The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
OK, so when Microsoft introduced D.S.C.E., it's reason for being in-effect on Windows Vista and Windows 7 operating systems is to prevent and stop drivers or *.SYS* files from being loaded into the kernel if they have a bad signature (whether expired or cannot be read clearly by the system) or have absolutely no signature whatsoever. But I see why Microsoft has introduced this feature, to prevent malware from getting 'full system access,' 'root access,' or 'rootkit access' to the system, but computer viruses I see rarely have system files in their aid, so why? But the thing that bugs me most is that, since I have Windows 7 operating system running on my computer, it is impossible to disable, it can be disabled in Windows Vista. But in order to have your driver run you must submit your source code, and compiled driver itself to Microsoft Labs, where you have to pay thousands of dollars in order to have your driver work. But when I download a source or binary from here and test it, I always have a error, "Driver cannot be loaded!," I know because the driver isn't signed. But I know a lot of developers out there are frustrated by the fact that their software can't load because of this annoying feature, how did you'll cope with this new annoying feature?
Simple Thanks and Regards, Brandon T. H.
Programming in C and C++ now, now developing applications, services and drivers (and maybe some kernel modules...psst kernel-mode drivers...psst).
Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up. - Thomas Edison
I assume this is related to your quest to develop a driver - what I write is probably not relevant otherwise.
I had to install a driver in x64 w7 to allow me to use a RC transmitter as a joystick for a couple of RC trainer/simulator programs (FMS, RealFlight)
The problem is, that the required driver PPJOY is developed by an indie developer that doesn't want/have the ability to pay ~$500/year for a certificate from Verizon or MS.
So, he simply signed the driver using his own certificate. While this means that the driver isn't unsigned, it does mean that it's signed with a certificate that isn't issued by a recognised CA (he's 'self-signed' it)
Alas, under the default environment, this driver fails to install - spewing error messages not unlike the ones you describe.
BUT THERE IS HOPE!
You can put the machine into what's known as Test Mode, whereby you CAN install these self-signed drivers, but are still prevented from installing completely unsigned ones. I had a tool that did it, but can't find it any more - I probably deleted it when I removed those sims from the laptop and chucked em onto the xp desktop.
It's deadly simple to enable 'test-signing' mode. ------------------------------------------------- 1. Hit the windows btn 2. type cmd 3. Right-click cmd.exe and select Run As Administrator 4. Type this at the cmd prompt: "bcdedit -set testsigning on" NOTE: This will not work if you don't run the cmd prompt as an administrator You will get an error message indicating that the operation couldn't be completed.
I don't know much about driver signing, but according to a post I read a while back on the Com0Com sourceforge forum, you can get third party driver signing for lower cost. For example, http://www.certum.eu/certum/cert,offer_microsoft_authenticode.xml[^]. I believe certum also offers a signature for free or close to it for open source drivers.\
But I see why Microsoft has introduced this feature, to prevent malware from getting 'full system access,' 'root access,' or 'rootkit access' to the system, but computer viruses I see rarely have system files in their aid, so why?
I used to see them all the time when people brought me their virus-infected systems for me to fix. Not anymore. That's why.
I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image. Stephen Hawking
The only reason the entry was changed to match the facts was that the petty little Hitler running that section was completely cornered by the fact that this intrusive, argumentative idiot who disagreed with him was the author of the book, and therefore the only person in the entire world who could accurately identify his inspiration for writing the book.
Sucks, huh? What a total b*ast*rd the author is, for disagreeing with the obviously correct opinion of the petty little Hitler.
Somewhere around 320,000,000 other entries still contain the unilateral opinions of their petty little Hitlers, because the subject-matter experts who disagree with the petty little Hitlers cannot (or are justifiably unwilling to make the effort to) incontrovertibly prove that they are correct and that the petty little Hitlers are therefore wrong.
Anyone who trusts information from wikipedia has a fool as counsel.
... And don't get me started on the blogosophere or twitter...
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
Professor entered to class with a big box in his hands and put it on his desk. He brought out a big glass and start filling that with Golf's balls. "Has this glass filled?", He asked the students. Then all of the students agreed that it filled. After that Professor brought out a container which contains pebbles and filled the empty spaces among Golf's balls with them. "Has this glass filled?", the Professor asked again. When all of students agreed, he start filling empty spaces in the glass between pebbles with some of sands. "Has this glass filled?", he asked again and filled the last empty spaces with couple cup of coffee. At this time the students laughed out loud.
When they all calmed he said: "The Golf's balls are our important things in our life such as the God, our family, our friends and our wishes. The things that if they remain but other things go, the life will keep going on. The pebbles are other important things but not as important as the Golf's balls like our job, our house and our car. The sands are other less important things."
He continued: "If we start filling the glass with sands, there are no space for pebbles and Golf's balls. This glass is similar to our life; If we spend most of the our times and energies on ordinary things, we have no time for important things. Spend your time with your family, play with your children and go out with your friends. Have fun with them, there is always time for fixing disrepair and cleaning the house. First care about the important things and specify them for yourself."
An student raised his hand: "What was the point of the couple cup of coffees?", the student asked.
The Professor smiled and said: "No difference that you are busy or not! There is always time for drink a cup of coffee with your friend."
It's a cultural thing. While it's common for certain cultures to like posting so called "uplifting" moral tales, other cultures find them unpalatable, saccharine and nauseating. Posts like this may find more favour in the GIT because the posters there are a lot more tolerant to this type of post. If you post it here in the lounge, you open yourself up to the votes of those who really object to this type of post. I have compensated Mark against your univote because that was a childish and petulant act on your part.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
I don't believe it's a cultural thing. Atleast, not if one goes by the sales numbers of all the "Chicken Soup" and other advice books. I make it a point to not touch any of the magazines laid out in barber shops and waiting rooms just so that I don't stumble upon the advice columns.
But what really miffs me ( and it probably may not characterize the regulars here ) is that people who are obsessed so much over gossip find it difficult to digest jokes and tales that highlight morals.
But then, I also think that these kind of tales and jokes are more appropriate for kids < 8 and not for a bunch of techies.
I don't believe it's a cultural thing. Atleast, not if one goes by the sales numbers of all the "Chicken Soup"
Always remember your target audience. I hardly doubt people reading code project are heavy consumers of Chicken Soup. Kid sisters or girl friends on the other hand would greatly appreciate such written words.
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
I have compensated Mark against your univote because that was a childish and petulant act on your part.
I agree with the rest of your post, and also do not disagree with you balancing the univote, but can't understand why you considered Meysam's 1-voting Mark's post as the childish and petulant act that you mentioned. The OP didn't have a problem with being 1-voted (based on the reply to Mark's post) but didn't agree with the reply which they thought was disrespectful. In that context I thought a univote with the kind of explanation provided is actually the correct and mature way to respond.
"Philosophy is a study that lets us be unhappy more intelligently." -Anon.
You cannot punch someone on their nose through TCP/IP. So, some people take advantage of this and be disrespectful of others, troll, talk crap, and some behave like children. You can ignore them, be abusive of them in return, or whatever. But this is how the internet works, and you will need to get over it.
However, I do think that your original post was more suitable to the GIT. I voted it a 1, and I wish didn't have to go through the trouble of reading it.