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.
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.