Perhaps I’m being dense but how do you see this helping Linux Gaming?
Even assuming that VBS-E allows Game Devs to shift their current kernel based anti-cheat over to it there’s no guarantee that Linux will get a compatible VBS-E module nor that Game Devs would allow its use.
I guess I see it as: If a Game Dev does this (use VBS-E) AND Linux gets a compatible module AND Game Devs allow its use THEN newer games may not have the same problem with anti-cheat as older ones.
The way I understand it is that every anticheat needs to be overhauled as they can no longer tap into the kernel/get kernel access. So the anticheat has to run in userspace. This can also be done under GNU/Linux which is why anticheat should work on both platforms.
The way I understand it is that every anticheat needs to be overhauled as they can no longer tap into the kernel/get kernel access.
Yes, if we assume that various institutions (cough cough looking at you EU) allow MS to remove kernel access.
So the anticheat has to eun in userspace.
VSB-E isn’t really “user space” but your point about the kernel is valid.
hich is why anticheat should
The word “should” is doing some heavy lifting in that sentence. Even if it COULD that doesn’t mean devs will allow it nor does it mean that existing games will get updated on EITHER platform. Removing a kernel level anti-cheat could easily be the death of some older games on Windows as the owner simply doesn’t want to put the money into making it work.
I’m honestly not too sure how possible it is to make VSB-E work on *nix either, since it appears to use Microsoft Hyper-V technologies at its core and those wouldn’t be available in *nix. That means that we’d be back to Game Devs having to specifically write anti-cheat for *nix…which is something they can already do if they want.
VSB-E is interesting but I’m not convinced its going to do anything for Linux Gaming at all. Hopefully I am wrong. :)
I must have missed something. What are you referencing with this comment?
They want to prevent spooky programs running in the kernel (like crowdstrike) which may break the whole system. Source: https://www.theverge.com/2024/7/26/24206719/microsoft-windows-changes-crowdstrike-kernel-driver
please.
It seems quite likely actually. The only problem might be them noticing the benefit for GNU/Linux.
Perhaps I’m being dense but how do you see this helping Linux Gaming?
Even assuming that VBS-E allows Game Devs to shift their current kernel based anti-cheat over to it there’s no guarantee that Linux will get a compatible VBS-E module nor that Game Devs would allow its use.
I guess I see it as: If a Game Dev does this (use VBS-E) AND Linux gets a compatible module AND Game Devs allow its use THEN newer games may not have the same problem with anti-cheat as older ones.
The way I understand it is that every anticheat needs to be overhauled as they can no longer tap into the kernel/get kernel access. So the anticheat has to run in userspace. This can also be done under GNU/Linux which is why anticheat should work on both platforms.
Yes, if we assume that various institutions (cough cough looking at you EU) allow MS to remove kernel access.
VSB-E isn’t really “user space” but your point about the kernel is valid.
The word “should” is doing some heavy lifting in that sentence. Even if it COULD that doesn’t mean devs will allow it nor does it mean that existing games will get updated on EITHER platform. Removing a kernel level anti-cheat could easily be the death of some older games on Windows as the owner simply doesn’t want to put the money into making it work.
I’m honestly not too sure how possible it is to make VSB-E work on *nix either, since it appears to use Microsoft Hyper-V technologies at its core and those wouldn’t be available in *nix. That means that we’d be back to Game Devs having to specifically write anti-cheat for *nix…which is something they can already do if they want.
VSB-E is interesting but I’m not convinced its going to do anything for Linux Gaming at all. Hopefully I am wrong. :)