Wine 6.6 Released With Better Plug & Play Driver Support

[jrch2k8]

Nothing that Denuvo installs has been proven to do anything illegal. If you know something different, please let us know 'cause otherwise these are vapid accusations.

Well, Denuvo making anything illegal or not aside, the dude on that post made sure no one will hire him for kernel/security research related jobs any time soon. Jeez just WoW

[birdie]

Well, Denuvo making anything illegal or not aside, the dude on that post made sure no one will hire him for kernel/security research related jobs any time soon. Jeez just WoW

The comment must contain actual content.

[kylew77]

I dislike how Michael makes everyone think Wine is unique to Linux and MacOS. I've actually never ran wine on MacOS, but I have run it many times on FreeBSD and following last years Google Summer of Code the NetBSD support is supposed to be pretty good too. The only major OS lacking wine support is OpenBSD and it used to work on OpenBSD a long time ago. Sorry for being that a hole but the *BSDs that support wine should get mentioned too!

[jrch2k8]

The comment must contain actual content.

Is a bunch of stuff anyone can research but to name few

1.) Ring 3 and 0 have huge differences in capacities unlike stated
2.) userspace and kernel levels also have a myriad of differences and scopes for an attack
3.) Ring 0 is an extremely dangerous place to run anything, specially a closed BLOB
4.) Denuvo can literally do anything and without a very deep security audit would be extremely hard to prove anything(because is operating inside ring 0 or lower) and since its commercial software to reach that level you probably need a huge amount of money on lawyers and some years to reach the point an CVE actually exists unless they want to like Microsoft or Apple do.
5.) The fact you cannot prove is doing anything illegal it does not imply is not doing anything illegal and you should always assume so unless you can factually prove is indeed not doing anything illegal(this is the most basic concept for cyber security), specially something running at a lower execution ring since no regular tool can be trusted to detect said illegal activity in the first place.

In the end promote trust on something that run on a lower execution ring(or even regular ones) because you think is a witch hunt(and whatever else he said) because there is no proof of wrongdoing is extremely naive

[Quackdoc]

Is a bunch of stuff anyone can research but to name few

1.) Ring 3 and 0 have huge differences in capacities unlike stated
2.) userspace and kernel levels also have a myriad of differences and scopes for an attack
3.) Ring 0 is an extremely dangerous place to run anything, specially a closed BLOB
4.) Denuvo can literally do anything and without a very deep security audit would be extremely hard to prove anything(because is operating inside ring 0 or lower) and since its commercial software to reach that level you probably need a huge amount of money on lawyers and some years to reach the point an CVE actually exists unless they want to like Microsoft or Apple do.
5.) The fact you cannot prove is doing anything illegal it does not imply is not doing anything illegal and you should always assume so unless you can factually prove is indeed not doing anything illegal(this is the most basic concept for cyber security), specially something running at a lower execution ring since no regular tool can be trusted to detect said illegal activity in the first place.

In the end promote trust on something that run on a lower execution ring(or even regular ones) because you think is a witch hunt(and whatever else he said) because there is no proof of wrongdoing is extremely naive

I disagree with point 5. It could be said I am arguing semantics, but the distinction is important, You should assume that it CAN, not that it IS. That is the difference between not using something at all, and implementing proper protections to prevent it from possibly doing something. IE. containerization.

[jrch2k8]

I disagree with point 5. It could be said I am arguing semantics, but the distinction is important, You should assume that it CAN, not that it IS. That is the difference between not using something at all, and implementing proper protections to prevent it from possibly doing something. IE. containerization.

True but in the case of Windows and Denuvo specifically, it could bypass containerization and perhaps even hypervisors(if we assume their promise of stopping at ring 0 is false), so yeah is very complex situation which is why i preferred IS to CAN in this context since i'm more the better safe than sorry kinda guy. Hence i always assume a 60/40 approach about IS and CAN respectively to be on the safeish side but you POV is also totally correct

[oiaohm]

An idiotic correction. Denuvo is DRM, not malware. Malware is something which actively harms your PC or life whuke Denuvo does nothing aside from making it harder to steal something it protects.

https://www.geeksultd.com/2020/05/kaspersky-labels-denuvo-as-malware/

birdie sorry to say Denuvo has been labeled Malware many different times. The way Denuvo operates allowing remote command and control server to-do a lot of things without user approval does put it in a questionable area.

[ix900]

https://www.geeksultd.com/2020/05/ka...vo-as-malware/

birdie sorry to say Denuvo has been labeled Malware many different times. The way Denuvo operates allowing remote command and control server to-do a lot of things without user approval does put it in a questionable area.

Kaspersky is a virus lol. It probably does far worse than Denuvo. Talk about extra code, attaching itself every way possible, using your computer's resources, removing things on you, causing problems lol. Denuvo isn't even that bad. Kaspersky should flag themselves as malware and a virus.

Last time I checked Half-Life was available on Steam Play/Linux (1, 2 and Black Mesa). Why would you try to play the Windows version on Wine?

Wine does solve the problem of when native fails to work properly. That's really the whole point to Wine when native doesn't work. Native from other OS is no different. Wine may allow it to work.

There are also times when native can be slower and be worse because of issues. Wine also solves that.

[birdie]

Is a bunch of stuff anyone can research but to name few

1.) Ring 3 and 0 have huge differences in capacities unlike stated
2.) userspace and kernel levels also have a myriad of differences and scopes for an attack
3.) Ring 0 is an extremely dangerous place to run anything, specially a closed BLOB
4.) Denuvo can literally do anything and without a very deep security audit would be extremely hard to prove anything(because is operating inside ring 0 or lower) and since its commercial software to reach that level you probably need a huge amount of money on lawyers and some years to reach the point an CVE actually exists unless they want to like Microsoft or Apple do.
5.) The fact you cannot prove is doing anything illegal it does not imply is not doing anything illegal and you should always assume so unless you can factually prove is indeed not doing anything illegal(this is the most basic concept for cyber security), specially something running at a lower execution ring since no regular tool can be trusted to detect said illegal activity in the first place.

In the end promote trust on something that run on a lower execution ring(or even regular ones) because you think is a witch hunt(and whatever else he said) because there is no proof of wrongdoing is extremely naive

You're good at speculation, conspiracies, wearing tinfoil hats and just pure BS. Now, again is there anything proven? Because according to you anything (closed-source) that runs at the kernel level is malware. Which also mans that Windows, MacOS/iOS and Android are all malware by definition because they contain closed source binary drivers written by God knows whom. Sorry, I'm not going to argue with this madness.

I just wonder how do you wake up in the morning knowing that your PC runs closed source EFI firmware, and you most likely have firmware for your GPU, SSD, NIC, WiFi card and in some cases your sound card.

Kaspersky is a virus lol. It probably does far worse than Denuvo. Talk about extra code, attaching itself every way possible, using your computer's resources, removing things on you, causing problems lol. Denuvo isn't even that bad.

You should have started with "any closed source software is a virus, lol". So many tinfoil hats wearers here, LMAO.

[ix900]

You should have started with "any closed source software is a virus, lol". So many tinfoil hats wearers here, LMAO.

Maybe if sarcastic in that kind of way but I have no problems with closed source or open source so it never crossed my mind. Not everything needs to be open source.