I love the Battlefield series but I’m not turning on Secure Boot for them. If it remains a hard requirement, I’ll simply be passing altogether.
Battlefield 6 cheats day 1 of early access. Depite kernel level anti cheat, forced secure boot TPM 2.0
Submitted 3 weeks ago by sirico@feddit.uk to games@lemmy.world
Comments
Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Katana314@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I was able to get around secure boot by installing the beta on my PS5. From then, I had the pleasure of being unable to enter due to broken menus! Can’t complain for having spent nothing and having little trust in the franchise.
PHLAK@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
There’s nothing wrong with Secure Boot and enabling it can prevent a small subset of attack vectors with no real downsides. That being said, the things Secure Boot does protect against aren’t likely to be an issue for most users but it’s nothing to be afraid of.
pathief@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
If you want to install Linux, secure boot limits the distributions you can use. If you don’t then it’s whatever.
brezel@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
beautiful. fuck secureboot.
9tr6gyp3@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Why?
brezel@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
- some people run more than 1 OS
- some people actually program and need to load unsigned shit all the time
- some people have legacy hardware that doesn't run with secureboot
- it is my decision and my decision alone how i boot my operating systems. not EA's.
Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Needlessly intrusive. Can obviously be circumvented by cheaters anyway, so quite possibly superfluous. Apart from that it protects against the kinds of attacks that typically require physical access to the computer. If you have physical access you have full access anyway. Etc.
SoupBrick@pawb.social 3 weeks ago
It fucks with Linux. I literally just disabled it to resolve a driver install issue before this announcement was made.
shiroininja@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
So I can’t play battlefield without TPM? I hate tech these days. My Ryzen board doesnt have it. Hence why I’m not on windows 11
JigglySackles@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I just refuse to enable it. It makes changing things a hassle.
Psythik@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Same. Keeps things simple with Linux and, Windows doesn’t even complain about it being disabled, so long as it’s present. I’ll never understand this requirement.
Jaded99@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
You can still get win 11 without TPM by using Rufus and bypassing TPM which will have to be done for a lot of old PCs and we will have to do it by October this year.
mushroomman_toad@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Why would you install Windows 11on a computer? What happens if you don’t do it before October?
ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 3 weeks ago
Didn’t Microsoft stop this in a recent-ish update? I remember trying it on a machine without TPM and it just didn’t work.
Bazzite worked fine though (after some headaches setting it up).
b000rg@midwest.social 3 weeks ago
Does this disable updates though? My wife somehow had Win11 installed on her pc without enabling secure boot, and her updates got so far behind that now it refuses to update and needs to be reinstalled.
end_stage_ligma@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
you will own nothing and be happy
lorty@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
Your anti-cheat doesn’t work anyway so let me play in linux you cowards.
Defaced@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Anyone with half a brain could see this coming from a mile away. My conspiracy brain almost thinks this is some concerted and calculated effort by Microsoft to artificially lock games to Windows through anti cheat. It’s disgusting, isn’t needed, and just plain isn’t effective. They can spew all the metrics out of their ass, we all know that it’s just not effective.
wizzim@infosec.pub 3 weeks ago
I am not sure about this conspiracy theory of yours: Microsoft does want third party applications sitting in the kernel anymore.
Natanael@infosec.pub 3 weeks ago
Not entirely;
github.com/microsoft/ebpf-for-windows
Microsoft just want that 3rd party code to interact in a more predictable way with the kernel
rozodru@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
a year ago on Mastodon when EA started locking out games like Apex Legends, BF1, V, 2042, etc from Linux I said “I bet you Microsoft is about to launch a handheld and since they have a deal with EA and Gamepass they want EA Exclusivity on their handheld and to lockout Steamdeck/Valve” sure enough a few months later Microsoft announces their Xbox handheld with Asus.
KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
And what’s the one thing they are getting fucking torched over even by Xbox loyalists? The price (Steam Deck has a cheaper SKU)
PushButton@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
So you got the spyware without the benefits, that’s a hell of a surprise isn’t it?
But thank you for your money suckers!
poolhelmetinstrument@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
This is where we need dedicated servers and self moderation
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Yep.
Things were better when private servers had actual mods and admins, they acted more like pubs where you could go see the regulars, actually form a community.
Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
DayZ, Rust, and Minecraft were the model all along. Nice that it’s vindicated.
msage@programming.dev 3 weeks ago
CS 1.6
ohshit604@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
This is where we need dedicated servers and self moderation
My knowledge towards battlefield games ends at BF5 but I’m pretty sure people pay to host custom servers, EA refuses to open source it and only supply a handful of third parties with the actual code.
I’m sure there is an NDA involved.
DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
I won’t buy BF6 if it doesn’t have a server browser
renrenPDX@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I only found out about this today from someone whose computer got bricked from trying to enable secure boot.
Narwhalrus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
My machine went into a boot loop and I had to clear CMOS to boot again.
I wonder how many people without the resources to fix a problem like that easily are going to end up without computers for an extended period of time because of this.
MBech@feddit.dk 2 weeks ago
Just clear the CMOS.
I had issues aswell where I couldn’t boot, and you wanna know why? Because I didn’t follow the step by step instructions EA tells you to follow. Follow those instructions, and it’ll work just fine.
mugita_sokiovt@discuss.online 3 weeks ago
I’m glad I didn’t enable Tivoization (Secure Boot) and TPM. Those suck, and actually froze our machines. It’s literally useless at this point.
Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 3 weeks ago
Secure Boot isn’t Tivoization because you can enroll your own keys.
mugita_sokiovt@discuss.online 3 weeks ago
From my research, while I could see that being the case, “Secure Boot” is classified by the Free Software Foundation and the GNU Project as Tivoization, and GPL-3 was made to fix that. That’s how I saw it, at least.
northendtrooper@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Having Anti-Cheat of any kind outside of the game is laziness or lack of resources.
I believe just have physical limitations of the character or objects and verify the movement every once in a while to make sure that their movement is not super human (ie, aim bots).
You don’t need a kernal level anti-cheat.
warm@kbin.earth 3 weeks ago
Back when Battlefield was Battlefield, it would self-regulate because most people played on self-hosted servers, so cheaters and bad actors were taken care of swiftly. But now they want their own control to put shitty bots and SBMM in the game, so here we are.
Miaou@jlai.lu 3 weeks ago
I don’t think the devs have much to do with these decisions
theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Kernel anti-cheat does absolutely nothing to prevent aimbots/triggerbots, as most are run using 2 separate machines, anyway. The first machine runs the game in a totally clean and legitimate environment, but sends its video output (either using standard streaming tools like OBS or by using special hardware) to the 2nd machine. The 2nd machine runs the cheat and processes the video to detect where to aim and/or when to shoot, and sends mouse input back to the 1st machine.
C4551E@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
I would have thought this would introduce enough latency to make an aimbot ineffective, but I know nothing about the cheating scene
NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
And they should just make good games too, right?
The issue with “just analyze the players” is that it is VERY expensive computationally. And it causes issues with non-official servers as it drastically increases the cost of a dedicated server and makes a listen server nigh unusable.
To be clear: I do not think the kernel level anti-cheats are a consumer friendly solution. But it takes a special kind of arrogance to insist you know better than decades worth of research and work in trying to stop hacking.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Yeah I mean its not like Valve has been using a combination of server side and client side game file only validation to do AC for Counter Strike for 20 years or anything.
Yep yep yep, the whole industry uses Kernel AC, other than the devs of the longest running comoetetive FPS genre ever, yep yep yep!
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
It takes more work and resources to do what they’re doing. They already do server side anti cheat. And realistically, this is more effective than not doing it, though it definitely still gets defeated anyway. I would say the things that it asks of the customer are not worth the trade even if they were 100% effective, but they are more effective.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
I offer:
0.2% more effective detection of cheaters (theoretical)
You offer:
Full and total access to every single file on your computer, all of its hardware, and all connected devices, via kernel level access.
Do you accept?
count_dongulus@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Wall hacks could be defeated by the server only reporting the positional information about enemy players to game clients when it detects that the client player’s camera should be able to see some part of the other player’s silhouette. This is possible, albeit computationally expensive, but the main functional issue is latency. Nobody wants enemies magically popping into view when their view changes quickly because their ping was more than 6ms lol
frongt@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
That doesn’t cover wallhacks.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Why are people like this.
Passerby6497@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Honestly, if I had the skills I’d be doing that as an explicit fuck you to the draconian anticheat bullshit they force on everyone, because what better fuck you than showing all that effort was for naught, especially close to launch.
EA can go fuck themselves with the world’s biggest cactus.
thespcicifcocean@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I prefer “fuck you with an anchor”
lorty@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
A lot of hacking in valorant is about this tbf (and to more efficiently sell boosts)
tiramichu@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
For some people the only things that brings them joy are 1) winning 2) making other people stuffer
RepleteLocum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
Or developing cheats. It sounds really fun and you get to grow by keeping on top of the anticheat.
ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
It’s fun to cheat in games, that’s why we have cheat codes.
Also there’s the competitive side of it where not getting caught is a skill and glitching is just game knowledge.
blindbunny@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
They’re gonna kill this game aren’t they.
Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 weeks ago
It’s already dead mate. Hop on the finals, we got linux support.
Oisteink@feddit.nl 3 weeks ago
Nah. Everyone wants tpm 2.0 Ask Microsoft
warm@kbin.earth 3 weeks ago
Game is generic enough, so it'll keep a playerbase.
ampersandrew@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
There aren’t exactly a wealth of games doing what Battlefield does outside of Battlefield itself.
poolhelmetinstrument@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I have a feeling they are
MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Hmm, yeah, it’s something every developer should know; client-side validation of input still needs server-side validation, because client-side is not reliable, no mather what you force on them.
Electricd@lemmybefree.net 3 weeks ago
Server side anticheats need to be considered. Clientside has been annoying users far too much, and can be bypassed. A combination of both (and I’d like a less intrusive clientside one) would be better
ChaosSpectre@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
More proof that anti-cheat and bans just isn’t a working approach.
Almost every cheater I’ve talked to or seen interviewed has said they do it because they like winning. If thats the case, pushing them away isnt getting rid of them, its making them try to win harder, and they are literally spending money to make that happen.
This means, there is a market for cheaters, one that publishers and devs simply assault instead of realizing they could replace it entirely.
Create a marketplace in your game for cheats. When a player buys a cheat in game, they can turn it on but only in a specific playlist that cheaters get to play in. You dont need to own or turn on cheats to play in that playlist, in case you feel like challenging yourself, but cheaters can use them as much as they want in that playlist. If a cheater wants to go into cheat free playlist, their cheats get turned off by the game and they have to play like everyone else. Cheat free playlists can have cheat detection, and if you are caught cheating then you get banned from cheat free playlists permanently, but you arent banned from the game or the cheat playlist.
This deters cheaters from paying third parties for cheats, gives them a space to experiment in, makes money for the company running the game, and reduces the amount of cheaters in regular public lobbies. It also creates a space of challenge for people who don’t cheat, sorta like how people will do no death runs in souls games.
Sure, it isnt a perfect solution, but its far better than punishing every player with invasive tech, while simultaneously letting a market of cheat sellers thrive. For a bunch of capitalists, its wild they haven’t realized they are missing out on money with cheats.
AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I suspect that if you’re now playing where everyone else gets the same advantages, that ruins the fun of having cheats
If not and the cheats themselves are just that fun to use, sure, add it in as another gamemode
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Pretty much the same as all the other BFs. They all had cheats in the Beta/early release versions. I’ve played and own literally every BF game since the original release of 1942. Cheats have always been present more or less.
CtrlAltDyeet@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
And yet they have the audacity to block Linux players
MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
I play games mostly on my Steam Deck after migrating from Xbox. Didn’t want to pay for Internet access to use the Internet I already pay for (Xbox Live).
Battlefield games like BF1 and BF4 used to run on the Deck about a year ago, but then EA toggled something and disallowed any and all Linux distros. Can’t remember their reasoning, but something something anti-cheat.
Now me, a paying customer, was fucking pissed. I purchased these games on my Steam Deck to avoid corporate wallets gardens like the Xbox, and then EA lock me out of my purchase after the refund period had elapsed. What the fuck???
So I started dual booting Windows 10 on the Deck to regain access to a product I had paid for. Fucking shit I had to do this in the first place.
But now I need to enable Secure Boot to play the new shit, and I have no clue how to do this without bricking my Deck. I’m an engineer, but not the software type. I don’t want to fuck around with my gear just to play games.
Client-side AC is a poor solution to cheating that can be solved with server-side AC.
Fuck EA. Fuck M$. Fuck all the corporations that want to run spyware on my devices
Kolanaki@pawb.social 3 weeks ago
secure boot required
Wow. Might be the first BF game I pass on even if they eventually give it away for free.
ThunderComplex@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
FreddyNO@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Shame was really looking forward to bf6. Guess I’ll pass
cadekat@pawb.social 3 weeks ago
Can’t you load your own keys into your BIOS, letting you sign whatever you want anyway?
Jaded99@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Only AI will be able to root this out in future
csolisr@hub.azkware.net 2 weeks ago
Back on Reddit, there were even complaints that EA's anticheat was conflicting with Riot's anticheat. Yep, now you potentially need two different installations of Windows to run each of your games. At this point, you would need to buy several SSDs and a SSD extension (or an external USB reader, since USB speeds nowadays are relatively fast enough to afford running those games from an external drive), then install each game (and operative system) in a different one, and swap between them before booting, just like a cartridge. Same would go, of course, for your actual main GNU/Linux drive that contains your actual personal data - that way, the anticheat can't even see your personal information, as it'd physically unplugged from your computer. And since Windows checks the license per motherboard, not per drive, you should be able to recycle the activation key between your Valorant "cartridge" and your Battlefield "cartridge". At this point, paying for a dedicated game console and the online pass starts becoming attractive...
...That, or just boycott multiplayer games altogether. If your group of friends doesn't mind, of course.
y0kai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Oh no! Ch43t3Rzzzz!
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
I am still baffled that anyone thinks that Kernel AC is any kind of effective at stopping hacks, people have been literally making a living off of defeating it, and selling those hacks, for almost a decade now…
But nope, still got hordes of idiot gamers who think they work, think they’re necessary, think they can’t be spoofed.
Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
It’s crazy to me that people cheat in online games. You really have to be a huge fucking loser to do this.
Small pp energy.
Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Sadly, I think the financial incentive is too great these days. People make decent money off this shit
rautapekoni@sopuli.xyz 3 weeks ago
I don’t know what energy this is, but not good either.
burgerpocalyse@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
i dont know if you know this, but generally the people buying and playing games arent the ones making the decisions about anticheat
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
Not sure how you could read this and come away with the idea that I do believe that…
I am talking about the subset of gamers that go on internet forums and discord servers and make false, unsupported claims, argue that Kernel AC is necessary, tell people this just is how it is now, get with the program,
eat the bugs, play the spyware game, its fine, everyone is doing it.Burninator05@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Indirectly buyers are making a decision on anticheat. If someone buys a game with anticheat, they’ve made the decision to reward the developer for making the decision to include anticheat.