• TurboWafflz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    111
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    21 days ago

    The fact that companies think client side anti cheat is a good idea is so insane. Maybe try designing your server better instead of blaming the operating system for not letting you control your users

    • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      21 days ago

      Genuinely curious, because this isn’t my area of expertise, but how do you design a server to be “better” if it has to trust data from a remote client?

      Example, if the client is compromised - because as they’ve said, they have no way to “attest” that the kernel is not compromised - how would the server know any better?

      If my Apex client tells the server I got a perfect headshot, how would the server know I didn’t fake the data? Is there a real answer to this problem or are we just wishing they come up with an impossible solution?

      My general understanding is that EA is 100% correct. Now, on the other hand, maybe the should just limit plays between Linux <-> Linux so people can at least still enjoy the game (I’m moving to Linux soon so I’ll basically no longer be able to play the game, which is, as my primary gaming addiction, a huge loss I’m willing to take).

      There’s compromises EA could take, but I think the Linux market share is just too small for them to care to spend any resources - even though they’re raking in billions (~$3.4 Billion) and could spare a few resources to find a good middle ground. Capitalism at it’s finest.

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        21 days ago

        Your core premise is broken. Relying on trusting anything from a remote client cannot possibly result in a fair game.

        • Evotech@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 days ago

          It’s not that simple. Especially not for real time shooters, latency is a killer.

          • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            20 days ago

            It is exactly that simple. You already have to account for latency because everyone but one player (who you also can’t trust no matter how many rootkits you install) is not the server. Having a proper server doesn’t change that in any way.

            Client side validation cannot possibly provide any actual security, but even if that wasn’t the case and it was actually flawless, it would still be unconditionally unacceptable for a game to ever have kernel level access.

            • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              19 days ago

              Client side validation cannot possibly provide any actual security

              Except it already does.

              but even if that wasn’t the case and it was actually flawless

              Nobody is claiming its flawless. This is the same anti-seat belt, anti-air bag, anti-mask, anti-vax argument. It “DoEsn’T WoRk iN eVeRy CaSe!” - that was never the intent. It’s about harm reduction.

              it would still be unconditionally unacceptable for a game to ever have kernel level access.

              Anyone with a technical background would agree with you, as do I, but the reality is anti-cheat software with kernel level access already exists and it works specifically because it has kernel level access.

              • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                19 days ago

                No, it doesn’t. Cheating is still incredibly common on games that install malware. If people care enough to cheat, they will cheat whether you have kernel access or not. It doesn’t make a dent. They use it for the exact same reason they use DRM. Because they can.

                It also can’t possibly theoretically “reduce harm” when every single installation on every individual computer is many orders of magnitude more harm than all cheating in every game ever made.

                • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  19 days ago

                  No, it doesn’t. Cheating is still incredibly common on games that install malware

                  I never claimed it’s flawless or that it works in all cases. Think of it like antivirus software. Does it catch every and any malware that has and will ever exist? No. Does it still work to minimize all kinds of “bad shit” for normal end users? Yes.

                  If people care enough to cheat, they will cheat whether you have kernel access or not.

                  Lets rephrase that: If people care enough to commit crimes, they will commit crimes whether you have cops in your city or not - Your statements logical conclusion would be to get rid of police and crime investigators. Does that sound reasonable? It shouldn’t, and it doesn’t make sense against anti-cheat software for the exact same reason.

                  They use it for the exact same reason they use DRM. Because they can.

                  They use it because it solves a real-world problem that’s unsolvable by other means. There’s no real alternative because you have to trust the end-user, who, although may not be very likely to cheat, makes it extremely easy for a bad person to spoil the fun for everyone else.

                  I would love to live in a fantasy world where we don’t need cops, a government, rules, regulations, and anti-cheat software, but there are bad apples that will spoil the fun for everyone.

                  It also can’t possibly theoretically “reduce harm” when every single installation on every individual computer is many orders of magnitude more harm than all cheating in every game ever made.

                  I mean “reduce harm” in the strict sense of spoiling the fun in gaming. vulnerabilities happen with all software, this isn’t unique to anti-cheat.

      • cm0002@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        21 days ago

        If my Apex client tells the server I got a perfect headshot, how would the server know I didn’t fake the data?

        Any game that works like that is fundamentally flawed and AC is nothing but an attempt at a cheap bandaid at best.

        The client should be doing nothing but rendering and sending player actions to the server and the server should be managing the game state as well as running its checks on those actions. And when one client sends actuons that are weird and doesn’t line up with it’s internal game state it should kick the client immediately always deferring to what ITS game state is telling it, not the client.

        • ampersandrew@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          21 days ago

          The cheat in this case would send legitimate actions. Like maybe you, the human, would have missed the headshot, but your cheat corrected to the inputs that would have landed one.

        • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          20 days ago

          And when one client sends actuons that are weird and doesn’t line up with it’s internal game state

          What if my hacked client sends actions that are not weird, completely plausible, but didn’t happen and instead were faked? E.g. I take a headshot and would have missed, but my client sends data that I actually shot them dead center, because I wasn’t completely off? How would the server know it wasn’t me?

        • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          19 days ago

          Right, but the server is still receiving data from the client. If the client sends a plausible head shot, even though it was actually a miss, how would the server know? You still need client-side “police”, AKA anti-cheat software to mitigate a significant type of software-based hacks.

          Now that I’ve typed it out, cops are actually a great analogy to anti-cheat software. Cops play the exact same role. Nobody wants them around until a crime has been committed. Cops/anti-cheat software don’t catch everyone, but the threat of being caught mitigates some crime/hacks, and for the cases where criminals/hackers are caught, society/gamers are better off for it.

          In closing ACAB - I completely understand why we don’t want anti-cheat software on our computers, but there really is no better way; or if there is, I still haven’t heard it.

      • TurboWafflz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        21 days ago

        They should just use the same approach big minecraft servers use, the game itself has no anticheat, but the server makes sure the data it’s getting from the client makes sense and kicks clients sending weird data. Doing any checks client side will always be insecure and a nuisance to players

  • sp6@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 days ago

    If you accidentally ban linux users in three[1] different[2] banwaves[3], then linux was only halfway supported in the first place, even if they overturned (almost) all of those bans.

    I think the real reason they did it was EA’s financial situation. Since money is tight, the amount of resources they were willing to put into real linux anti-cheat probably dropped to “none at all,” and now we’re here. Otherwise other cheater-prone games like Counter Strike, Overwatch, Halo, The Finals, DayZ, Hunt Showdown, etc would have probably dropped/blocked linux by now too.

  • bitwolf@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    20 days ago

    Someone did the math on Twitter.

    There is about 2900 Linux gamers playing Apex.

    So even if 100% of Linux gamers cheated it could in no way be the majority.

    What I think happened is the dev team struggled to solve the problem so they used Linux as a scapegoat when leadership came down on them.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      20 days ago

      This sounds likely. Unfortunately, when the problem doesn’t go away a few months from now, it’s not like they’ll reenable Linux support…

    • Psythik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      20 days ago

      Yes* unfortunately. It’s very popular.

      I’ll never understand why people enjoy P2W games.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 days ago

        It’s not P2W though, right? I thought they only sell cosmetics w/o competitive advantage (outside a mistake here and there), everything that actually impacts competitiveness is provided equally to everyone.

        If that’s not the case, could you link something that indicates that?

        • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          20 days ago

          I would say you are right, because all the playable legends are able to be bought with the free currency you can get by just playing the game.

          I guess some people could make the argument that paying players have faster access to new legends and legendary finishers, etc. I would say this is more like “pay to skip some grinding” than “pay to win”.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            18 days ago

            Yeah, if it’s unlockable in a reasonable amount of time (say, 5-10 hours per hero), then it’s basically the same as those stupid F2P mobile games where you can pay to “speed up time” or whatever. Or if there’s a rapid churn where you lose access to heroes after some amount of time (i.e. even if you pay, they’d disappear).

            But if you can grind for a few hours to get the hero you want, then yeah, not P2W.

        • Psythik@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          19 days ago

          You have to pay to unlock heroes, many of which can improve your performance once you find one that best matches your playstyle. I consider that P2W.

  • Pavidus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    21 days ago

    This must be the drastic change to increase monetization they were talking about just yesterday.

  • Presi300@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    Would’ve cared… If the game had gotten any good updates for the past… Year? Probably more at this point.

  • Harvey656@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 days ago

    These fucka banned me 2 years ago and I never even played the damn game. My brother convinced me to download this and when I opened it, bam, already banned. They new I was just too good and would win every game. Literally the only game I’ve ever been banned from.