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…

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    7 days ago

    If your cheat detection runs on the client side only, you don’t have cheat protection.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Well, there only so much in gaming that reasonably can be done server side.

      Sure, the server could identify that a player shouldn’t be visible and not transit that location to a client, addressing seeing through walls, in theory.

      But once a player is hypothetically visible, aimbot can happen. If you are crawling in a ghillie suit in the grass, but the other player has a client that skips rendering grass and replaces the ghillie suit model with a suit made of traffic cones…

      Now intrusive anti cheat isn’t worth it, but it is an unavoidable reality that it is up to the client to preserve the integrity.

      Closest you get would be streamed gameplay, where the rendering even is server side. Also not worth it. But even then I could see cheating machine vision and faked controls to get an edge unfairly.

  • Wispy2891@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    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

  • mcv@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Never heard of Rust, but it sounds like something I can afford to ignore.

    OS shouldn’t even matter to prevent cheating; do your anticheat validation server side. Anyone who knows anything about security knows the client side can never be trusted.

  • thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 days ago

    even most popular Minecraft servers have better functioning anti cheat that is completely server side

    Why isn’t this the standard everywhere? These servers prove that server side anticheat works.

    • AAA@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      It is. All games have this kind of server side verification which denies not allowed actions. The difference is in Minecraft it comes down to “no, you cannot fly, or” no, you cannot build a pig spawner because you don’t have one in you inventory". But in Counter Strike you need to decide if one player’s 14ms headsbot is legit, while some other player’s 20ms kill was not. Or if someone was acting on information they shouldn’t have (radar and wall hacks). That’s orders of magnitudes harder.

      Generally speaking, the slower a game, and the less hand eye coordination are necessary, the easier is server side cheat detection. On the other side, there’s chess…

  • youmaynotknow@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 days ago

    Does the anti-cheat break the game on Linux? Not buying the game. I don’t need that kind of crap in my life.

  • Taldan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    I tried Rust, but quit quickly due to the extreme levels of racism and open Nazis. Maybe they should address some core issues of the game before blaming Linux for their problems?

    Also, how was their playerbase only 0.01% Linux? Was their game terrible on Linux? Why did it have hundreds of time less players than other platforms

    • Cus@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      well they dont see that part as a problem because the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree

    • Bruhh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Helldivers uses nProtect not EAC but yes, EAC in general is compatible with Proton. The Finals use to run EAC for the longest and Arc Raiders currently uses it and both those games run well.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        Does Deep Rock Galactic or maybe Marvel Rivals use EAC? I could’ve sworn I’ve seen pop-ups mention it and those are the three games I’ve played on Linux. But also, memories are bad, constructed memories happen, yadda yadda.

        • Bruhh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          Neither of those use EAC. I think Rivals uses some NetEase anti cheat and DRG doesn’t use anti cheat at all. Lots of games nowadays have pop ups so I don’t blame you for misremembering.

  • andyburke@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    128
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    Get your anticheat code off my fucking cpu and onto your servers where it belongs.

    Garbage games do this, simple as.

    • mycodesucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      Absolutely. You know where all the players are and what they have. Just check if something that the client is reporting is IMPOSSIBLE and kick the player who threw the request. If you have a player who is performing at over a certain level of realistic performance, have someone manually check them to verify they’re legitimately that skilled and if so, flag the account as “actually just that good”. It’s the only reliable solution.

      • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        I’m not a gaming dev, but a full-stack web dev; is it not common sense that data needs to be validated on the server side, not client? I don’t really get why client-side “anti-cheat” is a thing, but may be missing something.

        • wols@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          Not a game dev either but my guess would be the main reason is server performance/compute cost.
          Any checks that are done on the client run on the users’ hardware instead of the publisher having to pay for more/better servers and electricity.

          I think the disconnect with most other types of developers stems from the respective goal hierarchies. In most fields of computing, correctness isn’t just a high-value goal - it’s a non-negotiable prerequisite. With online multiplayer games, one of your chief concerns is latency and it can make sense to trade some cheating for a decrease in lag. Especially if you have other ways of reducing cheating that don’t cost you any server processing power.

          Also, aren’t many of the client side anti-cheat solutions reused in several games? If you’re mainly checking that the player is running exactly the same client that you published, I imagine the development cost for anti-cheat is lower.

          TLDR: Money. It’s always money.

      • FishFace@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        What performance threshold should that be? 10%? So 140,000 manual checks of CS:GO players? 1% is still 14,000. How are you going to check those people - go to their houses? If they don’t let you in just ban them? What about people who install cheats that allow them to perform as well as someone in the top 2% but not top 1%? They have a free ride?

        It’s not possible to catch all cheats, but pure server-side cheat detection is basically worthless.

        • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          Doesn’t CS do it by using volunteers, showing clips to players waiting for matches or something where they can vote if the player was using cheats? I could be remembering wrong though, my CS knowledge comes entirely from watching klicksphilip :P

          • FishFace@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 days ago

            CS has VAC which can issue VAC bans - unless something’s changed. They may also get volunteers to assess stuff idk.

  • oyzmo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    So many games that work flawlessly on Linux, so I just skip those that don’t:]

      • Cus@lemmy.zipOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 days ago

        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…

  • snooggums@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    8 days ago

    I would bet that the claim of more than half of Linux players cheating is false positives due to shitty anti cheat. Like the anti cheat relying on some windows process or trying to initiate some process and linux is structured differently so it fails.