Microsoft IS NOT Killing Kernel Anti Cheat!!

Summary

This video debunks misinformation around Microsoft's supposed removal of kernel-level anti-cheat software, which some speculated would benefit Linux gaming. The claim originated from misinterpretations of a blog post and has been amplified through various outlets. The video explains that Microsoft is working on reducing the reliance on kernel-level access for security solutions, but this does not equate to banning kernel access entirely. The creator highlights the importance of reading sources carefully to avoid spreading false information and commends outlets like 'Gaming on Linux' for properly understanding the issue.

Takeaways

• 🛑 Microsoft is *not* removing kernel-level anti-cheats as some outlets are reporting.
• 📜 A source misread a Microsoft blog post, leading to incorrect articles and rumors.
• 🔄 The misinformation spread quickly through multiple references, creating a feedback loop.
• 💻 Microsoft’s actual intent is to provide more security options *outside* of kernel mode, not to block kernel access entirely.
• 🚫 Kernel-level anti-cheats like Vanguard, BattlEye, and FaceIt *are not* being removed, contrary to what has been falsely reported.
• 📚 The blog post mentions 'restricted kernel access' but emphasizes innovation and collaboration with security providers like ESET.
• 🔒 Microsoft wants to improve security while minimizing the need for kernel-level access to protect system stability.
• 🎮 Removing kernel access could theoretically help Linux gaming, but that's not what Microsoft is doing.
• ❌ Some articles and Reddit posts misinterpreted the blog, claiming Microsoft would block third-party kernel access.
• 🔍 Gaming on Linux’s Liam Dawe correctly called out this misinformation and clarified the real changes Microsoft is proposing.

Q & A

What is the primary claim made by the original article regarding Microsoft's kernel-level anti-cheat?

The original article falsely claims that Microsoft plans to remove kernel-level anti-cheats, which could significantly impact Linux gaming.

Why does the speaker believe this claim is false?

The speaker believes the claim is false because it is based on a misinterpretation of a blog post by Microsoft. The article misreads the intention behind Microsoft's plans, confusing restrictions with blocking kernel-level access.

What is the kernel-level anti-cheat, and why is it controversial?

Kernel-level anti-cheat software operates deep within a computer's system, giving it broad access to monitor for cheats. It is controversial because of its potential security risks, as it can affect system stability and performance.

What is Microsoft's actual plan regarding kernel-level access as discussed in the blog post?

Microsoft plans to minimize and restrict third-party kernel access, not block it entirely. They aim to create a platform where security solutions can operate with fewer kernel dependencies to improve stability and security.

Why does the speaker mention companies like CrowdStrike and ESET in relation to this topic?

The speaker mentions companies like CrowdStrike and ESET because they attended a Microsoft security summit where these issues were discussed. ESET, for example, supports modifications to Windows but emphasizes that kernel access must remain an option for effective cybersecurity.

How does the speaker explain the cycle of misinformation in tech reporting?

The speaker explains that one article with misinformation can lead to others citing it, creating a loop where false claims are perpetuated. In this case, an article from 'Notebook Check' misinterpreted Microsoft's blog post, and others spread the misinterpretation.

What could be the potential benefits of moving security capabilities outside of the kernel, according to the speaker?

Moving security capabilities outside of the kernel could lead to better system stability, fewer crashes, and reduced security risks, making it easier to manage security software without compromising system performance.

What does the speaker say about the impact of this situation on Linux gaming?

The speaker clarifies that the claim about this change benefiting Linux gaming is incorrect. Even if anti-cheats moved out of the kernel, it wouldn’t necessarily improve compatibility with Linux systems or make it easier for games to run on platforms like Steam Deck.

What example does the speaker use to illustrate problems with kernel-level anti-cheat software?

The speaker refers to a recent issue with Valorant’s anti-cheat, Vanguard, which caused ethernet connections to crash on Windows. This highlights the instability and intrusiveness of kernel-level anti-cheat systems.

What advice does the speaker give to the audience regarding information in tech reporting?

The speaker advises the audience to always check sources thoroughly before accepting claims. They emphasize the importance of understanding the original materials to avoid being misled by misinterpretations or false reporting.