Linux

10179 readers

639 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

anzo@programming.dev

dwraf_of_ignorance@programming.dev

601

Valve hopes the Steam Machine will make devs pay more attention to Linux anti-cheat support (www.pcguide.com)

submitted 6 days ago by cm0002@no.lastname.nz to c/linux@programming.dev

63 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Steam Machine’s upcoming release means more people will be playing games on Linux, specifically SteamOS. The idea of ditching Windows for gaming is becoming more attractive, as the Steam Machine is first-party desktop-level hardware that’s optimized for Linux-based SteamOS. The biggest hurdle for Linux gamers right now is a lack of support for many anti-cheats – particular those that require kernel-level access. But with the release of the Machine, Valve hopes game devs take notice.

Steam Machine seems to getting the most attention out of Valve’s latest hardware launches. The Steam creators announced the new console-like mini PC alongside the Steam Frame VR headset and new Steam Controller. Even the Frame runs on SteamOS, which means Valve now has a trio of first-party hardware on Linux (including the Steam Deck handheld).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 100 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Kernel Level Anticheat needs to die. We have memory security, virtualization and antitampering features in operating systems now. All the games in Linux run in user space, none require system access because they are already sandboxed to an extent - every Wine/Proton game runs in a sandbox, since very older games often required admin permissions to run. Build your netcode with "never trust the client" as your first rule, E2E encrypt your network packets, learn to lag hide, and you'll eliminate 90 percent of the haxors.

[–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 38 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Build your netcode with "never trust the client" as your first rule

I wish this were more prevalent. Server side anti cheat is a problem that money can be thrown at and solved but its cheaper at face value to lease that labor from anti cheat service contracts.

[–] Quibblekrust@thelemmy.club 11 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Just tell AAA game studios that AI can solve cheating server-side and they'll throw money at it.

[–] otacon239@lemmy.world 6 points 5 days ago

I wonder if there have been any ML approaches to anti-cheat yet. I could actually see that making a ton of sense.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 10 points 5 days ago

We have memory security, virtualization and antitampering features

As someone who games entirely on Linux and wants multiplayer to work out, the features you're referring to are for keeping the application contained by the kernel, not the other way around. On a system where the user has full autonomy, no application should be able to know what is going on outside of its user space, and I don't want it to.

It'd be nice if it was a solved problem, but it's not. From consoles to phones to windows, currently the industry relies on you not having autonomy over your device for anti-cheat to work. Every other solution is either expensive (obfuscation arms race), or untenable (real time, high resolution server side validation of every property of every player).

[–] vithigar@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 days ago

That all reeks of effort though.