumably) used Linux for cheating is discrimination. Even if there were no cheaters at all… it’s still discrimination… because it used to fucking work.

theneverfox@pawb.social on 02 Nov 03:39 collapse

Oh no, I totally agree with you that this is gross behavior - I just think your rule is too broad.

So we need more focused rules and mechanisms. I think disclosing anti-cheat on the store is a good mechanism, I think forcing them to provide previous releases is a good rule. That obviously doesn’t cover nearly enough, but in the current gaming environment I think it’s a good start

Vilian@lemmy.ca on 30 Oct 21:56 next collapse

Valve was giving refund when riot added the anticheat

xep@fedia.io on 31 Oct 00:00 collapse

Are there Riot games on Steam?

DragonOracleIX@lemmy.ml on 31 Oct 05:43 collapse

They publish their single player games to steam. Don’t know about any of their multiplayer ones though.

xep@fedia.io on 31 Oct 14:10 collapse

I believe those are games made by other studios with the League IP and published by Riot. AFAIK there's no reason for them to have anticheat.

pressanykeynow@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 00:38 next collapse

I don’t think that’s fair. I “own” GTA5 and don’t really care for the last… 8 years? what they add. I had the full content of my purchase. Why should I be able to gain money for this?

conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works on 31 Oct 02:53 collapse

Don’t be pieces of shit and you won’t owe refunds.

In a just world people would be going to prison for it.

PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 05:14 collapse

That’s exactly what Valve did. The automated refund system wasn’t available, but you could request a manual review and cite the added anti cheat; Valve was refunding those who did so.

schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business on 30 Oct 19:50 next collapse

Ooh and it’s a giant yellow banner you probably won’t miss, and not some two-shades-ligher-than-the-background nonsense.

Good job, Valve.

ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca on 30 Oct 20:42 next collapse

Gamers don’t care

If Valve was against this then they would block them from their store. This is avoiding legal consequences

tdawg@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 20:55 next collapse

“”“gamers”“” aren’t a monolith

Some people clearly care bc they are currently discussing it

ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca on 30 Oct 21:00 next collapse

“””gamers””” aren’t a monolith

That’s why some people discussing it aren’t going to do anything to dissuade the practice

kopasz7@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 22:17 next collapse

Games have been buried in negative reviews for less. We can’t tell in advance.

But implying you know, and can speak for all people who play games is just bafflingly ignorant and conceited.

ArmoredThirteen@lemmy.ml on 30 Oct 22:50 collapse

And people not discussing is better how?

FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org on 30 Oct 21:41 next collapse

Well to be fair, we’re like 1% of all gamers. Most gamers don’t give a flying fuck and will gladly buy these products anyway. So the companies don’t really have much incentive to give a shit.

pressanykeynow@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 00:32 collapse

That’s why it’s a big disturbing banner where most gamers don’t understand the text but know that big disturbing banner is bad. Will it affect the sales? Not at all. But it will raise the problem(mostly Linux anticheat) to the higher standing people in the gaming companies than before because now they require those top level managers to make a decision is it big disturbing banner or Linux anticheat.

FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org on 31 Oct 00:39 collapse

I highly doubt this will do anything at all to sales. But I’m just guessing. Maybe it will. Hopefully! But I still applaud the change by Valve. I think it’s great.

pressanykeynow@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 00:47 collapse

I don’t think the point is to do anything on sales. Valve profit from sales. It’s to raise the problem so now the managers have to decide on a scale how much they abuse the players. Before it wasn’t even a problem, now it’s Valve: “maybe you shouldn’t wink wink”

FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org on 31 Oct 01:44 collapse

Well yea, I don’t think Valve wants to nuke their own sales, lol. I think they don’t want any devs doing any funny business and abusing anti cheat. That’s my guess.

shadearg@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 22:39 next collapse

See, you don’t understand. /s

Nothing ever matters, and nothing ever happens.

brbposting@sh.itjust.works on 31 Oct 00:17 collapse

Another “to be fair” - what do y’all reckon is the proportion of gamers who could define kernel? (not rhetorical)

Edit: maybe not as good as a question as how many have any opinion on kernel-level anticheat, since you don’t need to be able to define kernel to be against the anti-cheat if you’ve heard it slows down games

schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business on 30 Oct 21:39 next collapse

That’s fair: most probably don’t.

I appreciate a ‘this won’t work in Linux no matter what you do’ banner on things, though.

Katana314@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 13:58 collapse

I’ve been using some browser plugins for Steam that add ProtonDB information to each Store page, it’s a useful thing to have. It may even make sense to leave it as a plugin, since many Windows users won’t care.

dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de on 30 Oct 22:16 next collapse

You speak for an entire demographic. How do you get that role?

ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca on 30 Oct 22:41 collapse

Observation

dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de on 30 Oct 23:07 collapse

Not enough observation to read this room aye.

ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca on 31 Oct 14:29 collapse

I don’t care what the minority of people here say

The most popular games use kernel anti cheat, kids think cheating is bad. And very few people even know what a kernel is, they will just think it means “cheating is impossible” even though it doesn’t do that at all

dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de on 31 Oct 14:38 collapse

You care enough to reply again.

ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca on 31 Oct 14:44 collapse

It would be rude not to reply to someone who is as curious as you

dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de on 31 Oct 14:55 collapse

Fair enough.

For what it’s worth if you’re happy with anti-cheat at the kernel level then crack on. If I don’t trust corporations with that level of access then that’s also fine.

This isn’t something I would ever install in my system and the two games I play Minecraft and Factorio both don’t have this issue so I’m not missing out by not playing COD 8928384 or whatever popular games use this.

Harvey656@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 07:25 collapse

I’m a gamer, and absolutely fuck these damn things. I still haven’t bought helldivers 2 yet. I refuse to compromise my system for their issues.

mrvictory1@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 16:31 collapse

If kernel level AC is a concern, you can play the game on Linux where “kernel” level AC runs at user level thru Wine

saltesc@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 21:06 next collapse

They do this with Early Access and people still lose their shit about empty content and unfinished graphics in a game they paid $10 for.

Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca on 31 Oct 12:52 collapse

If only they let you filter out games from being seen on your store page or showing up in recommendations using this as a criteria.

Nytixus@kbin.melroy.org on 30 Oct 19:56 next collapse

Meanwhile at Epic...

"Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh"

pivot_root@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 01:17 collapse

That’s quite a generous interpretation. If we’re being real about it, it’s going to be another “you assholes” email from Timmy.

TommySoda@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 20:23 next collapse

I feel like they’re doing this because they are going so hard with steam deck. Regardless, good on Valve for doing this.

cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca on 02 Nov 17:31 collapse

The steam deck is also amazing, such a nice piece of hardware. I’ve been gaming on Linux for years and I’m surprised how well it works. Feels like a console.

corroded@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 20:25 next collapse

Why is kernel-level anti-cheat even a thing?

If I was trying to prevent cheating, I’d hash the relevant game files, encrypt the values, and hard-code them into the executable. Then when the game is launched, calculated the hash of the existing files and compare to the saved values.

What is gained by running anti-cheat in kernel mode? I only play single-player games, so I assume I’m missing something.

ampersandrew@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 20:32 next collapse

They can prevent you from running cheats that other anti-cheats can’t detect. For instance, they could modify the value in memory so that your calculated hash always succeeds even when it’s modified. This doesn’t stop cheating though; it just means cheaters have to use cheat hardware that exists at a layer that even kernel anti-cheat can’t detect.

Maalus@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 20:35 next collapse

And then a game gets updated so the hashes don’t match and uh oh, everything is fucked. Oh, but we can change the hashes of the files in the executable! Yeah, so can they. People modding shit into the executable is basically a given. Let alone the fact that you’d need to sit through a steam “validation of files” length of time every time you’d need to launch a game (because validation works exactly as you have described).

What is gained is that it has access to more information. Some cheats use an entirely different program / process that reads memory and outputs info that is available to the game but hidden from the player. Like a client needs to know where a person on the other team is to be able to draw their model. So you read that, you put a little box over where they are, and bang you have wallhacks.

joyjoy@lemm.ee on 30 Oct 20:40 collapse

I think the popular thing now is to mod your mouse so it clicks on the enemy player’s head.

kevindqc@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 20:37 next collapse

Because there are kernel-level cheats

What you proposed can very easily be bypassed without even needing kernel access by just editing the executable code that checks hashes to always return true

msage@programming.dev on 30 Oct 22:55 next collapse

Boo freaking hoo.

It’s not like there are so many other ways to cheat, actually used in many games with anticheats.

We should all stop pretending it’s necessary to put malware into your computer just so some company can claim they have no cheaters, which is never even true.

xep@fedia.io on 30 Oct 23:58 collapse

The point of anti-cheat is to create a substantial barrier for cheating. If you have to go the extra mile to run an external hardware cheat so as to be "undetected" then surely this means the anti-cheat is working. If it were as ineffective as you imply, cheaters would be cheating on their main accounts.

sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip on 31 Oct 16:21 collapse

… Buuut you can still defeat Kernel level Anti Cheats.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=RwzIq04vd0M&t=2s&pp=2AECkAI…

Which means that you still have to end up relying on reviewing a player’s performance and actions as recorded by the game servers statistically via complex statistical algorithms or machine learning to detect impossibly abnormal activity.

… Which is what VAC has been doing, without kernel level, for over a decade.

All that is gained from pushing AC to the kernel level is you ruin the privacy and system stability of everyone using it.

You don’t actually stop cheating.

It is not possible to have a 100% full proof anti cheat system.

There will always be new, cleverer exploitation methods, just as there are with literally all other kinds of computer software, which all have new exploits that are detected and triaged basically every day.

But you do have a choice between using an anti cheat method that is insanely invasive and potentially dangerous to all your users, and one that is not.

SkavarSharraddas@gehirneimer.de on 30 Oct 21:03 next collapse

Modern cheats for multiplayer games don't modify local files (or attribute values in memory), since the server validates everything anyway. They're about giving you information that's available but not shown in the game (like see-through walls, or exact skill ranges), or manipulate input (dodge enemy damage, easy combos). Those cheat can run in kernel mode (or at least evade detection from user mode), so the anti-cheat needs kernel mode to be more effective.

ysjet@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 01:19 next collapse

since the server validates everything anyway

Oh you sweet summer child.

The server doesn’t validate shit, because that takes up CPU cycles on THEIR hardware, which costs them money. A huge part of kernel level anticheat is forcing YOU to pay the cost for anticheat, so they can squeeze a few more pennies out of it. And if your computer gets owned because they installed insecure, buggy malware on your system…? Well, they’ll just deny. After all, it’s kernel-level, how are YOU going to prove anything?

Katana314@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 14:05 collapse

If server validation was still a common practice (as it should be) then cheats wouldn’t come in the form of speed hacks, teleportation hacks, or invincibility. The traditional thing in CS that was hard to prevent is aimhacks and wallhacks. I respect that those are hard to prevent, but they can be much less impactful in modern hero shooters.

catloaf@lemm.ee on 30 Oct 21:13 collapse

You don’t need to modify the files to modify data in memory.

JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 20:28 next collapse

Common valve W

sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip on 30 Oct 20:42 next collapse

However, it’s only being forced for kernel-level anti-cheat. If it’s only client-side or server-side, it’s optional, but Valve say “we generally think that any game that makes use of anti-cheat technology would benefit from letting players know”.

I will always love Valve for their ability to use corpospeak against corpos.

Your game has anti-cheat?

Wonderful!

I’m sure that always only results in an improved experience for all gamers, lets let them all know!

=D

Joeffect@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 23:24 collapse

How does vac play into all of this then …

Edit: I was talking about them labeling vac games as being anti cheat… And wondering if they were going to pull some double standard… I didn’t know they label them already and still don’t know if they do…

graff@lemm.ee on 30 Oct 23:36 next collapse

It doesn’t run at the kernel level?

sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip on 30 Oct 23:42 collapse

VAC is not kernel level, because surprise you don’t actually need kernel level to do anti cheat well.

VAC games would just get the standard AC message banner, not the scary yellow kernel level warning banner.

… I am pretty sure VAC games have indicated on their store page that they use VAC for well over a decade.

lastweakness@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 04:37 collapse

you don’t actually need kernel level to do anti cheat well.

I’m sure you’re right, but VAC is one of the worst examples for that… I think whatever Blizzard does with Overwatch 2 is a better example.

sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip on 31 Oct 15:56 collapse

I would love to see any kind of documentation that can somehow prove OW2’s AC is better than VAC, something that isn’t based on vibes or immediacy bias.

lastweakness@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 16:42 collapse

I sure wish there was some empirical study regarding the same too. I’m very much going by anecdotal evidence from myself and others right now

sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip on 31 Oct 16:56 collapse

So … your previous assertion that OW2’s AC is superior to VAC was in fact just based on vibes.

Anti Cheat developers typically do not like to explain how exactly they work, how effective they actually are.

Their data is proprietary, trade secrets.

There will almost certainly never be a way to actually conduct the empirical study you wish for, save for (ironically) someone hacking into the corporate servers of a bunch of different anti cheat developers to grab their own internal metrics.

But that should be obvious to anyone with basic knowledge of how Anti Cheats work, both technically and as a business.

… None of that matters to you though, you have completely vibes based anecdotes that you confidently state as fact.

Please stop doing that.

When someone has no clue what they’re talking about, but confidently makes a claim about a situation because it feels right, this is typically called misinformation.

lastweakness@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 17:34 collapse

I mean, anybody could verify it by spending a few hours each on the respective games… But yes, any empirical data would be nice. For example, a study on the amount of blatant hackers found on lobbies joined in comparable ranks. Anyway, this isn’t exactly misinformation to anybody who has played both games at any decent rank. It’s unproved but immediately discernible information. Take that how you will, i don’t really intend to argue about this here. This kind of pointless argument is the worst thing about Lemmy.

sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip on 31 Oct 18:00 collapse

I mean, anybody could verify it by spending a few hours each on the respective games… But yes, any empirical data would be nice.

No, thats an anecdotal experience, and all it would tell you is the players’ perception of how prevalent cheating is… not how prevalent it actually is, not how effective an anti cheat system is at blocking cheaters.

But yes, any empirical data would be nice. For example, a study on the amount of blatant hackers found on lobbies joined in comparable ranks

“It would be great if there was any valid data/research to back up or disprove that thing I said earlier, but there isn’t, therefore I am completely justified in saying whatever as I want and acting as if its indisputable!”

Anyway, this isn’t exactly misinformation to anybody who has played both games at any decent rank. It’s unproved but immediately discernible information.

Again, no.

You made a claim that a particular anti cheat system is better than another.

You keep saying that ‘oh anyone can just tell’.

No.

What you are describing is again, at best, player perceptions of cheating prevalence.

The logic you are using is exactly the same logic that people who believe in astrology or woo woo nonsense medical treatments use to justify their efficacy.

… You have nothing but vibes and anecdotes, which you admit are unproved and have no basis in fact, beyond ‘i think this is obvious’.

You’re just bullshitting.

It is indeed pointless to attempt to get a bullshitter to admit they are bullshitting, when they’ve already backpedalled by moving goal posts, dismissing the importance of the discussion after being called out for making a specific claim which they can’t back up.

You could just admit that ah well shit yeah, I guess I don’t have any actual valid reasoning or data to back up my claim, but nope you keep trucking on, doing everything you can to talk around that point instead of addressing it.

Gigasser@lemmy.world on 01 Nov 00:15 collapse

I mean…bro was just giving an opinion man. He didn’t even really say that much originally. I think claiming the “superiority” of something online alot of the times is vibes based. That ain’t necessarily bad though. Are people not allowed to give more generalized or vague opinions?

Chozo@fedia.io on 30 Oct 21:05 next collapse

Probably a pessimistic take, but I don't expect this to have any discernable impact on sales, or any other effects that would discourage publishers from these practices. The average user doesn't care about or understand how these things work; they'll see an anti-cheat warning on the store page and think "Okay, tell the colonel I'll be on my best behavior then" and continue to buy the game.

spankmonkey@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 22:05 collapse

It will benefit those that care and won’t negatively impact the experience for those that don’t.

Win, win.

Woodstock@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 21:23 next collapse

Can someone explain like I’m stupid on kernel level anti cheat and why I should watch out for it? Not a dig at all, a genuine question!

ArchRecord@lemm.ee on 30 Oct 21:36 next collapse

To put it very simply, the ‘kernel’ has significant control over your OS as it essentially runs above everything else in terms of system privileges.

It can (but not always) run at startup, so this means if you install a game with kernel-level anticheat, the moment your system turns on, the game’s publisher can have software running on your system that can restrict the installation of a particular driver, stop certain software from running, or, even insidiously spy on your system’s activity if they wished to. (and reverse-engineering the code to figure out if they are spying on you is a felony because of DRM-related laws)

It basically means trusting every single game publisher with kernel-level anticheat in their games to have a full view into your system, and the ability to effectively control it, without any legal recourse or transparency, all to try (and usually fail) to stop cheating in games.

ampersandrew@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 21:40 next collapse

And it’s worth noting that trusting the game developer isn’t really enough. Far too many of them have been hacked, so who’s to say it’s always your favorite game developer behind the wheel?

sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip on 31 Oct 02:16 collapse

Or, even better, when you let a whole bunch of devs have acces to the kernel…

sometimes they just accidentally fuck up and push a bad update, unintentionally.

This is how CrowdStrike managed to Y2K an absurd number of enterprise computers fairly recently.

Its also why its … you know, generally bad practice to have your kernel just open to fucking whoever instead of having it be locked down and rigorously tested.

Funnily enough, MSFT now appears to be shifting toward offering much less direct access to its kernel to 3rd party software devs.

barlescharkley@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 22:32 next collapse

More importantly, if traditional anticheat has a bug, your game dies. Oh no.

If kernel level anticheat has a bug, your computer blue screens (that’s specifically what the blue screen is: a bug in the kernel, not just an ordinary bug that the system can recover from). Much worse. Sure hope that bug only crashes your computer when the game is running and not just whenever, because remember a kernel-level program can be running the moment your computer boots as above poster said

Woodstock@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 00:38 next collapse

Thank you! Really clear and appreciate you taking the time to explain!

FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org on 31 Oct 00:45 next collapse

Not all anti cheats run at startup. Some only run when you play a game. I think vanguard for valorant ran all the time at first and people were pissed. Meanwhile easy anti cheat runs only with a game. So it depends. It all sucks though.

ArchRecord@lemm.ee on 31 Oct 03:22 collapse

That’s definitely true, I probably should have been a little more clear in my response, specifying that it can run at startup, but doesn’t always do so.

I’ll edit my comment so nobody gets the wrong idea. Thanks for pointing that out!

Katana314@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 14:03 collapse

It’s not just trust of the game developer. I honestly believe most of them just want to put out profitable games. It’s trust that a hacker won’t ever learn how to sign their code in a way that causes it to be respected as part of the game’s code instructions.

There was some old article about how a black hat found a vulnerability in a signed virtual driver used by Genshin Impact. So, they deployed their whole infection package together with that plain driver to computers that had never been used for video games at all; and because Microsoft chose to trust that driver, it worked.

I wish I could find an article on it, since a paraphrased summary isn’t a great source. This is coming from memory.

catloaf@lemm.ee on 31 Oct 17:18 collapse

It’s trust that a hacker won’t ever learn how to sign their code in a way that causes it to be respected as part of the game’s code instructions.

That’s not an accurate description of the exploit you describe. It sounds like the attacker bundled a signed and trusted but known vulnerable version of the module, then used a known exploit in that module to run their own unsigned, untrusted code with high privileges.

This can be resolved by marking that signature as untrusted, but that requires the user to pull an update, and we all know how much people hate updating their PC.

yamanii@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 22:46 next collapse

Easy, a bug in battle eye forced me to reinstall windows, this kernel access has to go.

HK65@sopuli.xyz on 30 Oct 23:53 next collapse

Making it super simple, it runs with full access on your machine, always. It can fuck anything up, and see everything. It can get your browser history, banking details or private messages you enter, activate your webcam or mic without you knowing, or brick your computer even.

And you can’t even check what it’s really doing on your computer because it’s a crime under US law.

Finally, it can get hacked and other people than the creator can do all these to your computer as well,as it already happened once.

scarilog@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 04:02 collapse

And you can’t even check what it’s really doing on your computer because it’s a crime under US law.

Is this specifically for kernel level anticheat? Because this isn’t a thing for software in general right??

Miaou@jlai.lu on 31 Oct 09:14 next collapse

If anything reverse engineering is more permissible in the USA than many other places, IIRC

HK65@sopuli.xyz on 31 Oct 10:18 collapse

Not if you’re running afoul of the DMCA.

HK65@sopuli.xyz on 31 Oct 10:18 collapse

It’s a thing for any measure said to enforce copyright under the DMCA.

So it’s a thing for most proprietary software.

loboaureo@lemm.ee on 31 Oct 07:51 next collapse

Also, the most games that don’t work in linux is for this reason (and steamdeck works in linux)

mrvictory1@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 16:33 collapse

Imagine a game having higher privileges than what you get with “Run as administrator”

Riccosuave@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 21:35 next collapse

Not to be annoying, but can someone please ELI5 how kernel level anti-cheat software actually works, or link good resources where I can read about it.

ampersandrew@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 21:40 next collapse
scoobford@lemmy.zip on 30 Oct 21:40 next collapse

Eli5: your PC has different access levels a program can run at. This prevents a malicious or badly coded program from completely fucking your computer. Kernel level anti cheat runs at the lowest level access that exists under windows. It can do basically whatever it wants to your PC, and if a backdoor is coded in (happens way more than you’d think), it gives malware basically total access to your PC.

conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works on 30 Oct 21:50 collapse

It runs with higher priveleges than you have and can see anything that happens on your computer.

It also creates a giant additional attack vector.

hal_5700X@sh.itjust.works on 30 Oct 21:41 next collapse

Nice.

[deleted] on 30 Oct 22:04 next collapse

.

yamanii@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 22:48 next collapse

4 likes on him complaining that modlogs being public is something bad, cowards that only want to be shitty in the shadows.

PyroNeurosis@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 31 Oct 00:59 collapse

I’m still fairly new. Where do I go for modlog drama?

Redjard@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 31 Oct 02:06 collapse

There is a sub for sanity checking mod actions, aita-style.
If you keep in mind it is for active unconfirmed situations, and that votes there are not meant to mark the cases of mod abuse, I think it can fill that niche.

!yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Jtee@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 23:02 next collapse

Wow, mad because you can be held accountable. That’s sad.

Thanks for the steam link!

finitebanjo@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 23:10 next collapse

I was going to ask why the thumbnail on this post is a hexagon shaped bear, but your comment explains it well enough.

Blisterexe@lemmy.zip on 31 Oct 00:18 collapse

the thumbnail is a hexagon bear because it’s the logo for easyanticheat, the most recogniseable anticheat

finitebanjo@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 00:22 collapse

Well thats somewhat unnerving.

fsxylo@sh.itjust.works on 31 Oct 16:28 collapse

You will love the spyware bear.

Voyajer@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 23:12 next collapse

He used to relentlessly spam the /r/linux_gaming subreddit and argue with people there too until he deleted his reddit account lol

mrvictory1@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 05:15 collapse

He’s still on Reddit

Voyajer@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 10:40 collapse

He would make another account account

mrvictory1@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 16:25 collapse

Yes he said he made an alt but I think his main is still active? Not sure.

NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip on 31 Oct 15:08 collapse

I really don’t see a need to drag community drama everywhere. GoL is one of the biggest aggregator blogs out there for… linux gaming. Whether we should prioritize original sources over aggregators is a different discussion.

But yeah. Liam is great for news aggregating but he is 100% the stereotypical linux gamer and has a long history of starting random shit. Still annoyed by how fast he got everyone to shit on the Duckstation devs because they didn’t want to be exploited.

Sunny@slrpnk.net on 31 Oct 21:17 collapse

Being a big(“great”) news aggregator doesn’t excuse bad behavior.

NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip on 31 Oct 21:28 collapse

Are you the lemmy cops? Is it your responsibility to chase any link to someone’s website across every instance and make sure people know they are a bit of a jackass?

If you think GoL should be a banned source, take it up with the various moderators. If you think only primary sources should be allowed (which I actually agree with), that is also a discussion to be had.

But rushing in to berate people for linking to one of the most popular news aggregators for a story that people would be interested in because you don’t like the guy who owns that site? All you are doing is discouraging people from making posts in the future.


Which is the problem with dragging community/subreddit drama everywhere you go. It just makes the site a much more hostile place for everyone. And we really aren’t big enough to be doing that.

Sunny@slrpnk.net on 31 Oct 21:42 collapse

🚨 🚨 🚨 FREEZE! STOP RIGHT THERE!! 🚨 🚨 🚨

As the official lemmy police I am arresting you for defending a mad lad caught abusing powers. You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.

Jokes aside… I do think people should be allowed to post opinions an discuss other peoples behavior. Gol dude was caught abusing his powers, which is a disgusting thing to do, personally don’t mind him being called out for that in a post here and there. It’s not an attack on the poster, it’s a reminder to folks who the guy really is.

I’m all for the truth, no matter who it is.

x00z@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 23:46 next collapse

I wish Valve would just ban them. It’s weird to have something that looks like pure malware in a Game store.

pressanykeynow@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 00:21 next collapse

Luckily Valve seems to believe in freedom of decision for their users so they won’t do this. There are kernel level cheats so there are kernel level anticheats. Obviously anticheats are mostly lame in what they do so it would probably be better for them to not be kernel level. Still there are “pure malware” anticheats and Valve thinks it’s up to the user to decide if they want one, their job is to inform the user. And that’s the best approach here in my opinion.

Maestro@fedia.io on 31 Oct 07:40 collapse

They will be gone with time, but not because anything that Valve does. Microsoft is locking down the kernel after the CrowdStrike debacle. In a few years it will be impossible to run any custom kernel code.

EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de on 31 Oct 00:02 next collapse

god damn right!

xep@fedia.io on 31 Oct 00:06 next collapse

I do everything important like banking etc on a separate device that isn't my gaming PC. This has been quite liberating since I worry less about invasive anti-cheat, drm etc. I realize not everyone wants to do this but it's been a nice compromise.

ampersandrew@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 00:24 next collapse

That’s one way to do it, but I worry less about those things by not supporting them with my time and money.

Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 31 Oct 06:10 collapse

For me anything important is done in the browser (very rarely) and mostly on the phone.

Maxxie@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 31 Oct 03:47 next collapse

I imagine the alternative way to combat kernel-level cheats would be asking player for all his game state data, validating it on a server?

Wouldn’t work on peer-to-peer and you’d have to do a bunch of unnecessary compute(recalculating every tick if player-generated data is possible according to game rules) but its the only way I can think of.

bitwolf@lemmy.one on 31 Oct 04:07 next collapse

Or bring server browsers back and let server mods handle it.

I’ve rarely, if ever, had a bad time using a server browser.

A more modern idea. Put all the chesters into the same lobbies through matchmaking

Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 31 Oct 06:09 collapse

Or bring server browsers back and let server mods handle it.

How will you handle competitive matchmaking? I agree for casual matchmaking though

A more modern idea. Put all the chesters into the same lobbies through matchmaking

Maybe moderm in relative termy but notnreally. One of the articles I could find on the quick is from 4 years ago: ign.com/…/cod-warzone-cheaters-are-being-matched-…

DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 04:45 next collapse

That does not detect things like wall hack and aim-bots that don’t modify the game state directly.

Maxxie@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 31 Oct 05:33 collapse

Don’t tell the client what’s going on outside its vision, I suppose? Add a small buffer to compensate for latency, so wall hack would be more of a “corner hack”.

DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 12:19 collapse

I mean sure, that is how some (mostly strategy and tactical) games do it, but for an FPS, figuring out where the buffer should be would be a programmers nightmare. I guess you would have to try to calculate all possible lines of sights a player could have within some buffer time (100-1000ms) and then all players that could in theory enter them… Add physics and it is practically impossible.

Also, corner hack is useful enough and it does not address aimbot. IMO the answer is some combination of human moderation and ability to play with “friends” instead of randos. E.g. you could ask people to like or dislike a player at the end of a match and try to pair players that liked each other in the past.

levzzz@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 05:28 collapse

Most games already do this lol Cheats usually don’t do anything that is technically impossible to do on a vanilla client, just highly improbable

Maxxie@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 31 Oct 05:35 collapse

True, can’t think of how would you combat a cleverly written aim-bot.

vordalack@lemm.ee on 31 Oct 07:39 next collapse

Any program having kernel level access is spyware. This is getting ridiculous.

Mwa@lemm.ee on 31 Oct 10:10 collapse

Vanguard anticheat…

Mwa@lemm.ee on 31 Oct 10:09 next collapse

W steam/valve

sonymegadrive@feddit.uk on 31 Oct 10:37 next collapse

Easy Anti Cheat - requires manual removal

Wait, so this sketchy, privacy-invading stuff remains even after a game is uninstalled?! I had no idea.

How is this stuff not classed as malware at this point?

sp3tr4l@lemmy.zip on 31 Oct 16:04 next collapse

Oh it was initially classed as insanely intrusive malware when kernel level AC was introduced about a decade ago, by anyone with a modicum of actual technical knowledge about computers.

Unfortunately, a whole lot of corpo shills ran propaganda explaining how actually its fine, don’t worry, its actually the best way to stop cheaters!

Then the vast, vast majority of idiot gamers believed that, or threw their hands up and went oh well its the new norm, trying to fight it is futile and actually if you are against this that means you are some kind of paranoid privacy freak who hates other people having fun.

Crozekiel@lemmy.zip on 31 Oct 16:17 next collapse

I’ve been shouting from the rooftops for years that this stuff is malware. I’m not the only one. No one listens.

mrvictory1@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 16:29 next collapse

EAC installation process includes “registration” of a game, and the uninstall process “unregisters” the game. If all games using EAC are uninstalled, EAC itself also should be uninstalled.

catloaf@lemm.ee on 31 Oct 17:11 next collapse

Wikipedia says malware is

any software intentionally designed to cause disruption to a computer, server, client, or computer network, leak private information, gain unauthorized access to information or systems, deprive access to information, or which unknowingly interferes with the user’s computer security and privacy

It does not do any of these things. Like any software, it may have vulnerabilities, and being a kernel module it can be high risk. But that’s no different from any kernel module, like your graphics driver.

michaelmrose@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 21:12 next collapse

It’s a much higher risk than average because games are often abandoned within one year of release and still run as long as 10-15 years later and connects to the internet and other randos on the internet. See the Call of Duty games that allow you to take over the computer of anyone who connects to your online match. It greatly degrades the security of its users.

Technically lots of things people call “malware” don’t actually do any of those things. For instance they may hijack your default search engine, pop up ads, or otherwise monetize your computer at your expense. The category that was invented by ass coverers is “possibly unwanted program” but outside of those who worry about being sued by scumbags people colloquially refer to both what you call malware AND PUPs as "malware the root of which is “bad” after all. Language being descriptive not prescriptive I think this broader definition of malware is fine.

cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca on 02 Nov 15:29 collapse

It unknowingly interferes with my security or privacy, 100%. It has root access. What’s it doing in there? Nowadays you’re naive to think it’s just to prevent game cheating. I guarantee they’re collecting all kinds of information.

michaelmrose@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 21:04 next collapse

Do you remember when Sony released cds that when inserted into Windows computer auto ran an installer that installed a rootkit that made it impossible for Windows to see any processes or files that started with a certain sequence of characters instantly turning any malware that named its files or processes similarly powerful rootkit. Oh and it installed a cd driver that made it impossible to copy their music.

Suggested removal was a full reinstall of windows.

Xttweaponttx@sh.itjust.works on 15 Nov 17:06 collapse

Jesus christ

yamanii@lemmy.world on 01 Nov 01:52 collapse

Plenty of games use it, if it uninstalled with each one then others would stop working.

cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca on 02 Nov 15:27 collapse

I kind of assumed it would be packaged with each game, a waste of space (but how big could it be?) but leaving a game with anti cheat a global dependency seems like a bad idea.

ThermonuclearCactus@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 31 Oct 15:54 next collapse

I bought Sea of Thieves about 5 years ago. Recently, they added kernal-level anticheat (which does precisely fuck-all to actually stop cheating). While that is annoying, I’m not particularly worried because the studio that makes that game is owned by Microsoft, and like all Microsoft products, it was banished to my windows partition with the rest of the spyware.

MoonHawk@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 19:03 collapse

Well… kernel level software can access everything on your computer. That includes other partitions and unmounted drives

raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 19:14 next collapse

Only if those other partitions are not encrypted. Sure, it could still wipe them - but that’s something that backups are good for, and something you would certainly notice immediately :)

ThermonuclearCactus@lemmy.blahaj.zone on 31 Oct 20:00 collapse

Anything sensitive is encrypted and I never decrypt it while running windows.

Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works on 31 Oct 17:38 next collapse

Is this a Linux problem? I’ve never had to look for this detail before in Windows.

ampersandrew@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 17:54 next collapse

It does prevent Linux compatibility, but even if it didn’t, it’s a computer security problem, for those who care. You’re essentially allowing different game companies to install a rootkit on your computer so you can play a video game.

raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 19:15 collapse

You’re essentially allowing different game companies to install a rootkit on your computer so you can play a video game.

Put like that, makes it even more obvious how insanely stupid slash desperate slash addicted some gamers are, doesn’t it?

CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 20:33 collapse

Most gamers don’t know that easy anti-cheat is a rootkit to begin with.

raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world on 01 Nov 09:46 collapse

is “easy anti-cheat” a brand name? Or was that just your wording?

CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world on 01 Nov 18:29 collapse

www.easy.ac/en-US

raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world on 02 Nov 09:50 collapse

Well - if people still trust any piece of software coming from Epic…

trigonated@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 18:03 next collapse

Mostly, and even some Windows users don’t want to install software that has such a great amount of permission over the entire system just for a game’s anti-cheat.

It’s nice that users can now know beforehand if a game uses such software. Avoids refunds.

bay400@thelemmy.club on 31 Oct 18:20 collapse

Unless, of course, they add it months after release drastically limiting your chances of refunding (looking at you EA WRC 2024 😡)

trigonated@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 19:02 next collapse

That sucks : (

[deleted] on 01 Nov 06:16 collapse

.

michaelmrose@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 20:59 collapse

If they change the deal they should have to offer refunds. This makes it an expensive choice after the fact.

michaelmrose@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 20:58 collapse

No its common for anti-cheat on Windows to have full root permission to your entire system Windows users are just on average less intelligent, less concerned about privacy, and, more ignorant about technology. This doesn’t mean using Windows makes you stupid its just the OS of choice for the stupid and ignorant.

nforminvasion@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 21:38 collapse

Holy logical fallacy batman. Ad hominem much?

michaelmrose@lemmy.world on 01 Nov 00:33 collapse

Ad hominem isn’t when you insult people AND make an argument its when you insult people INSTEAD of making an argument.

User initially believes that this is only a Linux issue because its almost entirely discussed on forums frequented by technical people who often use Linux whereas forums full of Windows gamers are equally effected but ignorant of the topic.

[deleted] on 31 Oct 17:42 next collapse

.

captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works on 31 Oct 19:24 next collapse

I wonder if you phrased it the way the Play store does: This game wants permission to:

  • send SMS messages
  • make calls
  • know your location
  • stalk your family
  • raid your fridge
  • access, read and upload files
  • manage and add contacts
  • cup your balls
  • go through your trash
  • irritate your boss

etc.

Think anyone would install them?

Vilian@lemmy.ca on 31 Oct 21:54 next collapse

of course, people don’t even look at play store permissions

captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works on 31 Oct 23:46 collapse

I suppose they do suffer from the “Known in the state of Cancer to cause California” problem. A bubble level app wants in-app purchases and GPS access.

Nexy@lemmy.sdf.org on 01 Nov 01:00 next collapse

i dONt hAVe anYThinG To HIdE

captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works on 01 Nov 01:18 collapse

Anyone who says that while wearing pants is a filthy liar.

lud@lemm.ee on 01 Nov 07:51 collapse

I mean it’s also pretty cold without pants.

linearchaos@lemmy.world on 01 Nov 04:22 next collapse

looks at Disney pluses binding arbitration clause

Yup

not_so_handsome_jack@sh.itjust.works on 01 Nov 04:48 collapse

Cup my balls? Go on…

MyNameIsAtticus@lemmy.world on 01 Nov 08:11 collapse

This will be helpful for discerning if a game can run on the Steam Deck. There’s not many games that don’t have verification (Either by Valve or ProtonDB) but for newer games with anticheat it will serve as a good rule of thumb i imagine

EdgeRunner@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 01 Nov 09:57 next collapse

I think that’s the main goal behind,
To avoid frustration for steamD owners and avoid a bad reputation of “all games are unplayable on it”

cyberpunk007@lemmy.ca on 02 Nov 06:45 collapse

Lots of games with anti cheat auto work under wine/proton. The most on top of my head example is Elden ring. Runs fine on my desktop with arch, as well as my steam deck.