Rust Just Drew a Line in the Sand: The TPM 2.0 Mandate Is Here

Rust's Latest Anti-Cheat: A Necessary Evil That Cleans House, But Kicks Players To The Curb

Facepunch is drawing a firm line in the digital sand for Rust players, mandating **Secure Boot** and **TPM 2.0** for server access. This isn't just an option; it's the inevitable future, according to COO Alistair McFarlane. We predict this drastic move, while aimed squarely at the game's notorious cheat community, will significantly reshape Rust's player demographic.

This decision is the culmination of years of an escalating anti-cheat **arms race**. We've long documented Facepunch's frustrations, with McFarlane himself detailing the routine harassment and threats leveled by the very cheat makers this measure targets. For developers, this isn't merely about ensuring fair play; it's about basic professional respect and the ability to work without the constant threat of a poisoned well.

Here’s the breakdown of what's coming:

• From March, server owners can opt in to only allow connections from players with **Secure Boot** and **TPM 2.0** enabled.
• Facepunch will review metrics, with a clear expectation to make these requirements mandatory across all servers.

Our analysis shows this isn't a unique play. Titles like Highguard, Battlefield 6, and even Black Ops 7 have already embraced these system-level checks. This trend of **kernel-level anti-cheat** is now the standard in competitive multiplayer, a necessary evil some might say. We've seen the pitfalls, of course – who could forget the Genshin Impact incident where its anti-cheat was leveraged to disable antivirus processes? These are the "blowing winds of shifting anti-cheat standards" McFarlane cited, and Rust is now squarely in their path.

However, this decision comes with a hefty price tag for segments of the community. Most notably, it explicitly slams the door shut on **Linux** and **Proton** users. McFarlane's blunt assessment that games supporting these platforms are "not serious about anti-cheat" sends a clear, if exclusionary, message. For those who champion open systems or simply prefer not to run Windows, Rust is no longer an option.

Then there's the economic impact. As user psychoPiper aptly put it, "Fuck the people that love to game but can't afford to upgrade I guess." Not every gamer runs cutting-edge hardware, and forcing these stringent OS-level requirements inherently gates access for those with older, yet perfectly capable, machines. This creates an undeniable barrier to entry for legitimate players simply seeking to enjoy the game.

The community's response, as expected, is a microcosm of the wider anti-cheat debate. We see the stark division:

• The "Clean House" Camp: Many veteran players, like Shot-Buy6013, champion the move: "Anyone who sunk a decent chunk of time into video games or improving them will be 100% for reducing the amount of cheating." The sentiment, echoed by f30jayden with "Anyone mad is a cheater," is understandable. The frustration of being griefed by aimbots and wallhacks in a survival sandbox like Rust is soul-crushing.
• The "Collateral Damage" Camp: Beyond the economic barrier, some lament the game's evolving identity. As llamafacetx commented, "Rust becoming competitive was a mistake." This last point resonates with us. Rust, at its core, was always a brutal, sandbox experience. As it leans harder into a "competitive" posture to justify these anti-cheat measures, does it inadvertently lose a piece of its fundamental identity?

Our belief is that while the opt-in phase might offer a temporary truce, the writing is on the wall. Mandatory adoption is coming, and with it, a potentially cleaner but significantly smaller and more homogenous player pool. We at In Game News have seen this play out time and again. Developers are caught between a rock and a hard place: a vocal, destructive cheat community, and a legitimate player base with diverse setups and expectations. Facepunch's move is a desperate, calculated gamble. It might clean up Rust's digital streets, but it undeniably alters the game's accessibility and, perhaps, its very soul. The true meta-game now isn't just survival; it's about whether your PC is up to spec.