Battledield now throwing an error because Valorant is already sitting in kernel memory. Time to buy your EA Battlefield PC but don’t forget your Valorant PC
Hello, fellow Rainmeter user with Mond skin.
Not my screenshot but rainmeter is awesome
This clock is available in Linux with KDE as a simple widget, without any external software
(Sorry I had to bring it up)
What’s the name? I just started my Linux journey.
Modern Clock, available to download through Edit mode widget menu
it’s
It s
Isn’t Microsoft about to block kernel modules like this entirely? I thought I read that somewhere
Yeah, to stop another CrowdStrike, but it’s not a sure thing, yet there’s talk of api’s etc and wouldn’t surprise me if certain companies got a pass. An article covering your point: https://www.theverge.com/news/692637/microsoft-windows-kernel-antivirus-changes
I hope so much that this will happen.
Nope. They’re developing an alternative set of APIs for userspace in conjunction with security vendors for their products to use but it’s all still a long way off and will be optional to start with.
Given the volume of mission-critical devices security products are installed on (which the CrowdStrike fuckup highlighted), getting them out of kernel space would be a huge risk reduction for the world. And security vendors would love to get away from that risk as pulling a CrowdStrike costs a lot of money setting things right with customers.
But an anticheat used by consumers on their personal devices for a game, not such a big deal.
While I’m sure MS will eventually deprecate and then kill off third party kernel drivers, it could take a decade since MS has so much business (both internal and within their customer base) that relies on legacy crap.
Yep, they’re planning to create a new way to do it, not disable the old way.
And I think that a decade for disabling the old way is optimisticI have a feeling you’re right about this. I do wish Microsoft would take the Apple approach as Apple steamed ahead with deprecating kernel-mode access.
Love them or hate them, Apple take security a lot more seriously than Microsoft these days and it’s a real shame MS see security architecture as a nuisance rather than a core responsibility of their business.
it’s a real shame MS see security architecture as a nuisance rather than a core responsibility of their business.
I’m pretty sure the reason behind this is that they treat backwards compatibility as a higher priority in a lot of cases. There are so many odd choices I see in my day to day that I can only explain away by backwards compatibility. It’s part of the reason you see them take forever to depreciate old and insecure protocols until they get an encouragement from a vuln hitting the news.
That’s what I’ve noticed as well. They keep the old stuff around for as long as they can, because some software made 30years ago is critical to our society so they need to support it or we’re doomed
Like Japanese trains being controlled by some Flash app
And it’s not like the companies will update old stuff, either. They’ve shown a willingness to forget about old games as soon as the revenue dips too much. The result will be that those games will be unplayable in the future.
ive heard valorant have to be uninstalled, and ive alao heard that you cant run both games at the same time. which one is it? and why should care with a pc with disabled tpm2
It’s a shame, they won’t get my money
Ahahahaha. 😂 That is just brilliant. The kernel anti-cheat deadlock.
No no deadlock was that weird moba valve put out and supported for a whooping 2 months
They are no longer supporting it?
It’s not even released yet, its still being developed.
Wdym supported for 2 months? It was, and still is, in closed alpha, getting regular updates
My bad, it just never makes any news rounds anymore so to the majority of game players it may as well be dead.
Valve never intended for deadlock to have as much media coverage as it did. It happened anyways because a media outlet chose to ignore the informal NDA message that popped up when launching the game. The message was removed shortly after the incident.
Dota2? /s
Games dont belong in the kernel. Shit should have stayed in userspace. No, I dont care how many billions are on the line, games are not that important.
Those are not games but anticheats
True, your wording was my intention.
But is your intention my wording?
alternative: Games do not belong on computers that do non-game things.
Anyway, this is going to be resolved as soon as north korea finds out who many people have important stuff on PC they game on, and hack some hapless devs source to install a rootkit on 100m PCs via steam.
I don’t think you understand people don’t have money to buy one computer to work, one to play, or a console to play. People are cheap that way, when it comes to food or a gaming console they choose food.
I guess only Nintendo is allowed to release games then.
Sony can’t, Playstation has a web browser and therefore games do not belong on it.
I mean, i expected some comments on this, but that ? really?
very weak. back to the drawing board.Checkmate, the playstation 5 doesn’t have a web browser
Neither did Playstation from what I remember
Playstation 2, 3 and 4 could run a web browser (although in all cases it was netfront, worse than Microsoft explorer 6)
Yes they do. If I want games and non games on my PC then that is up to me, I am the fucking admin.
Yes they do. If I want malware and non malware on my PC then that is up to me, I am the fucking admin.
Fixed your post, and yes you are the admin, you can do what you want.
That was one hell of a leap in (il)logical thinking…
Do you think every videogame is malware?
Bait used to be believable.
Does anti-cheat even work?
kernel or no
It only works in so far that it makes making cheats harder to create and easier to detect. But it will never fully eliminate or catch all cheats.
Client side anti-cheat (the one installed on your PC) will never work, it’s just fundamentally impossible. They can restrict user freedom as much as they want, but the hardware still isn’t under their control.
The only reason they push for those kinds of anti-cheats is because they don’t have to pay for the extra processing of server side anti-cheat, and they also get the benefit of a backdoor into your computer that you may never fully uninstall without buying a new computer.
… Or installing Linux.
flyes away
Linux isn’t necessarilly immune. A game could easilly ask the user to install a DKMS module or use their kernel image.
They don’t, but that would be the equivilant.
That statement is to easy. It all depends on how much permissions you give the game and in what kind of environment you execute your game. From sandboxing to inmutable root file systems there is a lot possible to exactly prevent this to happen.
eBPF is probably the way with Linux IMO
I mean, it’s like saying Pentagon security can’t work because some skilled hackers can someday find a way to spoof / steal credentials. Security always happens on a sliding scale based on the value of the contents.
I think at the very least, they can take steps that inconvenience hackers sufficiently each update without harming players - they can’t make it impossible to hack on the client side, but they can’t make it feel not worth it for them.
The reason I sort of insist on it is that even with serverside checks for game logic like teleportation and instant kills, game engines still load the data for player positions which allow for wallhacks and aimhacks. Those checks can only happen clientside; you can’t even send mouse positions often enough to look for “snaps”.
At the least, I agree that modern coders have gotten very lazy about having the server verify basic actions. “Okay, player 22 deals 8000 damage to every other player in the server simultaneously? Okay.”
Some of it does, some of it doesn’t, the critique is that kernel level stuff is way more than needed against most cheaters but not enough against the most dedicated ones, and it is invasive as hell.
The best anticheat is good netcode and server side checks. You can’t wallhack if your client doesn’t see behind the walls.
Proof is in cheaters existing on day one of battlefield 6 open beta. Client side anti-cheat will never work. It’s good to have some basic preventative measures client-side, but server-side anti cheat is the only way to properly prevent cheaters.
Unfortunately companies keep investing in garbage client side anticheat that just pokes security holes into our machines.
Only Valve to my knowledge is investing money into their server side anti cheat, no other big player is to my knowledge.
Valves anti-cheat doesn’t really do anything though, at least not in CS2. It does like to boot me from the game from time to time because I’m playing on Linux though.
True VAC alone is not great (nothing really is), but CS2 (in my opinion) has one of the best systems against abuse, even though legit players like myself can get stuck in low trust factor sometimes.
VAC, trust factor, overwatch (player report reviewing, not sure if this was discontinued) all work together.
Hopefully a big improvement is to come soon with the VAC Live agents that monitor games using AI to predict likely cheaters.
Valve obviously has a big interest in keeping cheaters out, because their skin economy makes them boatloads (literally hehe) of money. I think they are the only company going down this road right now of AI agents, which is unobtrusive to users and should hopefully keep up VACs high accurate ban rate (which is at least a good thing about VAC, when you are banned, in almost all cases, you were indeed cheating (low fase positives)).
I do recognize though that AI agents likely comes with a high cost and may only be implemented in other highly competitive games that make lots of money.
There probably exist other methods, but it’ll take more investment in designing adaptable systems that can work on many games.
I do report a lot of cheaters, but I never know if it even does anything. I pretty much only play casual anyways. The worst is when someone is obviously cheating, and no one votes to kick them, or some special types actually vote against kicking the cheater so they can win …
ETA: the AI agents sounds cool, as long as legit players don’t get mistakenly banned. I didn’t realize cheating was such a huge problem these days until I started playing CS2 again. I used to scrim 1.6 Back in the day and never really had that problem that I can remember.
That’s only proof that it will never be enough to stop all cheating. But if the metric is if it reduces cheating then that proves nothing. Not saying I have proof that it does reduce cheating but I would personally bet on it reducing it somewhat at least.
It definitely reduces cheating, but mostly just by raising the bar of entry (not by that much as evident in day 1 cheats being present). I doubt it’s effectiveness though, since most games you can do some quick research and find $5 cheats that will go undetected (hell even free cheats can work if you do a little more research on doing the injection part manually yourself).
You can also never stop cheating, but the anti-cheat they install on your computer is just an extra attack vector for hackers, etc at this point, since it obviously doesnt work as intended.
Web developers work this out years ago. If you want to put content behind a paywall don’t do it client side because it will get bypassed.
This was me working out of a tiny office. Yet apparently I was more advanced than AAA game developers.
Hopefully they start to learn from this at some point… they should realise that their current anti-cheat systems are not working as intended at some point right?
Battlefield will lose sales, every game definitely loses players because of cheater infestations. Lots of money lost in my eyes, is it enough to make them see straight?
It needs to be a mix. Have your clientside anti-cheat look for obvious attack vectors, have your serverside anti-cheat look for suspicious play, and let users report others. Then have humans review suspected cheaters and make the final call.
But that’s expensive, and off-the-shelf anti-cheat gives them someone else to blame.
I agree, there’s definitely some checks you can only do on the client and only some that work server-side. Ideally everything that can be checked on either, are checked.
Currently it’s just all wrong, the client-side can’t be relied upon as heavily as it is.
The benefit factor to the rootkits they install on our machines is nil. Just bloats our systems with garbage that is just waiting to be exploited by hackers.
You’re viewing from the perspective of what would be best for the playerbase. These decisions are made based on what’s the cheapest possible solution to have the playerbase shut up about cheaters so they wouldn’t drive away potential customers.
Good eye.
I would think there’s money to gain by keeping your players engaged longer by having less cheaters, but I guess theres also an incentive to keep just enough cheaters that you can steadily ban them for more game sales (not that I think that’s happening, i hope not).
Anyways they take our money, we expect whats best for us, within reason of course.
I doubt the revenue from sales to cheaters is that significant compared to the risk of losing players. I think the simplest explanation is that catching cheaters is hard (read: expensive), so they’re happy with catching the most obvious cheaters with off the shelf solutions (i.e. the Pareto principle).
Yeah as I mention I don’t really believe it either, just brought it up because it’s a thought.
And yup the simplest explanation is usually the right one.
I do wish they would stop invading our systems with their current anti-cheats (invasive ones) though, that’s the main thing I am worried about.
Anecdotally, there seem to be fewer valorant cheaters than in counter strike.
Idk if that can be chalked up to “valorant uses kernel and cs doesn’t”, though. Probably not. And it’s still nonzero for valorant.
I came here to make a joke along the lines of “lol don’t play Valorant” but I see there’s people seriously suggesting it. Holy shit, you guys.
I mean, I don’t. Believe it or not it isn’t mandatory.
Congrats. Want a cookie?
Actually yes, you got any oreos?
This only happens if you’re running both games at the same time. Still not great but not as bad as it looks.
deleted by creator
Are ya sure? Valorants anti cheat is always on
Yes. I don’t have the source unfortunately but @AntiCheatWard on Twitter confirmed it
Just checked a few sources and yes it only happens when Valorant is already running and you launch BF6
It uses an anti-cheat that is loaded while the game is not? What is this and why is anybody playing it at all? O.o
Nope, valorants anti cheat loads on boot and embeds itself on deep windows callbacks to see everything in and out
deleted by creator
Most don’t know, don’t care, just want more games.
All of these companies keep looking for places they can get an inch more. Sometimes it backfires, but other times it succeeds and gets normalized.
I can tell you why they do it. Which is to get installed at launch time (like a driver required to boot for example), so they can watch absolutely everything that loads into the system.
But yes, I wouldn’t play any game that needs a kernel anti-cheat.
Kind of funny now we need to go back to consoles to play games because these asshole corps want to hijack our pcs.
Or just don’t play these games. There are enough games out there that you’ll never run out of decent ones.
Agreed. The steam sales alone could keep you so busy that you probably couldn’t even get around to test each one in one life time.
Chances are if we tried we’d probably find one that you like equal if not better.
I got a console when I switched to Linux. This has been a problem for decades now. So I’ve got one corporate game box that works with my friends, and one computer that I actually control.
I just prefer my main pc to do everything…but I will probably not play those games anyways
deleted by creator
War…war never changes.
or adjust it is settings
Good job EA
Ramp it up. The sooner we pull out of the kernel the sooner I dump windows
Soon you will only be able to play on certified monitors with anticheat tampering built in. They 100% guarunteed will not be backdoored or phone home, pinky promise, it is certain.
Its*. This word is an exception to the rule of using an apostrophe to indicate possession. It’s is always a contraction for “it is”.
It’s not an exception. Pronouns never have apostrophes for possessive.
His. Hers. Theirs. Its.
I didn’t even catch that the first time. But what should we expect from garbage software?
