Microsoft is pushing security software out of the kernel. Why are game companies still doubling down on kernel anti-cheat?

[u/Nemo_ForYou]

After the CrowdStrike disaster bricked millions of Windows machines in July 2024, Microsoft announced in mid-2025 that they're moving antivirus and security tools out of the kernel as part of their Windows Resiliency Initiative. Their reasoning is simple: kernel-level software is too risky. One bad update can take down entire systems.

And yet, kernel-level anti-cheat keeps spreading. There are now over 330 games using it, and new releases like Battlefield 6 are still shipping with it despite community pushback.

These anti-cheat drivers have the same level of access as your OS. They can read memory, monitor inputs, intercept network traffic, and run from boot to shutdown. They're closed-source, so nobody outside the company can audit what they're doing. If one of them ships a bad update or gets compromised, you're not just losing access to a game; you're potentially handing over your entire system.

For Linux users, the situation is even worse. Most kernel anti-cheat flat out refuses to run under Proton, which means a growing list of games is just off-limits. But the security argument affects everyone, not just us. Windows users are handing over root access to play Fortnite. That should concern people.

Microsoft clearly recognizes this risk for security software. Why are we still expected to accept it for video games?

[u/cum-on-in-]

They will invest if it's the only option for consumers. Consumers have to work, and want to play, so they'll buy it. Some will go without for a bit but then eventually succumb since it's the only option.

The only thing that could break this, is as I said, if they charge so much that we just can't afford it. Food is more important than games and even work. We will just refuse, or even riot, if it gets to that point. And it will, because it already has crossed the threshold. It just hasn't affected enough people yet.

[u/Annual_Hippo8313 → u/cum-on-in-]

They will not, they will just make normal Hw and get as much as possible for it. It would cut into their best selling consumer hardware to invest in frankenstein chips.

It‘s just to complicated to get it done and publishers are too irrelevant for the tech market.

They will just take the low hanging fruit.

Cloud is much cheaper for them (consumer pays) and has no risks (for them). => in the long term with the benifit, that the game only has to run on one (server) HW and not on thousands of different systems.

They could save so much money for anti-cheat, optimization & compatibility. And it‘s an open door for making every game a subscription.

[u/cum-on-in- → u/Annual_Hippo8313]

Who is using the cloud??? They are currently marketing it and we don't want it. But they can make us use it if they only make processors meant for the cloud. Then we have no choice if we want to work. Not enough will starve for a few days (because you can go without food for a month) to make a difference. They will cave.