Prev: Driver for handling bad ram modules (like BadRAM for Linux)
Next: assessing winusb potential
From: hq4000 on 23 Apr 2008 14:04
A driver, not yet WHQL certified, is embedding signed with a SPC shows
up as "Not digitally signed" in device manager view in XP machine.
(both .sys and .cat files are signed) However, accessing the .sys
file in computer does show that the driver has valid signature.

Further more, if the same driver is installed on Vista machine. Vista
device manager reports properly that the driver is signed. What is
the issue?
From: PCAUSA on 23 Apr 2008 14:18
On Apr 23, 2:04 pm, "hq4...(a)hotmail.com" <hq4...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> A driver, not yet WHQL certified, is embedding signed with a SPC shows
> up as "Not digitally signed" in device manager view in XP machine.
> (both .sys and .cat files are signed)  However, accessing the .sys
> file in computer does show that the driver has valid signature.
>
> Further more, if the same driver is installed on Vista machine.  Vista
> device manager reports properly that the driver is signed.  What is
> the issue?

On any Windows OS examining the driver signature via Properties will
show that you added a vaild signature. However, Windows XP simply does
not accept any signatures (valid or otherwise...) unless they are
Microsoft WHQL signatures.

IOW: On XP self-signed is treated as if unsigned by the OS.

Windows Server 2003 added what I would call "limited" support for the
OS to recognize and accept non-WHQL self-signed driver signatures, and
Vista goes further and works the way it should have been in the first
place.

Good luck!

Thomas F. Divine
http://www.pcausa.com

From: hq4000 on 24 Apr 2008 07:47
This is truly interesting! I have been working on test signing the
driver and the Window XP (x86) is happy to report that the driver is
signed. But not the release signed driver!
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Driver for handling bad ram modules (like BadRAM for Linux)
Next: assessing winusb potential