Will wine ever be able to run anticheat?
-
Yeah kernel level with hacks is what I'm interested in, couldn't the wine client give fake kernel level control to them that's actually in userspace?
If it could the anti-cheat system wouldn't be worth using. Being able to "trick" the anti-cheat system into thinking something else is going on than actually happens is the same an actual "cheat" would do. That's why kernel level anti-cheat system go though a lot of trouble to detect any kind of virtualization or similar tricks...the moment you could trick them into accepting a fake kernel is also the moment that fake kernel can pretend the fake input it generates actually comes from a real mouse or the checksum of that openGL/vulkan library is exactly the one expected and not the one of some altered libraries that "accidentally" forget to not render stuff behind walls...
It's also something that needs to be kept in mind when talking about "Companies can just enable the linux support in their anti-cheat systems but they don't." While this is true of course it also means the kernel-level anti-cheat systems are bared from kernel-access and degraded to user-space only. And as people have access to the source-code of the linux kernel nothing is stopping anyone from just modifying the kernel to...give more "favorable results" while playing the game. Of course the linux playerbase it too tiny to really offer a market for such cheats...but it's not completely unreasonable to not want to erode the capabilities of your anti-cheat system (That is of course if you believe they work in the first place...but that's a different discussion).
-
So? I just want the games to run, I don't care about that side of it at all, that side of it is essentially pointless to me. There were always workarounds anyway, what does it matter?
Developers who use kernel anti-cheat don't support Linux because userspace anti-cheat is largely pointless. It doesn't matter if you personally don't care, the companies that want anti-cheat do care.
The workaround for kernel anti-cheat requires hundreds of USD in hardware. The workaround for userspace anti-cheat is entirely software.
Because of this, you will have less cheaters if cheating has a $500 price tag. That's why kernel anti-cheat is effective, there's no way for that to be solved with a WINE patch.
-
So? I just want the games to run, I don't care about that side of it at all, that side of it is essentially pointless to me. There were always workarounds anyway, what does it matter?
At that point you might as well not have a kernel level anti cheat and companies who insist on kernel level anti cheat will block wine. The only solutions I see are
- Developers mainly use server side anti cheat
- They make native Linux games
- Distros provide a way to ensure a untainted (signed) kernel
-
Kernel level anticheat that thinks it's kernel level and runs in userspace is the best of both worlds though, is it not?
if that was possible, it would be relatively easy to defeat them on windows too
-
I'm not finding any information online other than that it's difficult
No, forget anticheat games. It's not possible to create a "fake" rootkit. If it was possible, they would have done it for Windows too, and it would defeat the purpose of anti-cheat. So, just don't run these games. They don't worth your security.
-
I'm not finding any information online other than that it's difficult
Will wine ever be able to run antiSpyware.
I hope not. I switched to Linux to get away from malware and spyware.
-
I'm not finding any information online other than that it's difficult
I wonder if immutable systems could negate the need for kernel anti cheat. If the game can ensure the current kernel and image is one from a list of acceptable ones, it doesn't need to kernel anti cheat. They could do this by comparing the checksum or something.
-
I'm not finding any information online other than that it's difficult
Just buy a minipc and use it solely for gaming on Windows if you really need to game.
-
Yeah kernel level with hacks is what I'm interested in, couldn't the wine client give fake kernel level control to them that's actually in userspace?
Sounds like a terrible idea; this would only further deteriorate the trust some companies have in Linux with anti-cheat, that would be terrible for the adoption
-
Yeah but that doesn't count tbh, if the dev has to give the okay we lose a ton of games, and that isn't what I'm looking for, the dev shouldn't be able to know it isn't running on windows
Then the answer is definitely not - at the very least Wine would need to simulate a very large part of the NT kernel.
-
Just buy a minipc and use it solely for gaming on Windows if you really need to game.
No idea why you've been down voted. If someone simply must play kernel level anti-cheat games, the best way to do it is on Windows. Developers have made it very clear they do not trust Wine/Proton/Linux and that are market share is simply too small to care.
-
Developers who use kernel anti-cheat don't support Linux because userspace anti-cheat is largely pointless. It doesn't matter if you personally don't care, the companies that want anti-cheat do care.
The workaround for kernel anti-cheat requires hundreds of USD in hardware. The workaround for userspace anti-cheat is entirely software.
Because of this, you will have less cheaters if cheating has a $500 price tag. That's why kernel anti-cheat is effective, there's no way for that to be solved with a WINE patch.
That’s why kernel anti-cheat is effective
Is it actually effective tho?
-
No, forget anticheat games. It's not possible to create a "fake" rootkit. If it was possible, they would have done it for Windows too, and it would defeat the purpose of anti-cheat. So, just don't run these games. They don't worth your security.
I mean I wouldn't mind defeating the purpose of anticheat. Let's all defeat the purpose of anticheat.
-
That’s why kernel anti-cheat is effective
Is it actually effective tho?
It doesn't stop cheating, it just makes cheating require spending a few hundred dollars and dealing with complex hardware setups. This means that relatively few people try.
Non-kernel anti-cheat can be bypassed by software. So it's cheap and easily available.
That's the only difference. Kernel anti-cheat doesn't prevent cheating, it just makes it more expensive.
-
I'm not finding any information online other than that it's difficult
wrote on last edited by [email protected].
-
I wonder if immutable systems could negate the need for kernel anti cheat. If the game can ensure the current kernel and image is one from a list of acceptable ones, it doesn't need to kernel anti cheat. They could do this by comparing the checksum or something.
That's essentially a console and not a 'pc'
-
Yeah but that doesn't count tbh, if the dev has to give the okay we lose a ton of games, and that isn't what I'm looking for, the dev shouldn't be able to know it isn't running on windows
You can't lose what you never had, though.
-
Just buy a minipc and use it solely for gaming on Windows if you really need to game.
Based on his other comments, he's hoping to use Wine to cheat
-
Based on his other comments, he's hoping to use Wine to cheat
No, I have no interest in cheating
-
At that point you might as well not have a kernel level anti cheat and companies who insist on kernel level anti cheat will block wine. The only solutions I see are
- Developers mainly use server side anti cheat
- They make native Linux games
- Distros provide a way to ensure a untainted (signed) kernel
That would ba a massive win in my book, kernel level anticheat is malware
