Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Steam games will need to disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages

gamingonlinux.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 660 posts

Re: Steam games will need to disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages

#211

Post by talldayo »

dbrueck wrote: post #176

The anti-cheat problem is long-running and complicated. If you choose not to run anti-cheat because you understand that these are opaque rootkits, good for you! That's a totally, 100% valid choice. But please keep in mind: - you are a tiny minority and not the target customer - online multiplayer games are an absurdly big business (i.e. there are huge incentives here) - no, you can't completely solve this server side…

> I'd love to see more curiosity from the HN community on this.

I'd love to see more curiosity from developers - the disappointment is mutual. Instead of attempting to systematically stop all forms of cheating through innovative or competitive methods, it would appear the industry is converging on dangerous half-measures and excusing it with evidence from a clearly failing system.

What should we, the users, expect? Perfect, cheat-free software that surveils us endlessly, or "good enough" security that lets users decide for themselves which servers are suitable? Let me cast my vote, and I know which ideal I consider realistic and attainable.

Re: Steam games will need to disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages

#212

Post by crtasm »

yreg wrote: post #195

I've just reinstalled GTA V last week and I was very surprised to find out that I now have to install a rootkit to run it. They had the balls to add a mandatory kernel extension into a game that I've bought 10 years ago and that I wish to play in single player only. I find it utterly ridiculous. As usual, piracy would have been the superior experience.

[dead]

Re: Steam games will need to disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages

#213

Post by ukd1 »

supportengineer wrote: post #147

Not a gamer - Is Steam basically a package manager like 'yum' or 'brew', but for games?

Yes; but more like the apple App Store - they take a cut, and (to some/varying extent) try to ensure some level of legitimacy / quality.

Re: Steam games will need to disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages

#214

Post by burnished »

sadeshmukh wrote: post #190
dbrueck wrote: post #176

The anti-cheat problem is long-running and complicated. If you choose not to run anti-cheat because you understand that these are opaque rootkits, good for you! That's a totally, 100% valid choice. But please keep in mind: - you are a tiny minority and not the target customer - online multiplayer games are an absurdly big business (i.e. there are huge incentives here) - no, you can't completely solve this server side…

Why isn't server-side anticheat a possible solution? Cheats can spoof inputs purely through visual output as well, meaning there cannot be full trust client-side.

Not an expert but I've done a little reading and basically the combination of real time actions and a network makes it intractable, you end up just having to trust the client on some things (or having to make trade offs like a client potentially not having the information needed to display the game state to the player, or choppy/unresponsive gameplay as a function of latency).

Re: Steam games will need to disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages

#215

Post by Terr_ »

There are two trends in the broader multiplayer game ecosystem which I think are worth highlighting:

1. More games are trying to cut costs with ad-hoc P2P servers, meaning that sometimes important logic is occurring on a not-so-trusted machine.

2. More games are using a revenue model which may be threatened by consumer-side tinkering.

For example, imagine a cooperative game that uses a P2P server, and the host has done something to make it much easier for the squad to get a drop of the Super Special Loot (#1) and the rarity of the loot through gameplay drives many players to purchase it though an in-game store.

Re: Steam games will need to disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages

#216

Post by burnished »

Thaxll wrote: post #61
OtomotO wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's exactly what I tell my friends. I can't play certain games, because they don't run on Linux and even if they did, I am not gonna install a rootkit to run them.

And yet you install driver on Linux without knowing it, I mean Linux has 0 security for drivers.

You gotta think about surface area and risk when comparing apples to oranges here.

Re: Steam games will need to disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages

#217

Post by sunshowers »

dbrueck wrote: post #176

The anti-cheat problem is long-running and complicated. If you choose not to run anti-cheat because you understand that these are opaque rootkits, good for you! That's a totally, 100% valid choice. But please keep in mind: - you are a tiny minority and not the target customer - online multiplayer games are an absurdly big business (i.e. there are huge incentives here) - no, you can't completely solve this server side…

While all of what you're saying is true, I think it is worth noting that historically a large chunk of this problem was solved by communities hosting servers. I agree that in the matchmaking era, remote attestation via kernel-level anticheat is the inevitable solution that you converge to after a few iterations.

And yes, servers would often kick out people who were too outside of the general skill level, even if they weren't cheating. As (say) a p80 player, playing against a p99 player feels roughly as bad as playing against a cheater. (But of course the p99 player is doing so honestly.)

Re: Steam games will need to disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages

#218

Post by coretx »

AlotOfReading wrote: post #149
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please clarify how an API which runs in the kernel does not have root access? Because I don't believe that's possible, but perhaps I'm wrong.

That's the promise of eBPF.

I'm already counting down the days for eBPF to blow up in our face. But admittedly, it's the cheapest way of gaining more capabilities and privileges than you need, thus it's here to stay.

Re: Steam games will need to disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages

#219

Post by Thaxll »

lomase wrote: post #163
bitwize wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

As Gabe Newell said "piracy is a service problem" I could pirate every game I have on my Steam account. I don't do it because the added value that Steam gives me.

Gabe newell has 0 value in that discussion, Steam is defacto the monopoly on PC, when you make billions by not doing anything and taking 30% on every game it's less of an issue.

The other funny thing is that Half Life 2 came out with full blown DRM that only decrypted when the game released.

Re: Steam games will need to disclose kernel-level anti-cheat on store pages

#220

Post by reissbaker »

db48x wrote: post #95
throwaway48476 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was the last time you had to install a Linux driver from out of tree?

Most people do install Nvidia’s out‐of‐tree graphics driver. It is definitely a risk.

Approximately no one with a Steam Deck installs Nvidia's out of tree graphics driver (because the Steam Deck is built on AMD).
Post reply on HN