Kernel level anticheat doesn't make sense on Linux because the kernel is open. There's simply no incentive to do that

An open source kernel doesn't prevent attestation mechanisms. Anticheats on Windows increasingly require Secure Boot, and all others drivers to be signed/whitelisted; they could try to put similar restrictions on supported distros.

	▲	B-Con 18 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Yeah, I imagine Linux support would be more like a supported Linux distro rather than generic Linux support. Something like SteamOS but with kernel anti-cheat and secure boot from the start. Big question is whether they can make craching the anti-cheat it hard/unpredictable enough that the publishers will trust it. If the publishers release such a platform and someone releases a live distro that can crack it with 3 mouse clicks, that's a lot of wasted effort. I have no idea how effective the Windows anti-cheat is, but I imagine that Linux tooling in general is going to make it harder to lock a user out of controlling their own machine.
	▲	frollogaston 8 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		In fact Android has secure boot plus its own stricter thing. Probably the most commonly running software based on the Linux kernel.
	▲	cwillu a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Yeah, the nightmare scenario. I'm actually a little bit worried that we will look back on the last few years as the Golden Years of Gaming on Linux