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

251–260 of 660 posts

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

#251

Post by hayst4ck »

throwaway48476 wrote: post #2

After the crowdstrike disaster 3rd party kernel drivers need to be shunned for non critical applications. Games publishers have been bad actors in this space for a long time now. The genshin impact anticheat was used in a malware campaign. Rockstar was very misleading trying to imply their kernel driver not being compatible with the steam deck was valves fault.

Crowdstrike isn't even the worst case. The SolarWinds disaster is the worst case scenario.

You have a closed source rootkit designed for finding data in raw memory (like passwords from an unlocked password manager), loaded into many gamer's machines, which many software engineers are. Some anti cheat explicitly support's arbitrary remote code execution by design. Many people mix their personal password vaults with their company's, which means that if you successfully hack an anticheat company and you can read the raw memory of an opened password manager with a program that is already designed to scan all processes memory, you now potentially have extremely valuable credentials. A small portion will even do things like add their 2fac keys into their vaults.

Here is Gabe Newell's thoughts on AntiCheat that are very relevant to this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/1y70ej/valve_vac_an...

Of course the other problem is the 23andMe problem and enshitification. Even if the data uploaded by anti-cheat isn't used right now, the storage of data alone creates incentive for abuse.

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

#252

Post by cmxch »

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…

Rejoinder: Blizzard’s Warden. No bootkit, no invasive system configuration required, even plays nice with “niche/enthusiast” platforms like Linux, doesn’t even care if your keyboard isn’t a bit niche too.

Thought: If they expect a console level of lockdown, why do they bother writing for the PC? If I wanted a $game_console, I’d buy the console.

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

#253

Post by Gigachad »

hayst4ck wrote: post #251
throwaway48476 wrote: post #2

After the crowdstrike disaster 3rd party kernel drivers need to be shunned for non critical applications. Games publishers have been bad actors in this space for a long time now. The genshin impact anticheat was used in a malware campaign. Rockstar was very misleading trying to imply their kernel driver not being compatible with the steam deck was valves fault.

Crowdstrike isn't even the worst case. The SolarWinds disaster is the worst case scenario. You have a closed source rootkit designed for finding data in raw memory (like passwords from an unlocked password manager), loaded into many gamer's machines, which many software engineers are. Some anti cheat explicitly support's arbitrary remote code execution by design. Many people mix their personal password vaults with th…

Something slightly related happened recently. A bit of malware that was distributed as a mod for BeamNG was installed by a high up Disney employee, who was also logged in to some internal work stuff. The hackers were able to leak huge amounts of company data.

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

#254

Post by drilbo »

wilsonnb3 wrote: post #184
orbital-decay wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The genshin impact anticheat was used in a malware campaign. Rockstar was very misleading trying to imply their kernel driver not being compatible with the steam deck was valves fault. I mean, nothing of this is new. ESEA, one of the most influential esports leagues, was caught using its anticheat to mine Bitcoin in 2013. [1] This is long out of control, probably since the days BattlEye switched to ring0 in 2012 du…

People really need to find a better word than 'rootkit' to describe software that users willingly and intentionally give root access.

I think it's fair to say that a lot of users have no idea they're doing so, hence why changes like the one in TFA are necessary to encourage transparency around these practices

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

#255

Post by cmxch »

fngjdflmdflg wrote: post #198
andrewmcwatters wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need kernel-level cheats to bypass VAC, nor kernel level anti-cheats to catch cheaters.

>nor kernel level anti-cheats to catch cheaters. Do you have some examples of good anti-cheats that are not kernel-level? Do you have any that are as good as Riot's Vanguard? I'd prefer examples of FPS games since these are the most mechanically skill based compared to other genres that have more strategy, but would like to hear any examples you are thinking of. Lastly, if you say server-side, that may work, but many…

Blizzard’s Warden + their legal team. While not strictly an FPS directed solution, I can play Heroes of the Storm in more places without breaking my system like Vanguard does for League of Legends.

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

#256

Post by akira2501 »

logical_person wrote: post #175
fngjdflmdflg wrote: post #171

I hate to say this but a large percentage (in fact, I believe a majority) of gamers simply do not care about invasive anti-cheats. Right now CounterStrike players are mostly begging Valve for kernel-level anti-cheat since their current solution isn't working at all. If anything, this warning will actually make many player's more impressed with the game. That said, more consumer information is almost always better in…

Prop 65 went great! Let's get a warning out for every game with peer to peer networking while we're at it.

> Prop 65 went great!

The secondary effect is that business will stop using processes and chemicals which require them to carry this warning. You've effectively created a new market segment.

Are the labels annoying to the point of comedy? Sure, but it's not /your/ behavior we were trying to modify.

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

#257

Post by Gamemaster1379 »

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…

> game companies are highly incentivized to work with (or at least not antagonize) the elite players

Actually, this is generally untrue. Companies BELIEVE this but often times, these players are a vocal minority put on pedastal and they often end up making the game worse for the general player base.

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

#258

Post by akira2501 »

fngjdflmdflg wrote: post #198
andrewmcwatters wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need kernel-level cheats to bypass VAC, nor kernel level anti-cheats to catch cheaters.

>nor kernel level anti-cheats to catch cheaters. Do you have some examples of good anti-cheats that are not kernel-level? Do you have any that are as good as Riot's Vanguard? I'd prefer examples of FPS games since these are the most mechanically skill based compared to other genres that have more strategy, but would like to hear any examples you are thinking of. Lastly, if you say server-side, that may work, but many…

My question would be can't the netcode be improved to prevent this in the first place? The fact that all players receive full game state enables this. In the early 2000s this made sense. Does it still today?

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

#259

Post by FactKnower69 »

kelnos wrote: post #162
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> one could say it's critical to stop hackers. It's never critical to stop hackers in a videogame IMO. We need to stop being so damn serious about gaming .

I think you're framing this the wrong way. Is it fun to be a non-cheater, and join a multi-player game where there are other players using software cheats that let them easily beat you every single time? I'm pretty sure I would quickly stop playing that game, and demand the publisher refund my money. That's just not fun. And that's just as a casual gamer. For people who compete and win prizes, endorsements, etc., the…

Community-run and moderated servers easily fixed this issue decades ago. Maybe video games should be fun centers of community again instead of maximally isolating and atomizing skinner boxes designed to make children addicted to endlessly practicing and competing at worthless skills so the sunk cost keeps them buying loot boxes

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

#260

Post by akira2501 »

arp242 wrote: post #16
lousken wrote: post #4

Good, the sooner devs realize they need to do server side properly, the better

It's impossible to prevent cheating from the server-side only. Something like an aimbot can operate purely on information you need to have as a client (to render the other players on the screen), and still be a huge advantage because it can respond faster than any human can.

It makes it way easier to detect it. If a player can pre move their aim to be at the point near where the aimbot would take it by using a wallhack they can hide the action much more clearly. If they're constantly doing 180 no scopes you've got a pretty good indication something is wrong.

Also if your guns aren't _perfectly_ accurate then the aimbot can't actually predict much of anything.

Post reply on HN