this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
337 points (98.8% liked)

Linux Gaming

15831 readers
58 users here now

Gaming on the GNU/Linux operating system.

Recommended news sources:

Related chat:

Related Communities:

Please be nice to other members. Anyone not being nice will be banned. Keep it fun, respectful and just be awesome to each other.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
poVoq@slrpnk.net
Quintus@lemmy.ml
mudle@lemmy.ml
337
Microsoft looking to restrict kernel level access after CrowdStrike incident might help us with our current Anti-Cheat dilemma (www.theverge.com)
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by mudle@lemmy.ml to c/linux_gaming@lemmy.ml
59 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

CrowdStrike’s Falcon software uses a special driver that allows it to run at a lower level than most apps so it can detect threats across a Windows system. Microsoft tried to restrict third parties from accessing the kernel in Windows Vista in 2006 but was met with pushback from cybersecurity vendors and EU regulators. However, Apple was able to lock down its macOS operating system in 2020 so that developers could no longer get access to the kernel.

Now, it looks like Microsoft wants to reopen the conversations around restricting kernel-level access inside Windows.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Wahots@pawb.social 45 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

Imo, third party companies just shouldn't have access to the kernel level. Someone is always getting hacked, and having this level of access to potentially hundreds of millions of computers is a huge risk. Especially if it's for something trivial, like anticheat in Helldivers 2.

[–] soundconjurer@mstdn.social 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

@Wahots @mudle , I hold that same relative feeling, but people do own their computers and if they want to play League of Legends and let someone into the kernel, who am I to tell them no? I ran league in Lutris, so no chance of making that decision even if I wanted to.

[–] ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

and let someone into the kernel,

Problem is, that similarly to invasion of privacy, this is not visible, and so they don't understand what's happening. It's just one more program, what could happen? It's not like somebody coming and inspecting your house, in that it is not noticeable in practice.

[–] soundconjurer@mstdn.social 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

@ReversalHatchery , I completely agree. My ring 0 is sacred and I can't prove there isn't anything in it already, but I wouldn't knowingly shove third party stuff into my kernel. I like to keep my apps restricted from anything they don't need on my system in userland. However, millions upon millions of people installed Tencent's Vanguard to play League of Legends like it wasn't any big deal (it is). If people want an inner ring security module, I suppose that's a bit their choice. 🤷🏽‍♂️

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 4 points 3 months ago

Yeah, those security agents can become attack vectors themselves, so running them kernel level is nuts.

[–] BurningRiver@beehaw.org 1 points 3 months ago

Enterprise level AVs are going to sit in the kernel so they can watch for anomalies in the OS. There are better EDRs out there than Crowdstrike, and virus definitions are an outdated way of detecting anamalous behavior anyway.