Confused on Steam Play and Proton? Be sure to check out our guide.

PUBG's newer anti-cheat sounds problematic for the Steam Deck and Linux

By - | Views: 21,054

PUBG is currently a game that doesn't work at all on Linux due to anti-cheat, even with the Steam Deck coming it's sounding like a game that won't play nicely. Oh, it's also going free to play.

In their development letter posted on December 10, they outlined what they've been doing and their future plans for anti-cheat with PUBG. While previously PUBG relied on BattlEye, which does have Linux support and recently made it easy for developers to turn on support for Proton and the Steam Deck, their newer proprietary solution with Zakynthos is going to get more invasive and cause more problems.

Through 2022, they explained that one of the major adjustments coming would be the "Implementation of kernel drivers" and I'm sure I don't need to explain to any regular Linux gaming fans why this will be a problem. These kernel drivers are designed for Windows, and something Wine / Proton likely will just not work with.

So what's the hope for PUBG running on Linux / Proton and the Steam Deck? It's not looking good.

A shame, as it's consistently in the top 5 most played games on Steam.

Article taken from GamingOnLinux.com.
25 Likes
We do often include affiliate links to earn us some pennies. We are currently affiliated with GOG and Humble Store. See more here.
About the author -
author picture
I am the owner of GamingOnLinux. After discovering Linux back in the days of Mandrake in 2003, I constantly came back to check on the progress of Linux until Ubuntu appeared on the scene and it helped me to really love it. You can reach me easily by emailing GamingOnLinux directly.
See more from me
32 comments
Page: «4/4
  Go to:

Eike 20 Dec, 2021
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
Quoting: mirvFor some things, but not others. Installation of software, modification of boot processes, unrestricted access to protected memory areas, all things that are an order of magnitude worse.
It's not so much as being closed/open source as it is what the software is intended to do. Drivers from nvidia vs a rootkit designed to spy on the user and report back in a possibly insecure manner? World of difference.

Yeah, I'm aware, but what would the malicious software actually do with all its rights?
(Because, "It's not so much as being closed/open source as it is what the software is intended to do." ;) ) It can access all my data, my mails, my letters, my pictures, my financial data, my browser's data (including banking and stuff(*)) all fine with user rights, right? It can encrypt and or post them...
Putting itself into the boot sector is a different thing, ok, but then, I'm not reinstalling as often as every decade...

(*) not totally sure about this


Last edited by Eike on 20 December 2021 at 1:30 pm UTC
mirv 20 Dec, 2021
View PC info
  • Supporter Plus
Quoting: Eike
Quoting: mirvFor some things, but not others. Installation of software, modification of boot processes, unrestricted access to protected memory areas, all things that are an order of magnitude worse.
It's not so much as being closed/open source as it is what the software is intended to do. Drivers from nvidia vs a rootkit designed to spy on the user and report back in a possibly insecure manner? World of difference.

Yeah, I'm aware, but what would the malicious software actually do with all its rights?
(Because, "It's not so much as being closed/open source as it is what the software is intended to do." ;) ) It can access all my data, my mails, my letters, my pictures, my financial data, my browser's data (including banking and stuff(*)) all fine with user rights, right? It can encrypt and or post them...
Putting itself into the boot sector is a different thing, ok, but then, I'm not reinstalling as often as every decade...

(*) not totally sure about this

That depends on the browser and how it's installed, for browser related activities. The browser itself may be executable, readable, but not writable by the user. SSL certificates certainly aren't writable by normal users, elevated permissions are absolutely required for that.
I'm not saying it's safe (it mostly certainly isn't!) but the attack vectors are increased substantially, along with the risk and ease of hidden installation and modification of sofware. Why increase the risk to such obscene levels?
No matter what way it's cut, kernel modules for anti-cheat are bad. They should not be permitted, and I suspect GPL only interfaces will start to appear more if they do come along. Users of less technical skill levels will need protecting from blindly agreeing to such blatant security nightmares.
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on:

Reward Tiers: Patreon. Plain Donations: Liberapay or PayPal.

This ensures all of our main content remains totally free for everyone with no article paywalls. We also don't have tons of adverts, there's also no tracking and we respect your privacy. Just good, fresh content. Without your continued support, we simply could not continue!

You can find even more ways to support us on this dedicated page any time. If you already are, thank you!
Login / Register

Or login with...
Sign in with Steam Sign in with Twitter Sign in with Google
Social logins require cookies to stay logged in.