https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=44235
--- Comment #10 from Constantine hi-angel@yandex.ru --- (In reply to Henri Verbeet from comment #9)
(In reply to Nikolay Sivov from comment #8)
I don't think so, but maybe it should be worded better on that page. What was meant to say is that the goal is to be compatible enough that an application should see no difference in behavior, and therefore should not apply any workarounds, different paths, and so on. But, if developer wants to detect if it's running under Wine, there's a way to do so, and there always will be.
Yeah. We may think changing behaviour based on whether an application is running on Wine or not is misguided, but we're not interested in some kind of race with application developers to prevent them from doing that.
Ideally EACs users (i.e., game developers) would ask them to please not do this kind of thing.
Given that thing is called "anticheat", I'm pretty sure it does have a reason to detect and prohibit Wine, because running in kind-of-sandbox which is Wine, I'm pretty sure, gives more possibilities for changing memory of the process without the later being aware of that. In the extreme-case-example one could do something on kernel level.
That problem either gonna be solved in Wine, or it will stay with us. As simple as that.