![]() ![]() #Supertux cheats code#Firstly, the kernel is licensed under GPLv2 and many of the parts in the kernel require the calling code to also be GPLv2 due to the "viral" quality of GPL. ![]() The separate kernel module approach comes with some gotchas. So, EAC could surely use this approach as well, right? #Supertux cheats driver#The Nvidia driver is instead loaded as a separate kernel module, which allows Nvidia to keep its source code hidden, but also allows the driver to be updated separately from the kernel. There are of course some notable exceptions to this rule, the largest of which is the Nvidia driver. #Supertux cheats drivers#Most drivers are delivered this way, where the driver gets tightly integrated into the kernel and the drivers are updated when the kernel is updated. In Linux, the standard way of delivering drivers is by submitting the driver into the kernel source code tree, which naturally requires that the driver be open source. It is also a mode of operation that is technically incompatible with the Linux way of doing things. Based on Sweeney's comments, this is the mode of operation used by Fortnite. This provides a very broad level of monitoring, which is also harder to bypass. This allows EAC code to run at a very privileged level and inspect essentially any and all parts of the system in order to detect tampering. We also don't know the scope of cheats that are detected by EAC in this configuration, so this system by itself may already be fairly comprehensive.ĮAC also contains a kernel-level component, which on Windows is installed as a kernel driver. There are plenty of games, even some popular free-to-play titles, which at best have this level of anti-tamper protection and they don't seem to have a major cheating epidemic, so clearly in many cases this should be enough. This may prevent some cheats but fail to detect others, which can be perfectly reasonable for games, where the number of cheaters and potential cheaters are fairly low or other systems complement the anti-cheat solution. However, this mode of operation is seemingly a comparatively high-trust configuration, where only part of the anti-tampering protections of EAC are active. We know that it can be run in a configuration where it is compatible with Linux/Proton apparently with just a relatively simple toggle. I will address some of these aspects a bit later, but for now let's focus on the main technical blocker, which is Easy Anti-Cheat.Įasy Anti-Cheat, or EAC, is an anti-cheat solution which apparently comes in a few configurations. There have been some responses to this from the Linux side, with some accusing Sweeney of exaggerating the difficulty of such a port or that his statements are conflicting, because he simultaneously believes the Linux market is too small to be worthwhile but also would provide a way for too many cheaters. He argues, that for a game of Fortnite's size this would open the flood-gates to significant influx of cheaters. The central crux of the issue, from Sweeney's point of view, is that making Easy Anti-Cheat, with all of its capabilities, run on Steam Deck (and thus on Linux) would be extremely difficult. One of the big topics of discourse in the Linux gaming sphere recently has been Tim Sweeney's statement on porting Fortnite to the Steam Deck, where Sweeney argues that Linux would be too difficult of a target and the market not big enough to warrant the amount of resources it would take to bring all of Fortnite on the platform. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |