Original Summary

I’ve been working on a project called Kyvrane because the anti-cheat situation on Linux has always bothered me. I’m a gamer myself, so I understand both sides of it. Game developers need some way to trust the machines connecting to their games, but I also completely understand why people don’t want extremely invasive anti-cheat running in the kernel with access to everything on their PC. So I’ve been experimenting with a different approach. Instead of trying to build another massive kernel anti-cheat, Kyvrane is based more around trust and remote attestation . Basically, can a Linux machine provide verifiable evidence to a server that it meets a certain security policy? There is a kernel module, but I’m intentionally trying to keep it small and limited. I don’t want Kyvrane scanning game memory, injecting into games, hiding itself, killing processes or monitoring everything someone does on their computer. I’ve gotten the project farther than I originally expected. The current v0.5 prototype has TPM-backed challenge/response attestation working in a software-TPM test environment. It independently verifies the quote, signature, nonce and PCR evidence, rejects replayed/tampered evidence, has an 11/11 passing tamper suite and 63 passing unit tests. End-to-end attestation in the current lab is around 34ms median. I’m currently working on v0.6, which is more about compatibility, privacy and proving Kyvrane can run without becoming the invasive thing I’m trying to avoid. But here’s the main reason I’m posting: I need people who actually know this stuff to look at the code. I’m not a Linux kernel security expert and I’m not going to pretend I am. Development has been heavily AI-assisted, and before I throw the whole thing on GitHub I’d really like experienced people to tell me what I’ve gotten wrong. If you have experience with Linux kernel development, TPM/IMA, remote attestation, security engineering or anti-cheat and you’re genuinely interested in reviewing it, DM me and I’ll send you the code/repo to look through privately. I want to know things like: Is the trust model actually sound? Is the kernel component doing anything it shouldn’t? Am I trusting something that a malicious Linux user could easily fake? Are there privacy/security problems I haven’t considered? Is there anything obviously AI-generated/bad that needs rewritten? And honestly, is this even in a state where you’d consider it ready to put on GitHub? I’m not looking for people to tell me it’s awesome. If something is fundamentally wrong, tell me. I’d rather have people who know more than me tear it apart now than put it on GitHub and find out later that I completely misunderstood something. If you’re interested in looking through it, DM me.   submitted by   /u/BambiKillerP320 [link]   [comments]

  • 情报分类：商业与市场研究
  • 分类依据：内容涉及商业、投资或市场动态
  • 信息来源：Reddit · SideProject
  • 发布时间：2026/9/18 03:14:59