This is so funny because rust has one of the worst cheating situations and majority of their players are windows users, and theres lots of games that have anticheat that allows linux and have notably less significant cheating problems like marvel rivals. in reality rust doesn’t take cheating very seriously because if they did they would have more server side software that detects illegitimate behaviour like tons of other games do successfully… even most popular Minecraft servers have better functioning anti cheat that is completely server side than rust has while getting kernel access to your pc. its pathetic and lazy development tbh and this entire post from them reads like such extreme cope…
If Linux gamers are not worth his time as we are so few then maybe this singular person’s comments are not worth our time over and over.
I hope for more than merely support for a freer OS. I want the whole video games industry to move away from a proprietary model to software freedom - where demand for support is not dependant on the original dev.
well yea idc i wasnt gonna play rust anyway i just posted since i saw it was being talked about and thought it might have some fun reactions about how stupid it is
I’m gonna make my own Rust, blackjack and h-… A better blackjack.
This is what happens when your game is exclusively a commercial product and not a creative work. This exact logic is why accessibility features are being implemented sparsly and slowly.
If all he cares about is money, let’s just not give it to him. There’s thousands of better games, more worth our time and money.
Hardware level cheat detection has always been a losing game. I’m a professional in similar area (not games) but it’s fundamentally impossible to do when you dont control physical hardware, it’s stupid. The only way to detect cheaters is machine learning based behavior analysis, period.
TL;DR: skill issue
The only way to detect cheaters is machine learning based behavior analysis, period
Either the entire game industry is incompetent, or you’re wrong. Machine learning is a powerful tool, but the only way? No chance.
Entire game industry is incompetent as in “willfully not doing the best as long as it keeps selling, or not having resources to do it anyway”. I can believe that
Yes they are willingly incompetent because kernel anti cheat costs nothing while ML pipelines would cost thousands if not millions usd in compute and engineering every year.
Luckily now with AI boom it brought down many machine learning costs significantly as well so we’ll see much more server side anti cheat.
So many games that work flawlessly on Linux, so I just skip those that don’t:]
This is the way.
And let people run their own dedicated servers again.
There are community rust servers with EAC disabled (mainly for linux players). I don’t know what the fuss is about.
How many of them competitive multiplayer?
Very obviously many. But I gotta say my reaction to your reply is just “eeew, I’m so glad I’m not one of those people” (who only play those kinds of games).
many. Marvel rivals, a bunch of the battlefield games, arma 3, dayz, dead by daylight, halo, hunt showdown, team fortress, war thunder, csgo, deadlock, vail vr most of these games manage to have less rampant cheating than rust while supporting linux at the same time, meanwhile rust claims that only 0.01 percent of players, only 14 people, were linux players and somehow thats causing a serious cheating problem that they cant resolve? anyone can tell how dumb that sounds…
Linux is gay anyway I’d rather have mac support
bitch you’re just jealous because Linux is
Sometimes it’s Trans also.
c/lostlemmyers
Lemmings
( -_•)▄︻テحكـ━一💥
If Valve’s expanding hardware lineup helps increase SteamOS adoption, they’ll change their tune.
Not a chance.
Overhaul your entire game stack || Blame Linux for being too small
Why would they need to overhaul their game stack? Rust would run just fine on Linux if they didn’t block it intentionally.
When I say they’re gamestack, I’m talking about their client and their backend services and their associated middleware.
Moving a game that is mostly client authoritative to server authoritative is a hell of a lot of work and requires serious rewrites to both the client and the server.
It also requires a lot more compute to handle the back end.
When you go from calculating everything on the front end and just sending the data back to the back end to sending actual controls to the back end and doing simulations, you need to rewrite a significant portion of everything.
It’s way cheaper and way faster just to write it in the client, and require the kernel/secured OS to police risky actions to the application.
The last couple of projects I looked at were probably 50% more man hours to make it server authoritative out of the box. Trying to come back and do it after the fact, It’s much, much higher.
I doubt that they will, given the fact that Linux is misrepresented a lot. They use Linux servers, so why not support Linux already?
mentioning EA games like Apex Legends removing support is laughable. Sure Alistair, ALL those EA games ALL decided around fall of 2024 to ditch support for Linux/Proton. All at the Same time. Not because EA has a deal with Microsoft/Game Pass and NOT because a few months later Microsoft announced their own Handheld with Asus. Just like Riot.
So Alistair how long until Rust is announced for Gamepass with all DLC included?
That’s a bit tinfoil-hatty. EA is a big company and these types of decisions typically come from the top, and if it was decided that they don’t want to bother with Linux, because, let’s be fair, they don’t really have that much of an incentive, the profits they get from Linux is probably worth less than the headache of supporting another platform, then they most probably decided to apply that to the whole company, not just a single game.
On Windows the cheating program it’s a simple exe that will get kernel access with a simple uac request.
Everyone, especially 12 years olds, are able to run it. (And maybe get malware/ransomware disguised as a cheating program)
None of the losers that need a cheating program to feel validated in online multiplayer games will have the skills to recompile the kernel in Linux to add support for that
None of the losers that need a cheating program to feel validated in online multiplayer games will have the skills to recompile the kernel in Linux to add support for that
aha! so you admit, IT’S POSSIBLE! Well aren’t we lucky we have microshoft who won’t let anyone recompile their colonels! shows you mr silly yunix!
;D
Image Text:
From linux_gaming community on Reddit
Posted by: Alistair_Mc
There are no plans to support Proton or Linux. It’s a vector for cheat developers, and one that would be poorly maintained by both us and EAC due to the low user base. When we stopped support for Linux, we saw more cheat users exploiting Linux, than actual legitimate users.
When monitoring cheats for Rust, we keep a close eye on wider cheat communities across several major games. We look at what cheat developers are doing, and how other studios are responding.
From that experience, I’m very comfortable saying that if a game supports Proton or Linux, they’re not serious about anti-cheat. The only exception would be if they have a fully mature, dedicated in-house anti-cheat team, even then, I’m not seeing anyone handle Proton and Linux well.
Apex Legends also dropped Proton support in October 2024 for the same reasons as we did several years ago.
Could we limit Proton to Premium servers? yes, but I think it’s total bullshit asking Proton users to buy the game and then $15 worth of DLC. I’d be pissed if I were forced to do that.
When we stopped supporting Linux, users made up less than .01% of the total player base, even if that number has doubled, or tripled, it’s not worth it.
I know that every time I post something like this, some Proton and Linux users call us lazy or dismissive. The reality is that fighting cheaters on one front (Windows), is already a never-ending battle. Adding more fronts multiplies that challenge without adding meaningful benefit to the wider player base.
deleted by creator
TBF, you’d have to pay me to play most of these “anti-cheat” games anyhow.
BF6 is pretty great honestly
But I think you still would have to pay him if you want him playng BF6.
I can’t speak with 100% accuracy. I just have something that tells me so.
It’s not even real Rust unless it’s coded in the real Rust language of Rustlandia.
Otherwise it’s just sparkling oxidation
i wonder if this guy heard about counter strike…
Who could have imagined that the people who create toxic PvP games are as toxic as the people who play them?
I gave up Rust when I moved to Linux.
They are changing the game from building a cozy PvP Minecraft, to a clan based wargame.
Cozy players, don’t cheat, clans do (Not all, of course).
Changing? Zergs have run servers since the first day I played almost 10 years ago. Small monuments are war zones the first few days of wipe. I don’t think that’s changed much since. Rust has never been cozy on any server with a population.
Rust PVE on community servers is pretty cozy.
Yeah I should’ve specified vanilla pvp servers. It’s always been a KoS hellhole. If anything, recent changes have made pvp less punishing.
Explain something to me. It’s a multiplayer game anything that affects all players should be handled on the server side, not the client. So if I make a cheat it can only be installed client side, not server side.
So if my hypothetical cheat looks at object placement and any time I sees a small object approaching at a high velocity it can say “I’m going to assume that’s a bullet based on what the server told me about it.” Then my cheat would say “your character moves from here to here until the bullet passes by, then moves back. I will tell the server you moved to the left 20 inches in the blink of an eye then moved back”
This works because the server just trusts what it’s told in this example.
So there are two options here to resolve this. Either the server sets thresholds and denies any placement changes look like the Flash is playing rust, or the server evaluates suspicious placement changes later when the cpu load it’s under is lower. The first approach stops much of this instantly but is computationally expensive and could not scale well for lots of players. The second would work well enough. You need to catch cheaters but it’s doesn’t have to be within the same exact cpu cycle.
In either case, these work because the server is taught to look for something that shouldn’t be possible. The enforcement happens server side. The client doesn’t fucking matter.
There is zero reason to put anti cheat on the client side when it’s not a P2P instance. Target a few servers, not thousands of players.
The client side anti cheat is a low effort hack that was good enough. Video game anti cheat devs are cheap as fuck because looking at client bits cost nothing compared to expensive machine learning pipelines that need to analyze all player performance. This is not a tech problem but a product/skill one.
You don’t need machine learning for this we’ve had perfectly good server-side anti-cheat for a while now and none of it’s been AI-based until recently. If we know the top speed the game should allow players to move any movement greater than that speed must be a cheat or lag, either way it shouldn’t be allowed.
There’s more to cheating than moving quickly.
It’s a huge part of cheating though. Fast movement, auto aiming, and wall hacks are the three biggest problems in cheating and all three can be solved algorithmically, without resorting to AI which is inconsistent and processor intensive.
You check whether the movement is possible for the allowed speed in the game.
You count the hit to miss ratio per weapon and build up statistical averages, anybody using auto aiming is going to be consistently out of that average, obviously you do this with each weapon in the game separately, snipers are obviously going to have a better hit rate than LMGs.
Finally you don’t send data for players that are out of sight. Wall hacks can’t work if the client isn’t given this information.The great thing about all of these techniques is that it’s method agnostic, it doesn’t matter what method the cheaters are using to inject their cheats, because you’re not looking for the injection, you’re looking for the end result.
Battlefield 6 has kernel level anti-cheat and it’s straight up doesn’t work because the cheaters are always ahead of the game. It also doesn’t help that the game is glitchy on its own.
Obviously. They gave one of a thousand examples. That doesnt mean their point is weak, it means they didn’t have the will (reasonably) to make their comment 50000 characters long.
If you have a specific example that doesn’t work to a reasonable extent, post that rather than this short, vauge retort.
Wallhack is an obvious one or anything that reads client and modifies the display.
Wallhack could be discovered through machine learning but very difficult I’d imagine. Other simpler rendering hacks like skin swap would be probably the hardest thing to detect server side as there’s no trace.
I think thats a fair ground though. Clearly client side anti cheat simply doesn’t work and if someone wants to put hats on their characters to headshot them easier then let them be the losers they are.
Wallhack is an obvious one or anything that reads client and modifies the display.
Absolutely, but thats strongly mitigated via not giving the client information it doesnt need to know.
Totally thought if you take a look at dota2 cheat scape the losers still come up with ways to mod an edge but a lot of that can be still detected when you put a competent engineers hat. I think the only really undetectable change is model/texture replacement which is honestly not that big of a deal as far as ruining fun for others sort of cheaters.
Your head is in the right place, but your example is very wrong. First, unless it’s a very slow projectile that’s not how bullets work in games, second movement takes place in the server, to do so in the client is nuts. Client sends inputs, sever moves, gives back player location, client adapts. While waiting for a reply the client simulates the movement expected, but sometimes the server doesn’t receive the package and so tells you you haven’t actually moved and you teleport back.
What’s usually not done is calculate vision cone, instead the server gives you everyone’s position and you calculate whether you can see them on your GPU. Which is why if you can get access to the GPU pipeline you can tweak it so it shows you objects through walls. If you move the LoS calculation to the server you completely eliminate wallhacks, however that is very expensive to do (although ray tracing GPUs might provide a good approach in the future)
Yes I meant movement happens server side, which is why this example cheat couldnt work. it would be telling the server what to do, and the server could always say “no, fuck off, thats not something you were coded to be able to do”. Sorry if I didnt convey that clearly.
I also understand the client has to draw things faster than the server can respond “okay, I moved you 12 inches to the left” so it guesses the outcome and if the server later responds with “denied, no teleportation in rust” it will just snap you back to the last position the server approved of.
My point is anticheat client side suggests bad code server side.
second movement takes place in the server, to do so in the client is nuts.
For the vast majority of games, it’s in between, because the latency if you waited for the server every frame you moved would be way too much.
It’s something like you have a local model of where everything is, and send updates to the server of where your local model says your character (and whatever else your inputs affect) are. The server receives that data, potentially validates it (server side anti cheat checking that your movement makes sense, similar to the OP post, for example), and then forwards that info to all players. The client side positions of everything are updated based on that info. Usually some interpolation is added to make things move more smoothly.
