Reply To: VoodooShield and SRP



    Dan: Yeah, there might actually be a good use for SRP in VS…

    Anyway, I am still looking for a good reason to implement SRP,

    Of course, if M$ is moving away from SRP…  Is there something we should know?  Like perhaps it doesn’t work too good?

    I think SRP would be great for ATM, POS and similar machines that are completely static, and I think it is great that there are several effective SRP solutions on the market.  But after playing around with SRP for many hours to figure out how it all works, I have come to the conclusion that it is simply not going to work with the user-friendly computer lock we all know as VS ;).  It is too bad because there might have been some pretty cool things we could have done with it… but even if there were, these are all things we can implement in the driver.

    As far as directly monitoring dll’s, this is the actual warning when you attempt to apply SRP policies to directly monitor dll’s…

    “Applying software restriction policies to libraries (dll’s) requires you to set rules for all the libraries used by a program in order to use the program.”  Which is EXACTLY why dll monitoring is always disabled… well, that and there is a performance hit.

    Either way, it is great that we all have a choice on what software best fits our needs.  As I was saying, I actually use a similar product to VS on two of our static machines, simply because it fits the use case better.  I could use VS and tweak it so that it never toggles to OFF, but this specific product works better for this specific use case, so that is what I use for these two static boxes ;).

    So SRP certainly has its role, but please keep in mind, if your car was locked all of the time, you would not be able to drive it.  And as hard as I tried, it just simply did not make sense for VS.