Now if only they could more clearly communicate when games are playable offline.
You must log in or register to comment.
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.
That does not detect things like wall hack and aim-bots that don’t modify the game state directly.
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
FYI - the owner of this site, gamingonlinux, was a mod on the !linux_gaming@lemmy.ml community until they were caught abusing their moderator powers. Then they deleted their account and complained on mastodon that it’s stupid design that mod logs are public. [Screenshot]
Instead, here’s a link to the official post https://steamcommunity.com/groups/steamworks/announcements/detail/4547038620960934857
Wow, mad because you can be held accountable. That’s sad.
Thanks for the steam link!
4 likes on him complaining that modlogs being public is something bad, cowards that only want to be shitty in the shadows.
I’m still fairly new. Where do I go for modlog drama?
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.
He used to relentlessly spam the /r/linux_gaming subreddit and argue with people there too until he deleted his reddit account lol
He’s still on Reddit
I was going to ask why the thumbnail on this post is a hexagon shaped bear, but your comment explains it well enough.
the thumbnail is a hexagon bear because it’s the logo for easyanticheat, the most recogniseable anticheat
Well thats somewhat unnerving.
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.
Gamers don’t care
If Valve was against this then they would block them from their store. This is avoiding legal consequences
“”“gamers”“” aren’t a monolith
Some people clearly care bc they are currently discussing it
See, you don’t understand. /s
Nothing ever matters, and nothing ever happens.
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
“””gamers””” aren’t a monolith
That’s why some people discussing it aren’t going to do anything to dissuade the practice
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.
And people not discussing is better how?
You speak for an entire demographic. How do you get that role?
Observation
Not enough observation to read this room aye.
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.
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
How does vac play into all of this then …
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.
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.
It doesn’t run at the kernel level?
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.
That’s one way to do it, but I worry less about those things by not supporting them with my time and money.
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!
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.
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??
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.
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
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?
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.
Thank you! Really clear and appreciate you taking the time to explain!
Easy, a bug in battle eye forced me to reinstall windows, this kernel access has to go.
That’s awesome! GTA V just screwed everyone on Linux! What a rug pull.
Adding kernel malware after the fact should entitle every single owner who requests one to a full refund no matter how long has passed.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Valve was giving refund when riot added the anticheat
Are there Riot games on Steam?
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?
Don’t be pieces of shit and you won’t owe refunds.
In a just world people would be going to prison for it.
That should be any update if you can’t play the previous one
I feel like they’re doing this because they are going so hard with steam deck. Regardless, good on Valve for doing this.
I wish Valve would just ban them. It’s weird to have something that looks like pure malware in a Game store.
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.
Common valve W
Meanwhile at Epic…
“Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh”
That’s quite a generous interpretation. If we’re being real about it, it’s going to be another “you assholes” email from Timmy.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
You don’t need to modify the files to modify data in memory.
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.
It will benefit those that care and won’t negatively impact the experience for those that don’t.
Win, win.
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.
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.
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.
