[ciphershed] Re: Reviewed commit e8529e95d89d3f519a31ef7de5bd7f0d0d318e8c
- From: Rocki Hack <rocki.hack@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: ciphershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 17:02:30 +0200
IsVolumeClassFilterRegistered() is actually a problematic function.
We might already broke backward compatibility (e.g. for system encryption)
because of rebranding.
In IsVolumeClassFilterRegistered we should search for "ciphershed" (new
installs) and "truecrypt" (backward compatibility).
This functions checks if a _ciphershed_ class filter for the volume class
is registered.
We need to to understand the design decisions which we might already have
broken.
It's used in DriveFilter.c:
https://github.com/CipherShed/CipherShed/blob/master/src/Driver/DriveFilter.c#L527
You can find the volume filter here:
https://github.com/CipherShed/CipherShed/blob/master/src/Driver/VolumeFilter.c
2014-07-02 8:53 GMT+02:00 Rocki Hack <rocki.hack@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
> *Do not change this class id! It's a windows system class for volume
> devices.Read windows documentation!*
>
> "*System-Defined Device Setup Classes Available to Vendors*"
>
> "Storage Volumes
>
> Class = Volume
> ClassGuid = {71a27cdd-812a-11d0-bec7-08002be2092f}
> This class includes storage volumes as defined by the system-supplied
> logical volume manager and class drivers that create device objects to
> represent storage volumes, such as the system disk class driver."
>
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/ff553426%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
>
>
>
> 2014-07-02 7:19 GMT+02:00 Jason Pyeron <jpyeron@xxxxxxxx>:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: ciphershed-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > [mailto:ciphershed-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dimitri
>> > Schoolwerth
>> > Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2014 19:04
>> > To: ciphershed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Subject: [ciphershed] Re: Reviewed commit
>> > e8529e95d89d3f519a31ef7de5bd7f0d0d318e8c
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 7/2/14, 2:02, Alain Forget wrote:
>> > > I have no idea what I'm doing. However, this is a good way
>> > to make you guys test to see if my e-mail signing actually works. :-P
>> >
>> > My client didn't pick it up at least (no error shown) and you took 2
>> > turns, suspicious! ;). I see now it also didn't pick up
>> > Jason's ("Error
>> > - No valid armored OpenPGP data block found") so could be something on
>> > my end.
>>
>> No I signed (this message too) with S/MIME. I like the fact that my
>> private key
>> was generated on a smart card and shall never be touched by my CPU.
>>
>> -Jason
>>
>> --
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> - -
>> - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us -
>> - Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100 -
>> - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333 Baltimore, Maryland 21218 -
>> - -
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00.
>>
>>
>>
>
Other related posts:
