Re: [PATCH 0/4] Update USER_SHARED_DATA timestamps more often.

[Rémi Bernon]

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