29 Nov
2019
29 Nov
'19
10:47 a.m.
On 11/29/19 11:40 AM, Rémi Bernon wrote:
* Then according to [1], updating the timestamps continuously could apparently break some copy-protection schemes (SecuROM for instance) that measures the time taken by some syscalls. As Wine is not exactly doing as Windows, the syscall timings could be larger and having the timestamps not increase in this particular case allows us to pass these checks.
[1] https://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2012-March/094788.html
My bad, it was SafeDisk, not SecuROM, as mentioned here: https://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2012-March/094810.html -- Rémi Bernon <rbernon(a)codeweavers.com>