1996-08-29 - RE: File System Encryption

Header Data

From: Wayne Clerke <wclerke@emirates.net.ae>
To: “‘cypherpunks@toad.com>
Message Hash: e04a898e1530c866bec0f1fe353fc642077cc50b1f7d2bca86b31b8d66ef1bf0
Message ID: <01BB9543.4F6CD2E0@csa088.emirates.net.ae>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-08-29 00:45:17 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 08:45:17 +0800

Raw message

From: Wayne Clerke <wclerke@emirates.net.ae>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 08:45:17 +0800
To: "'cypherpunks@toad.com>
Subject: RE: File System Encryption
Message-ID: <01BB9543.4F6CD2E0@csa088.emirates.net.ae>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


The Drifter[SMTP:drifter@c2.net] wrote:
    On Wed, 28 Aug 1996 02:55:20 +0400, Wayne Clerke <wclerke@emirates.net.ae>
    wrote:
    
    >Tried secdev? Edgar Swank (author of secdrv) recently posted
    >that secdev (note, not secdrv) does, in fact, uses 32 bit disk 
    >access with win95. Win95 reports that the secure device is in 
    >compatibility mode, but the host disk (and therefore the secure 
    >volume file) is being accessed in 32 bit (disk) mode. Not sure 
    >what issues there are with '32 bit FILE access' mode here. 
    >
    >Sounds worth a try though. Please post the results if 
    >you try this.
    >
    
    I have actually had Secure File System, Secure Drive, and Secure Device
    all installed with mounted volumes at the same time under Win95.  However,
    32bit file access is not the problem.  When you load a TSR in Win95, the
    operating system forces you into 16bit DOS compatability mode.  I'm not a
    kernal guru so I can't explain all the specifics, but it basically makes
    95 act as Win-3.11 and looses multithreading (as it were) and creates
    serious memory paging problems if you have >32mb installed.

You've got this all wrong. Only certain types of TSRs cause 
this. I'll leave it to an expert and just quote the author of secdrv:

Edgar Swank wrote:
>For those users of Win95 and SecureDrive who are concerned about loss
>of 32-bit disk access, I've recently learned that use of Secure Device
>
>  ftp.demon.co.uk:/pub/ibmpc/secdev/secdev14.arj
>
>instead avoids this requirement. Although the Secure Device virtual
>drive is listed as in compatibility mode, the real drives are not so
>affected.  And since the virtual drive is mapped to a dos file on one
>of the real drives, I believe you get 32-bit phyical drive access
>there as well, although access is still slowed by CPU time necessary
>to encrypt and decrypt.
    
    Thanks for the reply though .. and if you need assitance with getting
    SECDEV working under 95, just drop me a note.

Thanks for the offer ... 

    Drifter

Regards,


EMail: wclerke@emirates.net.ae
PGP key ID: AEB2546D		FP: D663D11E DA19D74F 5032DC7E E001B702
PGP mail welcome.		Voice: +971 506 43 48 53
<a href=mailto:wclerke@emirates.net.ae>Wayne Clerke</a>
If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space.






Thread