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

  • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    360
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      119
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

    • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      139
      ·
      2 months ago

      Gamers don’t care

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

      • DreamButt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        171
        ·
        2 months ago

        “”“gamers”“” aren’t a monolith

        Some people clearly care bc they are currently discussing it

        • FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            22
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            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
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              2 months ago

              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
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                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
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  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.

        • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          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

        • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          45
          ·
          2 months ago

          “””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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            25
            ·
            2 months ago

            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.

        • Katana314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          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.

      • Harvey656@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

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

    • Dremor@lemmy.world
      shield
      M
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      As he said, modlogs are public, and it seems like other user retreived the trace of what you call an “abuse of power” : https://sopuli.xyz/comment/12732467 .

      It is in his right as a moderator to chose how he moderate the communities he has the right to. If he finds your comment pedantic and annoying, and chose to remove it, so be it.

      I’m not taking sides here. I don’t know the whole story, and I doubt anyone else here does. With the little context provided, It’d be hard to take knowingly a side.

      But in both case, this is textbook harassement as you are copy-pasting this comment on every community this is posted on. This community has a pretty clear rule against harrassement (rule 2), which you are breaching, offense for which I’ll use my g… mod given right of banning you for the time being (I’ll re-evaluate tomorrow when I’ll be less tired).

      Edit : After talking with OP via PM, a ban of 7 days was issued

    • Jtee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      134
      ·
      2 months ago

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

      Thanks for the steam link!

    • yamanii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      ·
      2 months ago

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

    • Voyajer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      2 months ago

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

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

      • Sips'@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

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

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          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.

          • Sips'@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            🚨 🚨 🚨 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.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

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

  • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    138
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      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…

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        57
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          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.

          • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            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
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              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

              • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                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
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  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.

    • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      149
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        51
        ·
        2 months ago

        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.

      • CaptDust@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        ·
        2 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          2 months ago

          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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            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
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              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

      • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        2 months ago

        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.

          • DragonOracleIX@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

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

            • xep@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        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?

  • sonymegadrive
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    2 months ago

    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?

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

    • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

    • Crozekiel@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

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

    • yamanii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

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

      • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        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.

    • mrvictory1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        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.

      • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        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.

  • vordalack@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

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

  • TommySoda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    ·
    2 months ago

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

    • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

  • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    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?

    • pivot_root@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

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

  • Woodstock@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      103
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      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.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        66
        ·
        2 months ago

        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?

        • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          2 months ago

          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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        60
        ·
        2 months ago

        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

      • FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          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.

    • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        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??

    • yamanii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

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

    • LoboAureo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

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

    • mrvictory1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

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

  • ThermonuclearCactus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

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

  • corroded@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.

    • kevindqc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          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.

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        … Buuut you can still defeat Kernel level Anti Cheats.

        https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RwzIq04vd0M&t=2s&pp=2AECkAIB

        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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        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.

    • ampersandrew@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

      • unalivejoy@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

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

  • xep@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    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.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      2 months ago

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