Steam store pages received a new Anti-cheat field. Disclosure is mandatory for kernel-level anti-cheat solutions. And recommended for other anti-cheat solutions (like server-side or non-kernel-level client-side).

The field discloses the anti-cheat product, whether it is a kernel-level installation, and whether it uninstalls with the product or requires manual removal to remove.

Screenshot of anti-cheat indications

    • Sl00k@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I’ve been a heavy competitive gamer for 10 years now, kernel anticheat has been an incredible blessing developed these last few years despite every non-player calling it malware. Meanwhile all the consistent players rejoice and newer players don’t have to deal with constantly wondering if someone’s hacking every single lobby.

      You can see just how much this has directly impacted high elo League of Legends players via Riots dev blog after their implementation. The most notable:

      more than 10% of Master+ games had a cheater in them.

          • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            ·
            3 days ago

            Malware isn’t defined by its privileges but what it does.

            Correct… and anything that intercepts all system calls and forces closed applications that it deems “not safe” even if I the user specifically run it is malware. You bet your ass they feed back information to the mothership too.

            And btw, if you’re accepting the “Spyware” moniker from the other comment chain. Spyware is a form/category of malware.

            Definition from Malwarebytes:

            Hostile, intrusive, and intentionally nasty, malware seeks to invade, damage, or disable computers, computer systems, networks, tablets, and mobile devices, often by taking partial control over a device’s operations.

            Hostile - it’s not meant to help you at all. If you’re doing something deemed “unsafe” in their eyes. They will take action up to and including stealing your money that you paid for the game. intrusive - embeds itself in the kernel Intentionally nasty - Well it’s not accidentally nasty.

            invade - attached to games with little to no input on what you’re installing. disable computer systems - specifically the software you paid for Taking partial control over a device’s operations - the whole fucking kernel.

            I’d say meeting the VAST majority of the definition and at least one portion of each category is sufficient to call them all malware.

            • GetOffMyLan@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              No it’s literally not what malware is. Otherwise anti virus would be. And anti malware haha

              It’s literally none of those things mentioned.

              You are doing massive mental gymnastics. Intentionally nasty for an anit cheat is just stupid. You 100% know that’s not what that means.

              It also doesn’t invade, damage, disable or take control of the system.

              Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make it malware.

              • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                3 days ago

                Taking kernel level actions to stop processes on YOUR machine is absolutely taking control of the system.

                Kernel level anti-cheats meet every requirement. Just because you think there’s gymnastics going on doesn’t make it so. It’s actually well established in the security field that they count.

                • Kissaki@beehaw.orgOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  Have kernel-level anti-cheat systems ever stopped processes? Unrelated to the anti-cheat and the game itself?

                  I would imagine they would kick and ban you, not control other processes.

                  • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    9
                    ·
                    3 days ago

                    They have kernel access… They can control anything since they’re in the kernel. And yes, I’ve seen it.

                    If you remember back in the late 2000’s early 2010’s there were a boatload of apps that would hook into games to do things like display overlays for chats (Teamspeak for example, overwolf as another.) some kernel anti-cheats would stop those processes from starting up.

                    But don’t take my word for it.


                    https://www.pcgamer.com/according-to-experts-on-kernel-level-anticheat-two-things-are-abundantly-clear-1-its-not-perfect-and-2-its-not-going-anywhere/

                    I’m less worried about developers abusing kernel access, and more concerned with potential vulnerabilities introduced for third-party actors to exploit. Rigney cited two examples: the infamous Extended Copy Protection (XCP) from Sony, which bad actors used to compromise affected systems, as well as a backdoor vulnerability introduced by Street Fighter 5’s kernel level anticheat. In 2022, a ransomware developer also took advantage of Genshin Impact’s kernel level anticheat to disable antivirus processes.

                    Introduces backdoors to be used by malicious actors.


                    https://www.pcgamer.com/the-controversy-over-riots-vanguard-anti-cheat-software-explained/

                    Vanguard detects software with vulnerabilities which could be exploited by cheat makers, and blocks some of it.

                    Blocks external softwares that it deems “vulnerable”


                    https://old.reddit.com/r/gaming/comments/xf1cwr/the_insanity_of_eas_anticheat_system_by_a_kernel/

                    This is far from the first time that boot level firmware or kernel mode code inserted via patches or drivers have been used to install spyware, but every time I see it happen I want to warn users about the consequences, and provide some information about the danger.

                    Kernel devs beg users to not allow this shit.


                    Just look it up. All sorts of articles and experts have spoken on it.

                  • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    3 days ago

                    Source for what in specific?

                    That stopping processes is a kernel action? Go ahead. Open powershell and ask it to close some other system process… The UAP prompt (if you’re on windows, linux will just fail silently most of the time unless you sudo or are root) that shows up is the kernel validating that you even have permissions to do that. The kernel handles ALL task scheduling/management. When you close something you’re asking the kernel to do it. The kernel also handles ALL file management and driver management (drivers being extensions of the kernel). So the fact that it can read other active DLLs and such hooked into other processes (say your graphics drivers) is literally proof.

                    That industry agrees that it’s malware? Depends on which part of industry I suppose. But if it’s able to do all these actions at the kernel level, and attached itself it to other software to install, often doesn’t uninstall when you remove the game it was attached to, AND gets flagged by anti-viruses that don’t have it whitelisted yet… It’s definitionally malware. Go search for “Is <insert anticheat> malware”. Very few people will argue that they’re not.

                    Hell it’s possible for anti-cheats to write to UEFI if they really wanted to. There’s no legitimate reason for that level of access, 0, none.

              • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 days ago

                Anti-cheat software is very clearly and explicitly spyware. That’s the entire purpose of it. It spies on how you use your software in the hope that if you cheat you’ll be seen by the spyware watching you.

                This spyware is generally not something people want on their computer - as evidenced by people complaining about it. So effectively whats happening is that people are being spied on against their wishes. Spyware is a common category of malware.

                So I think it’s pretty easy to see why people might describe anti-cheat software as malware.

                • GetOffMyLan@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  Nah words have meaning. I get you don’t like it but that doesn’t make it spyware or malware.

                  Spyware isn’t about watching your system or memory it’s about stealing personal information.

                  These anti cheats specifically comply with privacy laws or they wouldn’t be allowed. You won’t find any breaking any laws.

                  Anti virus and anti malware applications do the same. Doesn’t make them spyware.

                  • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    2 days ago

                    [edit] I’d posted something to go into more detail. But I’ve decided that branch of conversation is not really the way forward.

                    I’ll just say that the software is not installed by choice, and it does things that people don’t want it to do… so it could be described as malware. But if you want it on your computer, then I guess for you it is not malware. In any case, it doesn’t look like we’re going to agree about this regardless.