Guys guys guys- The evil corporation is getting on board. Things really ARE that bad.
Wasn’t windows on arm designed specificly to break this capability? Linux won’t ever let it in but for windows I’m pretty sure this was one of this ARM things.
New rootkit is about to drop. 🥰
Is it morally correct to apply for the job while deeply under qualified for it and lie on your app to ensure they make no progress at maximum cost? Yes, obviously.
While I agree that it’s morally correct let’s also not be under any delusions that a company as garbage as EA isn’t using ai to screen applications. That makes your applying not only a waste of your time but also resources that are being sucked up by ai
Perhaps I’m naive about the programming of video games, but why isn’t anti-cheat for live service games handled on the server side? We already send mouse movement and keystrokes to the server to display in multi-player environments, why not just do anomaly detection on top of that data stream?
It feels like anti-cheat isn’t my problem to solve, or to accommodate for.
If the game state of every player at any time can be simulated entirely on server then yes, to some degree. This isn’t the case for many games that have some degree of client authoritativeness, like Apex Legends. As the other poster mentioned, this doesn’t eliminate seeing through walls still, or other cheats that expose game state that players can’t normally see but are required for the game to work.
If all games were streamed over the network, like in GeForce Now, then we would perhaps require far less client anticheat.
This is the real truth and why people clowned Apex into the ground ruining their franchise.
Yes and I am a game designer.
They want to control your data and device fully
i’m a proponent of server-side anticheat, but there is a few reasons games do it client side.
- server-side anticheats depend on heuristics and “checks” determining if a player is doing something “impossible”.
- one example would be checking if the player somehow has perfect accuracy on every player before even shooting, or if the player moves further than is possible in a given timespan (these are very simple examples).
- this is MUCH more difficult to make accurate, since these checks are fallible to network conditions or other hiccups.
- most online games opt for client-side anticheat since it lets the devs just “trust the client” easier. it can also detect things that would be impossible server-side, like X-ray (seeing other players through walls. this is impossible to detect server side).
Seeing players through walls can be solved in other ways, though. At least partially. One fix is to only draw models that the player has line-of-sight to, often with out of LOS models drawn behind the camera. Then, pop them back into place a frame before they are expected to be in LOS. That eliminates a lot of the advantages of wall hacks and model hacks. (Model hacks add a giant stick out of the front of player faces so you can see what they are looking at and, from the size/colour/whatever, how far away they are.)
Server side, you can also measure reaction time net latency to determine overly consistent or superhuman reaction times. If players aim to headshots in under 0.3s consistently, then they’re hacking.
And rootkits can be beat anyway, so they’re pointless, like by ruining a VM or by injecting the cheat at the bootloader, before the kernel.
And there are hardware man-in-the-middle cheats, with video capture cards sending a video stream to a companion computer running an image processing model that injects mouse commands back to the host computer.
I could keep going. There are so many ways. Trusting the client is impossible, trying to force it is unethical (requiring rootkits), and it doesn’t even stop cheating! Just give up and move to server-side detection, or go back to community servers that can self moderate with human admins.
And, imho, don’t even ban the cheaters—instead, flag their account to be exclusively placed into cheater-only games (with bots for filler, if needed to keep queue times roughly matched to avoid player detection). ngl, younger me (who had more time for this kind of thing) would have loved the challenge of trying to out-hack other players using cheats.
good points. yeah, client side anticheats are still vulnerable and I think they’re mostly just popular out of pure laziness. Making a good server side anticheat takes a lot of thought into what is and isn’t possible so it’s easier for a company to just slap on some slop and get 80% of the way there.
in valorant’s case, their anticheat is also a great date collection software to beam every possible identifier straight to John Data or whoever it ends up with.
I don’t understand this bird or animal that are cheats or kernel level anti cheat. But my guess why it’s not handled server side is it’s too late to detect anything. At that point all the cheats will be well disguised as user input.
When the anti-cheat runs on the client workstation, it just tries to make sure the client isn’t doing something nefarious. It’s cost effective for the game company and doesn’t cost the end user much except compatibility
To do it on the server, you end up needing to run a full simulation of the game which is really expensive at scale. You can, to some extent, just look for input values and thresholds, but over the years of trying to do this, people always find ways to cheat input threshold monitoring.
An interesting take is making the end user run the client on a rented server, then they can both have the client remote and not pay for anticheat at all.
The same EA that was recently sold to and is now part-owned by an investment firm owned by Jared Kushner and with ties to Donald Trump? Yeah, that’s not getting kernel access to any of my systems.
If you need kernel access because you don’t trust me not to cheat, I don’t really want to play your game.
Kernel access isn’t needed if they use signed boot and can verify everything running is what it should be.
but don’t you need kernel access to verify everything that is running
You want to be sure if the integrity of the binaries that are running. That needs a chain of trust from firmware to user space.
‘Never trust the client’, an adage that modern game developers have apparently forgotten. The only thing one can ultimately trust is the server. Anything client-side, beyond keeping honest people honest, is doomed to failure.
Regular (ie, not kernel-level) anti-cheat is as far as it needs to go. Anything delving past that, such as into kernels, is dumb and an increasing level of security risk for the consumer.
Maybe so, but kernel cheats these days are extremely easy to make, even more so on linux (since you can just hotload them at will while windows whines about signing).
‘Never trust the client’ does very little to prevent automation and aimbots.
In league of legends for example, kernel cheats that auto-aim your skillshots and automatically walk out of the enemy’s were really common, especially in high elo, and there is nothing the server can do to prevent them. I’ve seen my fair share of cheaters around GM elo over the years, but now, I don’t think I’ve seen a single one since they added vanguard. Though it does suck that I still need a windows partition.
Kernel level AC only makes sense if you’re not selling games, you’re selling platforms for micro transactions.
They don’t give a fuck about a ‘true’ gameplay experience.
They do give a fuck about not being able to groom children into gambling addictions later in life, and making astounding amounts of money while doing so.
Why care about the binaries when you can have AI write you a script for an ESP32 to scan a video camera and mimic hardware mouse inputs?
Signed by who?
Signed by EA, of course
The chain of trust will depend on the hardware. I would expect on a Steam Deck it would be Valve all the way. If it was Ubuntu it would be Microsoft then Canonical. I doubt any random distro would be acceptable to the games wanting to enforce anti cheat.
You can secure boot most distros these days. It’s not new either. Depends on who it what their anchor is, and if it’s more limited than just secure boot being active.
IM A KERNEL PLAYING A KERNEL DISGUISED AS ANOTHER KERNEL
Yes!! They could just do holistic anti-cheat data analysis instead.
Blame the cheaters.
I can’t understand why you have so many downvotes while being spot on.
Unless they explain why, we won’t know. Downvoting doesn’t change opinions, discussing and arguments does. If they can’t they won’t.
I mean, I also don’t care about cheaters because I’m not a competitive gamer. So this isn’t for me, anyway. Games should be fun and relaxing, and if you’re playing for money, then it should be on the people selling the product to monitor player behavior, the way any other pro sports league does.
I used to be a competitive gamer, but I didn’t care about cheaters either because…well, just because someone has cheats doesn’t mean they’re good at the game. For the most part I could tell when someone was cheating, but I could still out-gun the cheat and win.
Not everyone can do that of course, but it’s fun to see people cheat and still lose.
I’ve had similar experiences with this FPS game called krunker.io
Krunker.io is a browser based game, and it had a pretty bad cheating problem, and since it was a browser based gamr, the devs could never implement an anticheat that worked for long.
They implemented a deputization system, where certain respected members of the community would become “krunker police”, and then you could call them from a lobby. They would then invisibly spectate, and record and ban cheaters. The system worked really well, actually. Cheaters were banned quickly, and the requirement collection of video evidence held those involved accountable.
But krunker players had another interesting way of handling cheaters. You see, krunker has really bad netcode, bad enough that you would have to lead hitscan weapons a variable amount depending on how much ping you had. Krunker was also a movement shooter, where you could slidehop and go really, really fasy. The combination meant that you could dodge the shots of cheaters. As I got better, I just stopped calling krunker police, and started beating them. One of my fondest memories was this one lobby full of good players, and when a cheater joined we stomped them below all of us on the ranking, taunting them all the way down. At the end, they tried to sell their cheats and we all laughed. “Why would I buy these cheats? I’m better than them”. Eventually they ragequit. Good times.
But nooooo, nowadays modern game publishers need control over every part of the game. They demand control over the servers, refusing to let anybody host their own communities. They demand absolute control over the community, but refuse to actually moderate it and handle toxicity. And now, they’re demanding control over the clients, forcing you to install rootkits on your computers so they can control those too.
While it is not realistic to eliminate all cheaters, what I will say is that cheaters can easily ruin a game, especially one that has lasting consequences such as, for example, Tarkov. Which I did end up stopping playing due to cheaters.
In addition, if you start seriously questioning whether you lost due to the other person’s skill or their cheats after every engagement, then it erodes the game’s foundation and things start falling apart. You can’t do the process of analyzing what you did wrong or could do better, because you might have done the right thing and just lost due to a cheater. You can’t be confident that you could have gotten good enough to win that engagement next time, because it might just be a cheater and be impossible. Strategy goes out the window because you cannot assume that the other person acted rationally in a non-cheaty context. It subverts the rules of the game that you agreed to. Like when you’re playing chess and the other player keeps knocking over your queen with their finger. It simply stops being fun. The game turns into something else
Playing competitively is fun and relaxing for me though. Not everyone is the same
*edit: deleted. never mind, I don’t know what I read when responding my nonsense. *
Look, I don’t enjoy EA, they’ve killed several of my franchises, but what we shouldn’t do is demonize them for attempting to migrate to Linux. If a huge gaming company is taking Linux seriously it’s something we should celebrate. It means we’re making an impact
The problem is, this may actually NOT about anti-cheat. Just like, age verification is justified by “child protection”, anti-cheat may be a gateway to gradually take away the control over the kernel.
As some other people said, if they want effective anti-cheat, why not make it server-side? Maybe I worry too much, but the history tells us these companies likely not act in good faith.
Which i s why i really think it’s a leap to assume that hiring a single engineer means they are trying to modify the kernel. I really doubt any modifications would make it to the kernel for anti cheat. Server side or something in user space is very likely what they’ll be doing
Absolutely. Valve took Linux seriously and it’s helped Linux gaming immensely. But you can argue a few things - Valve are private and can still do what they want without an obligation to shareholders. Linux gives them better control of the software on their own devices, so they can tailor the experience exactly how they want. Investing in proton made it so people are willing to buy and use these devices, as the game library becomes nearly identical to windows.
A company like EA, a monolith at this point and historically one of the most profit driven, greedy, arguably scummy companies in gaming, if they’re investing in Linux support that means they see dollars and other companies will follow suit. They’re specifically looking at their anti cheat software according to this picture which would bring in their competitive shooters, the type of game that is largely missing on Linux.
If their anti cheat supports Linux, others like Easy anti cheat may push to support Linux, and developers like facepunch have even less of a leg to stand on when it comes to ignoring Linux. Unless EA does something like “You must be using our new EA Linux distro for our anti cheat to work” I can’t see this being a bad thing.
They aren’t being demonized for ‘taking Linux seriously.’ They are being demonized for the horns, forked tongue, spade-tipped tail, ichorous blood, and subservience to satan that are everything they have done before now. When the guy who moved in at No.1 and raped their daughter, then moved in at No.3 and raped their daughter, and then did it again at No.5 is showing up at your house at No.7, it might be called ‘great news’ that someone is finally interested in finally renting out that room you’ve had available for the last several years, but if you let them in, they’re just going to rape your daughter. It’s what they do.
I don’t think that people are demonizing them for attempting to migrate to Linux.
I’m pretty sure (because of my own reaction to this news, as well as the other comments) that it’s to do with people’s dislike of kernel-level anti-cheat and EA’s attempt to bring that to Linux.
Which also doesn’t make sense to me, we already have a few anti-cheats on Linux
Yes, I’m sure we do, but while things like Battleye and Easy Anti-cheat, and so on do work on Linux to an extent,
butthey don’t really have access to the Linux kernel.
I’m willing to celebrate… if it’s a net positive in the end. Linux gamers being able to play big titles, or game with Windows-using friends is good. Having to run DRM/adware/rootkit “anti-cheat”, subscriptions and dark patterns is very bad.
My outlook on the modern games industry is very low overall and I don’t see how to fix it. If I could do anything I’d instead promote and invest into “open source” games (software freedom respecting games).
That would all depend on both the Linux kernel accepting that to the upstream (which, let’s remember crowdstrike), and each distro not removing it. I sincerely doubt that is what this role is. This role is much more likely how to make anti cheat work in linux somehow without kernel access.
The kernal provides tools to inspect the system that userspace-only probably never can. So “works” here would be not crashing when it cannot investigate. The dev of the game Rust (which previously supported Linux) has brazenly said game devs are not serious about anti-cheat if they support Linux. Rust still has cheaters on Microslop Windows as kernal access isn’t even enough. Linux is better of not chasing the delution that is modern client side anti-cheat.
Exactly! This is exactly what we want, more big players on linux.
Of course the kernel level anti-cheat is another thing that needs to be addressed, but a big company acknowledgig the importance of linux is a huge victory to me.
Speak for yourself. I’d rather shit companies no matter how big or small not be a part of the Linux ecosystem. Do I want development absolutely but not at the sacrifice of core values. EA is a shit company. Full Stop. They have nothing good to provide.
But you can still choose to not interact with their software. What’s the problem?
The kernel is the brains of the any Linux OS. It has access to every aspect of your system. Which is why they (EA) wants access. I would like to think you wouldn’t put a device in your brain to have some 3rd party to monitor your entire body for bad actors.
Having this level of access to your system would allow them to see all the processes and files, scan them and create a fingerprint that’s linked to your account. With the levels of violations that all governments are conducting in our lives it would be a small feat for EA to divulge this fingerprint for not only their own profits, directed ads and marketing, but anyone who would ask including government entities.
That is only one level. One other aspect is performance hits. Adding this kernel level monitoring will also take clock cycles away from your real needs. Slowing down and interrupting the functions of your system potentially breaking things. This along with adding attack vectors for other nefarious actors to penetrate your system and take full control.
You are correct I do have a choice not to use their poorly implemented code. And I definitely will never use it. The final point I will add is if this were to happen it becomes a slippery slope for other companies to add their own kennel level “security” code. All you have to do is look at any other system. Next thing you know the last light of OS freedom will be extinguished.
Not to forget that EA is iirc getting bought by the Saudis so government entities would already be involved from the beginning
Absolutely!
And the focus on ARM caught me off-guard too, I wonder if they’re looking out for future handhelds being ARM or what.
Friendly reminder that kernel-level anti-cheat can and will be circumvented.
Any game fairness improvement that it provides will be temporary, but whatever malware it allows onto your system (either deliberately or through bugs exploited by third parties) will likely last until you reinstall the whole OS. Depending on the type of malware, it could even persist for the life of the hardware.
No thanks EA. You’re on my never buy list.
Nah, keep that shit off my PC. If i cant play a game due to not having a proprietary backdoor installed then im fine playing other games i can.
Hopefully, Linux developers will create a tool to blacklist DRMed products from being installed. I don’t want to unwittingly install Enigma, Denuvo, Easy Anti-Cheat, and other foul things onto my machine.
Lol, LMAO even.
It’s so sweet of them to think that I don’t play their games because I play on linux and not because I want EA software in my computer as much as I want to drink a shot of arsenic.
What’s a good alternative to their sports games, like EA FC 25 which I’ve been playing a lot recently?
Old FIFAs and PESs are playable by emulating consoles. Some of them have mods for modern players.
Literally the exact same game every year, just play the older one.
It’s the only version of that game I have, so the question remains whether there’s any alternative that isn’t by EA at all.
This is why monopolies on teams and player likenesses for games is a bad thing.
Sensible Soccer.
Yes. I’m super pleased that EA appears to be doing the right thing, here.
Absent everything thing else EA does and stands for, I would applaud this move by buying something from them sometime.
That said, I will continue to abstain from EA games for another few decades. I like the “sense of pride and accomplishment” it gives me.
Incredibly happy to see the option, but I ain’t gonna run that shit.
Will they finally make their games work on Linux…
Will they finally get their spyware to work on Linux …
Will we finally get a sense of pride and accomplishment?
