- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,782
I'll maintain any & all opt outs & removals on my own due to such being integrated that way. I can't say I'm pleased with it being integrated into the kernel instead of DKMS & such.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
EAC v2 and Fortnite coming to Linux
- Thread starter Mazzspeed
- Start date
DukenukemX
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2005
- Messages
- 11,731
Of course it'll run on CachyOS. Worst case scenario you swap kernels. I think CachyOS can even swap kernels without rebooting?
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,782
Nope, it doesn't have any hotswap/hotpatched kernel functionality.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 14,605
The response on the bug makes it seem like it wont be default kernel, because it breaks some functionality/drivers? It'll be something you have to enable yourself, knowing what issues it will cause.
It's going to break a ton of stuff. Things like lact are probably not going to run on a eac2 kernel.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,782
I'll just use the cachymod kernel & if there's a way to turn it off through kernel configs or something, I'll do that. I'm waiting to see how I can get around it though.
Have fun moving off Arch when they offer their own as well
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2007
- Messages
- 14,605
I don't know. Everybody in here and the bug was complaining like they thought it was, so...I looked myself and saw that didn't appear to be the case, and said as much here.
This is somewhat extreme. They're giving people options, meaning you don't have to have any part of it should you choose not to, and yet you're opposed to people having options? Without a solution to kernel level anticheat that's fair to all (and this is a surprisingly fair implementation), gaming under Linux is going to dwindle as studio's move to more locked down AC solutions - it's not a matter of 'if', it's a matter of 'when'.
I've implemented everything as per Epic's guidelines, and my KDE Neon system runs as it always did. Furthermore eBPF LSM doesn't have the privileges many are assuming it has, and LACT runs fine. In fact, enabling Linux features as per Epic's guidelines has broken nothing at all in relation to software compatibility.
There's nothing integrated into the kernel, everything used is already a part of Linux and has been for quite some time now. If anything, this is a far better solution than installing kernel level software using DKMS.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,782
I'll just keep any requirements disabled then.
And that's fine, in fact - that's the idea. I've got all the requirements enabled, besides possibly hibernation not working as intended (which I don't use), there's literally no downside to doing so.I'll just keep any requirements disabled then.
Last edited:
Epic is going to alter the deal don't worry. Lol we got you this far... Now we need this dkns module bolted on to kernels to be signed.
We let them in the gate and they barely knocked.
They talk about looking at virtualization technologies in the future, I fail to see how that could directly be viewed as a negative by the Linux community. There's been no talk whatsoever of signed dkms modules, in fact Epic have been very forthcoming and open about what they're doing and extending the invite to the broader Linux community in implementing the only viable and fair kernel(ish) anticheat proposal under Linux to date.
Honestly Chad, you're being a bit paranoid here.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,782
Valve should do a thorough deep dive into all code just to make sure they ain't pulling a Sony rootkit deal here. /s (sort of)
If you believe so. Possibly. Enjoy your kernel(ish) anti cheat. I hope it goes as well as you hope.
I'm not hoping for anything, I'm open to the idea that someone may have finally resolved the last remaining hurdle regarding Linux gaming that seems fair for all involved. Whether it works as intended remains to be seen, however ptr1337 the lead developer of CachyOS seems quite sold on the idea.If you believe so. Possibly. Enjoy your kernel(ish) anti cheat. I hope it goes as well as you hope.
We'll see how it shakes out. I'm still expecting in about 6 or 7 months from now after Epic convinces a bunch of EAC running developers with games that currently work no issue in Linux to move to EAC2. Meaning a bunch of games are no longer going to work UNLESS you run there signed kernel(ish) anti cheat kernel. My guess is some time not long after that some Linux hack pops up, and Epic freaks out and up and leaves. So on one hand even if this works fine... EVERY linux gamer who is very happy right now is going to be forced to use this stupid kernel(ish) anti cheat solution to play games we are already happily playing. AND on top of that at any time Epic might decide NA NA NA DOG F this... and drop this.
Frankly I don't put it past Tim Sweeney to be thinking EXACTY this. Lets get all the Unreal Linux games out there right now pulled into EAC2 for Linux. So we can pull the rug out on my buddy Gab and have every recent Unreal based game shit when trying to launch on steam anything.
For the record Maz. Hope I'm wrong. At this point I don't trust Sweeney.
Eldon Ring, Rust, War Thunder, First Descendant, 7 Days to die, Dead by night, Helldivers, Albion online, For honor, V rising, Chivalry 2, SMITE and a bunch of other games all run with EAC just fine right now.
I assume Sweeney is already talking to everyone of these developers wanting them to buy into EAC2.
We are putting a lot of trust into a guy that we know very much hates the only company that has ever really supported Linux. I don't trust that he is the mustache twirling villain I imagine him as. I personally think it burns his ass that developers using his engine and his cheat solution are supporting Gabes thing. Maybe I am paranoid Maz. Maybe. We'll see. lol
Frankly I don't want to be rebooting all the time to swap kerenels... and their is no way I make one of these signed kernels my all the time kernel. I stand by my first take. Why not just dual boot windows if you folks want to use kernel level anti cheat? IT already works.
I have no doubt that's what'll happen. However, it's not an "anti cheat kernel", it's a signed kernel. Signed kernels already exist under both Ubuntu as well as Fedora, and your not forced to use it assuming you don't want to play any games using EAC v2. However, you can still run a signed kernel and have secure boot disabled.
I can only remember this happening once under Windows, and from memory it involved whatever anticheat Genshin Impact uses. While certainly not out of the realm of possibility, it's unlikely an eBPF LSM user land process is going to be used for nefarious purposes even when it can hook into the kernel.
Probably. Likewise, many studio's may be pushing game distribution platforms (especially those with existing anti cheat solutions under Linux that are widely used) to implement anti cheat solutions that are more effective under Linux, otherwise they're going to pull Linux support and switch to a kernel based AC solution that only supports Windows - Which is already happening.
They run fine, but the fact remains that EAC isn't terribly effective under Linux and the possibility remains that studio's may be putting pressure on game distribution platforms to come up with better solutions or they're going to go full Windows kernel level AC and block Linux users entirely.
I'm not a fan of Tim either. But the fact remains that Epic are being very upfront, transparent, fair, and very much open to discussion in relation to their solution. I feel your heightened sense of paranoia may be somewhat unjustified here.
It's a signed kernel, 'signed' does not = 'locked down'. This distinction needs to be made crystal clear - No one is locking down kernels.
Last edited:
Not Yet.
Once you let Sweeney in the gate he is going to alter the deal.
Apex Legends pulled Linux support for supposed cheating.
For honor (ubisoft) pulled support for Linux in Sept... I listed it as working I guess I was out of date on that.
GTAV was working via battle eye (I know different tech, does work in Linux if dev allows) Rockstar pulled support cause Linux users cheat apparently (BS)
Anyway I don't expect REAL cheating. I am 100% expecting a false flag. Excuse to dump Linux support and Screw over SteamOS.
So you buy the propaganda then? Linux isn't the source or the enabling platform of video games cheating problems. Though all of the companies in question would really really love to get their memory resident software installed on your machines sure. AND NO I'm not being paranoid. Way to many anti cheat programs in windows hanging out in memory even after games have been uninstalled. Far to many of the anti cheat companies founded by and staffed by cyber criminals. This entire kernel hooking anti cheat stuff is a windows problem that should 100% stay a windows problem.
Yes I get it its "signed" I know what signed means. I also KNOW Epic isn't stopping here. This was a initial hey guys this seems reasonable right? Introduction. It looks like a lot of Linux people are falling for it. Its just a signed kernel. What's the big deal. X and Y and Z big distros sign kernels. What's the problem buddy? This setup is going to expand, evolve and require more concessions. Ya ya I know its just "signed" em hm I'm sure that is all it will take to make them happy.
I am still waiting to see what Valve has to say on this one. lol They don't even have Secure boot enabled on any of their hardware. I still think Gabe is going to say no thanks Sweeney. I am curious now Valve just stay silent. Or do they actually say something one way or the other. Hey maybe they decide to update everyone's hardware to enable secure boot and do this. Maybe. My money is on a Gabe rant about how Sweeney is the Bill gates of Video games and he can shove it. We'll see. lol
Unlike Microsoft, which is a corporation, Linux is a huge community - I highly doubt the community, including leaders in the community, would allow any more than has already been proposed. It's fair, it's more effective that what's currently implemented, and it's needed if gaming under Linux is to continue growing.
OK, so we're talking about cheating? The excuse used was that Linux was in some way used by cheats (there was mention at the time that WSL2 was being used under Windows as a cheat exploit), and Linux support was dropped as EAC under Linux simply isn't terribly effective. The idea is that EAC v2 is more effective, so perhaps we'll get Apex Legends support once more. Your argument here is basically highlighting what I'm saying: without a better AC solution under Linux, there's nothing stopping studios from blocking Linux users from their titles entirely as they move solely to a platform with a more effective AC solution.
See above.
See above.
What we need is an implementation that literally debunks the excuse used by studio's that cheating is rampant under Linux, EAC v2 is an attempt to do just that. We overcame the problem that was studio's using the excuse that it's too hard to code for Linux via the release of Proton and it's variants, now we need to overcome the excuse used by studio's that Linux is open to cheating - with luck EAC v2 satisfies that argument and there's no valid reason why studio's cannot allow their titles to run under the OS of an individual's choosing.
Yes I get it its "signed" I know what signed means. I also KNOW Epic isn't stopping here. This was a initial hey guys this seems reasonable right? Introduction. It looks like a lot of Linux people are falling for it. Its just a signed kernel. What's the big deal. X and Y and Z big distros sign kernels. What's the problem buddy? This setup is going to expand, evolve and require more concessions. Ya ya I know its just "signed" em hm I'm sure that is all it will take to make them happy.
To quote myself:
Yes, Tim's a pissy little bitch, but business is business and Gaben's a business Man - to ignore or flatly refuse to support an AC solution many studio's may switch to should it be successful is outright corporate suicide and highly unlikely on behalf of Valve. Furthermore, Valve need to be involved and in the game from the onset should the implementation be successful.
A few posts above you stated I was the one being hopeful, personally I think it's evident it's the other way around Chad - you're hoping that EAC v2 will fail as you're unhappy about it being an optional 'option' in relation to kernel used. I wish we didn't need such intrusive solutions, I really do - but when people are so hellbent on cheating, it's the ever growing minority that ruin everything for the honest majority. I mean, even with VACnet, the cheating situation under CS2 is a joke of epic (no pun intended) proportions - it's 'really bad'.
Last edited:
Valve at this point is NOT involved in anything.
Epic announcing this WITHOUT them tells me they are not in.
This announcement is a pressure tactic. I don't think its going to work. If Steam was excited about this they would already be talking about it.
IF Valve was even a little interested Epic would have waited for them to say so.
No its not any sort of suicide to tell Tim Sweeney to fuck off. Steam hardware has sold pretty damn well without fortnight, and other kernel level games. Fortnight is still popular, its also less played this year then it was last year. Its not a growing title anymore.
You got any citation of that? I'd be overwhelmed with surprise if Valve have nothing whatsoever to do with this. Once again: Chad, you're the one being hopeful here.
EDIT: I thought you weren't bad mouthing people open to the possibility of more gaming options under Linux?
Last edited:
Who is bad mouthing anyone? I don't trust Epic, I get why people want to play games. I don't think any of you should be trusting Epic but I get it. That's just like my opinion man.
Valve hasn't said anything about this.
EPIC has said they are talking to them. Valve has neither confirmed or denied that is even the case. If Valve was already on board they would have said something by now. Would they not? They haven't said we are turning on secure boot on our Deck, or our cube or on the frame. They haven't even said yes we are exploring and considering how to support this. They haven't said anything at all.
So you're opposed to a solution to the anticheat problem under Linux (that I'm sure you'll state doesn't exist) based on something that will likely never happen in the future to the extent you believe it will happen? Options are available to everyone on both sides of the argument, you can even run a signed kernel with secure boot disabled.Who is bad mouthing anyone? I don't trust Epic, I get why people want to play games. I don't think any of you should be trusting Epic but I get it. That's just like my opinion man.
At the end of the day, EAC v2 involves a lot more than just going into UEFI settings and enabling secure boot + TPM 2.0 + IOMMU + running a signed kernel & drivers; there are going to be people stating they can't get it working, and the possibility exists that studio's aren't going to be interested in dealing with support requests - so they'll just bounce all problems back to Epic (who'll probably just provide a generic setup page and advice to contact your motherboard vendor for a BIOS/UEFI update) and either stick with the more compatible EAC under Linux, or they'll adopt kernel anticheat under Windows and lock Linux users out altogether.
EAC v2 might succeed, it might fail for the reason mentioned above. But the reality is studios are blocking the ability to play games under Linux by implementing kernel level anticheat under Windows, and I believe that in the instance a solution cannot be found, Linux will once again be left behind and gaming will become considerably less viable as time advances - and to reiterate, I'm stating this as it's already happening.
It's still early days, give it time. This latest update from the lead developer of CachyOS is the first correspondance I've heard from anyone but Epic on the matter. I'm sure all parties involved are going back and forth on the matter, stating what they're comfortable with and where compromises need to be made.
As stated, I'm open to trying the implementation, at that point I'll form judgement. I'm not interested in heresay or speculation because it's "just not in the spirit of FOSS".
Last edited:
Correct. There is no problem. Companies should not be allowed to build back doors into the kernel >.< The solution is the problem. Its a toe into something that shouldn't exist.
Also correct. the only real anything anyone has heard is from a little distro built buy a guy running a hobby distro. (I love Cachy but lets be honest, its a distro that is excited to get a few hundred bucks a month from corp supporters like framework to cover their server costs) Its a distro maintained by 3 or 4 people on a part time basis. As cool as it is, its not Valve. So far no one important has weighed in. We'll see what Valve has to say on this. Frankly if Valve isn't on board this isn't a solution is it. So far we have no idea if they are on board. (I bet they are not) We'll see who is right. (and it could be you, maybe Gabe comes out this week and says he loves this)
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,782
I think it's a lot more than 3 to 4 contributors/maintainers now. Probably 2x to 3x, but that's also why they're trying to garner more support from big corps in order to be palatable to more users. They can share the workload for such additions.
Thowen
n00b
- Joined
- May 3, 2018
- Messages
- 1
Using CS2 as the benchmark, I'd want evidence of fewer cheater-affected matches, not just more bans. Those are different outcomes: a ban after someone has ruined several matches doesn't undo the damage.
For the Linux proposal, I'd also want a documented list of what the client checks, when it runs, and what stops working on an unsupported kernel. A signed kernel is one property; anti-cheat effectiveness and the support burden are separate questions. That seems a more useful comparison with VAC than assuming either approach wins because of where it runs.
For the Linux proposal, I'd also want a documented list of what the client checks, when it runs, and what stops working on an unsupported kernel. A signed kernel is one property; anti-cheat effectiveness and the support burden are separate questions. That seems a more useful comparison with VAC than assuming either approach wins because of where it runs.
And yet you listed just a couple of the many games that used to work with Linux that now don't due to studio's switching to anticheat solutions under Windows that are more effective, with another title being blocked only recently. There is an anticheat problem under Linux, and it's made worse when Windows cheats are leveraging WSL2 so the client switches to the Linux implementation of EAC making it easier to cheat in game under Windows.
As a systemd service, you'll be able to monitor when it's running, you'll also be able to forcibly stop the service.
EDIT: It looks like EA are also pushing forward with their own anticheat implementation under Linux: https://hire.moi/companies/electronic-arts/senior-reverse-engineer-anti-cheat--5cb13cf504
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,782
Oh great, too many new Linux anticheat implementations incoming. 
Oh great, too many new Linux anticheat implementations incoming.
Well Linux has to adapt, or we continue to loose titles to Windows. People have been discussing the anticheat problem under Linux for quite some time now, coming up with solutions that are more locked down than EAC's proposal, and yet when someone comes up with a fair solution you have a minority dedicated to conspiracy theories before the implementation's even released.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,782
Since I don't play many MP games, I usually don't think about losses or gains with them for Linux.
The problem is: In most cases, when a studio switches to the more effective anticheat implementations under Windows, you loose the ability to paunch the game under Linuix, period. So no more single player campaigns, and no more multiplayer.
Furthermore, if it doesn't affect you, than you don't need to enable anything under UEFI, you don't need to run a signed kernel and drivers, you can continue using your PC under the OS of your choosing as you always have. As stated: Options are available to everyone on both sides of the argument.
Frankly all well. If developers want to spite Linux cause we won't let them hook into kernel level things. We loose nothing. Multi player root kits can just stay on windows. Yes people that want to play those games really really should stay on windows.
Accepting EAC2 will destroy Linux gaming. I know you don't see it, this isn't a good thing. We can agree to disagree.
2 weeks since this was announced. Valve still has nothing to say.
The proposed implementation is running ebpf-lsm, it's scope is limited, it cannot override apparmor denials. This is nothing like kernel level anticheat under Windows.
Two weeks after EAC v2 was announced, the only feedback we've heard is from the lead developer of CachyOS, which is hardly surprising. I'm sure all parties are working through the details, as I stated earlier - give it time. Furthermore Chad, I'm not stupid, I see the bigger picture here.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2008
- Messages
- 9,782
I actually play very little games that have both MP & SP. If I do play MP, I'm thankful that I can at least run such games with Proton. I get the loss part, especially with Destiny 2 & others. My point is that in most cases, I'm probably not the type of person EACv2 will be targeting. My aim is to side-step, at least for whatever such time is allowed.
I know your not stupid Maz. We disagree that is all.
Don't take my text in the wrong way my friend. I understand your point, we just disagree. IMHO Sweeney just publicly bragged about vibe coding a Linux launcher cause coding is hard. Epic released a vibe coded buggy alpha launcher alongside a decree that users must padlock their BIOS and kernels to play Fortnite, the clock has already started ticking on EAC2. Make no doubt the second these kernels start popping up a army of annoyed neck beards are going to have their local AIs poking. I don't expect EAC2 goes very long before its as broken as windows anti cheats. NO most of the old guard Linux folks could give a shit about Linux gaming really, I do believes Epics and Sweeneys play here are going to attract a lot of people that just want to see this burn.
Wait and see what Valve has to say on this. I'm betting they aren't down and this entire thing fizzles. I get why people want games like these on Linux.
IMHO fortnight and games like it are a big part of why windows is a trash fire. We don't need to welcome in the "anti cheat" hamster wheel. Where the "security" that needs to be implemented keeps getting more and more and more draconian.
Of course EAC2 is; give up your PC to us Lite. They wanted a YES. Once you get one yes the next yes gets a lot easier. NO I say.