Re: RSA's SecurPC not-so-"Secur"

Martin G. Diehl (mdiehl@nac.net)
Mon, 18 May 1998 06:43:34 -0400

• Next message: Martin G. Diehl: "Re: RSA's SecurPC not-so-"Secur""
• Previous message: Camillo Särs: "Re: RSA's SecurPC not-so-"Secur""

Camillo Särs wrote:
> Rich Casto wrote:
> > Does anyone know if DataFellow's F-Secure Desktop has a similar
> > problem?
>
> We took this problem into account when designing F-Secure Desktop.
> The issue here is that there is no way to lock pages into memory
> in Windows 95. The function calls are there, but they are
> documented to do nothing and always return success.

There is a method to lock pages into Windows 95 memory: (1) set
the swapfile size to 0; (2) have enough real memory installed;
(3) expect to reboot often.

Another possibility is to have a put the swapfile by itself on
another drive and do a wipe file as part of a manual procedure
to shut down W95.

[snip]

> Camillo Särs <Camillo.Sars@DataFellows.com> Data Fellows Ltd.
> http://www.Europe.DataFellows.com/ Aim for the impossible and you
> http://www.iki.fi/ged will achieve the improbable

-- 
Martin G. Diehl
I am what I am.  All opinions expressed within are strictly my own.
If Ziggy says "Time is what keeps everything from happening at once",
and Newton teaches that Gravity brings all matter together, could we
say that Time and Gravity have an antagonistic relationship?

• Next message: Martin G. Diehl: "Re: RSA's SecurPC not-so-"Secur""
• Previous message: Camillo Särs: "Re: RSA's SecurPC not-so-"Secur""