From both a technical perspective and if the maintainers of these anti-cheat will consider porting or re-writing kernel level anti-cheat to work on linux, is it possible? Do you think that the maintainers of kernel level anti-cheat will be adamant in not doing it, or that the kernel even supports it or will support it. I think that if it ever happens, there will be a influx of people moving to linux, or abandoning their duelboots, and that alot of people will hate that such a thing is available on linux.

  • muusemuuse@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    Short answer: no

    Long answer: only the most important things should even have such low-level access to the system. A fucking game is not in that category. Nooooooo

    • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Obligatory Fuck Denuvo. If I had virtually infinite money, I’d do a hostile takeover of Denuvo and burn it to the ground.

  • Ulu-Mulu-no-die@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    I surely hope they never will, no user program should ever be allowed to run at kernel level, that’s what malware does.

    I personally avoid those kind of games, but those who won’t can dual-boot.

    • NotProLemmy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Or…just don’t play those games.

      99% of their communities are more toxic than radioactive waste. And, they are not open source and they don’t respect privacy. Because they are greedy.

      • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        All true. And yet, plenty of people do want to play those games. And there are other games (Borked) which also cannot be played no matter what. Really annoying, that.

        • NotProLemmy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah, some people are just stubborn. By some i mean most. You gotta adapt, what do you think evolution’s trying to tell you?

  • phantomwise@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    I can’t wait until I am able to give random programs kernel access on my system! That doesn’t sound problematic in the least! After all, I have the fullest confidence that for companies developing anticheat, my security is their highest concern! /s

        • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          He’s just being pedantic.

          Technically ‘ls’ has kernel access because it depends on system calls in order to produce its output.

          System calls are the mechanisms through which programs request services from the Linux kernel, allowing them to perform tasks like file management, process control, and device management. Any program that’s running on your machine has the access required to make syscalls and so you could say they have access to the kernel. They won’t have kernel-level privileges, so they can’t act as the kernel, but they do have access. Obviously the original user was referring to kernel anti-cheat modules which act as the kernel with all of the same privileges.

  • coconut@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    Sure hope not. If I wanted to run rookits I’d just use Windows. Why bother with Linux?

    This is why I don’t want more Linux adoption and don’t understand people cheering every new user. We’re in a sweet spot where a lot of games enable userland anticheat while we don’t get kernel level ports (however they may be shipped doesn’t matter). The only thing that’ll come out of more adoption is kernel level anticheat ports that’ll probably work with a few corporate backed distros only and we’ll actually lose the games we have today. Because those will switch over the kernel level alternatives too.

    The only way I’d like Linux to be a generic multiplayer platform is server side anticheats. It is very obviously the way to go and we are seeing extremely slow adoption (e.g. Marvel Rivals).

    • Ulu-Mulu-no-die@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      On one side, I’m one of those glad for people coming to Linux because Linux is truly fantastic and it can make your life easier on many things, I’m happy for them.

      On the other side, I share your concerns, because everything that gets adopted by the masses is inevitably subject to enshittification, I would never want that to happen to Linux.

      We should find a sweet middle-point tho I have no idea what that would be.

  • Anna@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    From technical point of view it is possible. eBPF already has almost everything needed for doing that. And I think it can be done with a simple LKM but if they want it included in the main tree I’m sure they’ll get some colorful email from Linus.

  • dan@upvote.au
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    AFAIK Microsoft have plans to block kernel level anti-cheat on Windows. After the CrowdSec issues last year, they’re rethinking which types of programs should even be allowed to run in kernel space.

    Edit: I was wrong. They actually want to increase what can be done in user mode, to reduce reliance on kernel mode code.

  • kadup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Absolutely nothing prevents somebody from writing a kernel level anticheat on Linux.

    Users would throw a fit, and it would be way easier to bypass, but it certainly could be made.

  • bad_news@lemmy.billiam.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    It already works, but studios using anticheats that DO support Linux CURRENTLY don’t bother implementing it because we’re maaaaaybe 3% of the market on a good day, so they say “fuck it” and don’t expend a few dev hours to enable it because they see it as a pain to deal with v users who need it.

    • bonn2@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      AFAIK the current anticheat systems on Linux only run in userspace not at kernel level. This does mean Linux is theoretically easier to bypass compared to windows, some games just dont seem to want to take that risk. For as you said 3% of the market.

      I personally disagree with that stance though, because all it takes is a hardware device and all software anticheats are useless no matter the os (think a raspberry pi, and capture card). So anticheat is really a losing battle anyways.

      • SmoochyPit@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Yeah… Apex Legends dropped Linux support a while ago and that’s one of the reasons they cited; and tbf, there were publicly available Linux cheats that ran under proton.

        But there’s also loads of publicly available “external” cheats that run the way you described. Some run through a virtual machine even. It’s just not a robust solution for preventing cheating, and mostly hurts the legit Linux players.

  • Caveman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    It’s the other way around. Windows will stop supporting kernel level anti-cheat because of Crowdstrike