EDIT: We have at least one user claiming that EAC and BattlEye can NOT see what programs are running on your computer via proton on Linux.
EDIT 2: According to brucethemoose@lemmy.world with comment https://lemmy.world/comment/24738141
"Yes and no.
If you run task manager or something in Proton? It just shows Proton processes:
ImagePlaceholder
But all linux process, and tons of information about them, are readable in the /proc directory. They’re just files, accessible to the program.
Try ls /proc yourself.
There’s nothing stopping anti cheat from checking that, if it’s configured to do it.
Which is pretty dang convincing to me.
If I have a good understanding, the Symlinks that Proton uses allow the games to view nearly your entire drive and see what software is running? Because Proton is explicitly NOT a virtual machine and merely a translation layer for Windows applications to run on Linux?
The reason I like to ask is because this is the general consensus, that Proton applications are not secure, but when searching online it doesn't explicitly state anywhere if the games with EAC or BattlEye are capable of spying on Linux users. So I'm looking for confirmation on this.
It does not matter what games you are running or whether they have anti-cheat. If you are running a program without any sandboxing, they can access everything on your system that your user has access to.
Steam launches games (doesn't matter if you use Proton or they are running natively) as a subprocess and if Steam itself is not sandboxed, those games will also not be. While the symlinks may be abused for this, Wine also gives access to running apps by mounting your Linux root folder as the Z drive (similar to C or D drives you may have already seen).
Running any untrusted software on your system (particularly proprietary ones like most games), you should be mindful of associated privacy risks.
I also wanna address one thing about the particular games you mentioned: EAC and BattlEye run with elevated privileges on Windows. This means it can access and modify things on your system that your normal user can't, like changing core system parameters (and even BIOS). On Linux, though, they run as your own user with regular privileges. This gives them access to your system only as much as any other app you are running. This is the key reason why some game developers don't let you play their online games on Linux, even when the anti-cheat system they use explicitly support it.
I feel like for all of the words you just posted you are kind of beating around the bush here. I found tens of such conversations about root access and inherent risks online already. I hope you're not copying and pasting LLM outputs.
The reason that these games request kernel level access in windows is to see what programs are running currently. Does root access not give them the same capability on Linux?
Rude. Based on your post I see that you are either misinformed or missing important information. I was trying my best to help you with my years of experience with Linux and privacy and now that you are going this way about this I am not very keen to do so.
Having root privileges and access to your system files (anything below the / directory, it is the root of your filesystem) are different things. Even without root privileges important information can be gathered about your system (e.g. by reading your
/etcfolder).That's insulting.
Correct. The difference is that they are not asking for root privileges on Linux.
I'm glad I checked with you about the LLM thing because I felt pretty slighted when I thought I was putting forth effort for a conversation and suspected others weren't at all participating but instead routing in their bots. I feel better knowing you're genuine.
I'm not, why would you accuse someone of being an LLM if you lack the understanding on the topic to make that judgement. The comment you accused of being from an llm was pretty clear, I'm not every sure what you were responding to making that accusation. It must that the accusation was an emotional one because you made the mistake of "feeling slighted" over a totally mundane explanation you asked for.
Frankly your posts in reply to most of these comments looks both stilted and robotic with an overall lack of understanding of the material you are replying to. IMO that looks like an LLM someone has sent to collect information and provide the consensus back to the user?
Are you sure you shouldn't disclose anything?
They could see what programs are on your machine without being kernel level. Even non-kernel level anti cheats generally detect and ban you simply for having CheatEngine, a hex editing tool that is basically GameGenie for PC, installed. Some even flag AutoHotKey as a cheat if it's installed. They don't even have to be running; just installed.
Whats your source on that? IDK much about Linux, tbh, which is why I'm asking, but if it were still in Windows then as an example RuneScape which runs a version of EAC, which is in this case not kernel-level, cannot detect AHK because I used to use it for skilling mouse-button macros a few years back to make the multi-hour grinds more bearable. Now, they COULD still detect bots who make clicks by analyzing timings and preciseness, but it clearly wasn't enough to prevent them because botting was and presumably still is a serious issue.
Just because it doesn't flag AHK as a cheat doesn't mean it can't detect it. Most games don't flag it. But every once in a while, they do. VAC isn't kernel level, but a fuckton of games using it will flag and ban you for having CheatEngine. The original MW2 back in the day, which used VAC, banned people for having AHK installed.
Oh they definitely consider it cheating, they have banned users for using it in the past and the official written policy says "1 button 1 input".
As for VAC, I haven't personally had any issues with them, either, what year did they change the policy?
RuneScape has not banned anyone for having or using AHK in and of itself. They have rules on macroing and unattended automation (ie botting). Their rules on the 1:1 input are specifically with mouse clicks; other buttons are fine to macro.