- Amongst the discussion of rootkits and anti-cheat, I would like to add that part of the reason it is necessary is caused by the game companies that took away the standard method of playing multiplayer -- players running their own servers.
It used to be pretty easy to just ban people from playing, now we're 100% reliant on their ability to do it. So we have anti-cheat which roots our computer, and still doesn't 100% solve the problem.
by Buttons840
5 subcomments
- The only multiplayer game I currently play is Beyond All Reason (a RTS game).
It's a free and open-source game, so creating a cheat client would be especially easy. But I've never encountered cheating.
I think there's a few reasons for this:
1) The playerbase is small and there is no auto-matchmaking, just a traditional list of servers. This results in the same group of people always playing together. People don't want to cheat when they're playing with acquaintances they see frequently.
2) Spectators are allowed in every game. The top-ranked games usually have several spectators.
You might think this would result in even more cheating, but in practice the spectators would prefer to watch a sneak attacks succeed, because it's funny. It's boring to be whispering the enemy secrets to you buddy on a private Discord, it's more fun to watch your buddy die in a surprising and funny way.
Also, the spectators can spot if a player does something that suspiciously well timed or lucky. The spectators see all, so they have the information needed to spot suspicious behavior.
3) Official servers create an official record of what happened in every game. The entire community has access to all the recordings. If someone thinks cheating is happening they can link to the official game recording on Reddit (or whatever) and everyone can see what happened.
4) An active moderator team reviews every report of cheating. There are official moderators that do the banning, but also volunteer moderators which can watch the recordings and create a trusted written account of what happened; this makes the official moderators have an easier job.
- As most of you know, these anti-cheat systems are functionally equivalent to rootkits. There is zero visibility into how these privileges are used for targeted attacks. Due to geographic location of the large game companies this has a geopolitical angle. Fingerprinting of devices and the networks they are in provides a lot of metadata that is most definitely fed into their intelligence apparatus.
by 999900000999
10 subcomments
- I'm ordering a new laptop to work on LLM stuff, and while I thought about jumping through the hoops to get Linux running with secure boot...
I had a realization, it's a cold day in hell when someone else is going to tell me what I can run on my computer. All the latest multiplayer games are now requiring secure boot on Win11 as well
I'm actually wary of all these anti-cheats, they're literally hyperinvasive maleware.
I don't need gaming that much.
And if I do I'll stream it with Gamepass or another cloud service.
- It's funny that game makers make a fuss about anti-cheat not working on Linux but then publish Switch versions of their games. That platform has almost zero security and is commonly emulated with cheats even in multiplayer these days.
by kamranjon
6 subcomments
- At this point - you would think that cheaters could be detected on the server side by either training a model to flag abnormal behavior or do some type of statistics on the movement patterns over time - is a client-side anti-cheat really required?
by hastily3114
14 subcomments
- Is there really no way to make anti-cheat on Linux that can't be bypassed? I don't know much about this, but it seems very difficult to make an anti-cheat for a platform where you can make changes in the kernel.
- I used to dual boot, but I that there are so many games on Linux, I just don't buy or play incompatible games. So EA lost a BF6 sale for being assholes.
- The only game I miss when I moved to Linux was League of Legends. Everything else pretty much works. I get that it’s not worth it for them to deal with more potential cheating, but it’s a bummer.
by phoronixrly
1 subcomments
- Thank you, I prefer my Linux without rootkits.
- Cheats aside, are there any competitive games that include Uber-like rating system? Meaning that you'd need to provide feedback whether you'd play with your opponents/teammates again after a game.
by Hikikomori
0 subcomment
- While some anti cheat supports Linux they're mostly useless as you can much more easily bypass them on Linux compared to windows. I guess enabling them for competitive games is one way to increase Linux users.
by waterTanuki
0 subcomment
- One would hope that Microsoft will eventually revoke kernel access to these companies (see, Crowdstrike incident) eventually forcing game developers to support Linux for many popular online service games and actually stop being so lazy with anticheat. Somehow a smaller studio like Embark managed to make Arc Raiders compatible with Linux. I have 95 hours into the game and have not encountered 1 cheater. Yet a mega corp like EA can't possibly afford to support BF6 on Linux because of kernel anticheat. I put only 10 hours into bf6 and got killed by aimbots three times.
- Main problem with highly competitive games is that you can run them inside a container and have full access to memory.
Most games will share all the data with every client which makes it trivial to display positions of every enemy on the map. It's just convenient for developers.
In games like Tarkov, once you spawn in, your client gets all the information that possible - positions of players, their names, equipment, contents of every single container on the map.
Tarkov is not the best example, because the netcode is terrible, and the architecure is a joke - you can loot everything on the map with a keystroke, and kill anyone with another, but other games are not better.
Even in Valorant, which makes an extra effort to only send data relevant to the player - ie. data about player that you are about to see - you can use that to see around the corners.
- Hm, most of these seem updated 3-4 years ago, is this list relevant any more?
- The framing of this is, in my opinion, wrong. I'd like to be able to play unranked matches in spite of the anti-cheat system (which is probably a an anti-piracy enforcer) not working. I play games to have fun; yes, cheaters suck the fun out of matches, but so does anti-consumer "anti-cheat" software that impedes playing the actual game.
by jillesvangurp
2 subcomments
- It will be interesting to see how this evolves. It used to be that game developers could safely ignore Linux. But with a growing number of Steam OS, Steam Deck, and Linux + Steam users gaming, it's going to get increasingly more painful in terms of revenue to be telling those users "our game only works on Windows" and just miss out on the revenue and deal with the angry users, forums full of users complaining the game doesn't work, etc.
It might only be a few percent of overall users. But a few percent of a billion $ is a couple of tens of millions. That's a steep price to pay for anti-cheat code.
by cornichon622
1 subcomments
- I don't understand why multiplayer games don't run more on the server. If the server runs the game, then sends to client only what it needs to display the game and play sounds, the client doesn't have more information than necessary and a whole class of cheats is eliminated. There is no need for a client to know where an enemy player is if the player won't be shown on screen (wall hacks).
I think World of Tanks runs this way, and I've never encountered much cheating on there.
by lwansbrough
3 subcomments
- Anti-cheat is a necessity for an enjoyable game experience. If you are a casual who doesn’t care about game integrity, you probably aren’t the target audience.
I don’t want any cheaters in my games. I don’t care if a rootkit is required. Riot has a kernel level anti-cheat and it’s _really_ good. It’s so good in fact that it deters most cheaters from even trying. This is the dream for anyone who wants fair games.
- It's a perfect litmus test as far as I'm concerned. If a company believes it's ok to put things like that on my machine, I don't want them anywhere near it, even if they were to "compromise" to work on Linux. Relying on a users machine to snitch on them is dumb at every level. Fix your hearts or die.
by givemeethekeys
3 subcomments
- Between Windows being so unbearably bloated and no way to make anti-cheat really work on Linux, it looks like the consoles win!
- It'd be nice to have the publisher of the games...
- Fundamentally anti-cheat is made to ensure you're running the game in genuine Microsoft Windows. If you're using Wine, you're not. They could check for genuine Linux, except that isn't actually a real thing, so they can't. Maybe on SteamOS.
by MisterTea
1 subcomments
- But can it run Crysis? No. Not on Linux :-(
I actually really liked Crysis for its open maps where you can approach a goal using different tactics. It had a lot of flaws and I hated the alien ship along with everything after as it was way too linear. Though I really want to play it again but alas, no more Windows for me.
- nah thanks. i remember my vista install getting destroyed by securom
by mock-possum
0 subcomment
- As someone who never plays online games with randos - mostly single player, or multiplayer with friends -
I cannot stress enough how much I do not give a shit about anti-cheat, and how thoroughly fed up I am with poorly conceived and ill executed malware being installed on my computer, holding games I own hostage in the name of stopping cheaters that I don’t care about it.
Anti-cheat should be opt-in.
- kernel anti-cheat are notoriously inefficient and are weaponized by hackers.
- It's so disappointing that the halo master chief collection still doesn't support split screen. Nothing compared to the joy of playing halo with friends in the same room.
- Well, that's just silly. Hook up a Raspberry Pi as your keyboard, mouse input and video output and all the anti-cheat fails. Same (largely) for VMs, same for many emulators.
And if nothing works you can always build a robot pushing mouse, buttons, etc.
Of course you can raise the bar, but if anything has been shown it's that cheating is not something that anyone has been able to prevent yet.
In many situations you can also interfere on the packet level. Of course maybe you need to extract some key, but in many situations that's not exactly hard. And then you can hook something into network.
by Barry-Perkins
0 subcomment
- [dead]
- [dead]
- I cant believe some people still insist calling it GNU/Linux.