RE: PGP scripting (reprise)
From: Peter Gutmann (pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz)
Date: 01/23/03
- Previous message: Witness: "RE: Standards for developing secure software"
- Maybe in reply to: lsi: "PGP scripting (reprise)"
- Next in thread: lsi: "RE: PGP scripting (reprise)"
- Reply: lsi: "RE: PGP scripting (reprise)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:43:44 +1300 From: pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann) To: robert.morson@wdc.com, secprog@securityfocus.com, stuart@cyberdelix.net
"Robert B. Morson" <robert.morson@wdc.com> writes:
>Windows 95 and 98 use the same type of DOS as you could buy stand-alone many,
>many years ago (like DOS 6.22).
>
>Windows NT 4.0, 2000 and XP all use a DOS emulation, there is no longer a
>"division" between DOS and the Windows OS, like there was with 95 and 98. It
>is fairly common for DOS programs that ran under 95 and 98 to have problems
>with NT 4.0, 2000 and XP. Has to do with the fact that emulation is not the
>same thing as the original.
I've resisted replying so far because I couldn't see that this was relevant
to a secure-programming list, but in an attempt to kill the thread:
- I have run PGP for DOS on a variety of NT and Win2K systems without any
problems.
- If you really want to run PGP 2.x under NT et al, get one of the Disastry
versions, which is the 2.x code built as a Win32 binary.
We now rejoin the debate in progress over Linux vs. Gnu/Linux...
Peter.
- Next message: Brian Hatch: "Re: Can System() of Perl be bypassed?"
- Previous message: Witness: "RE: Standards for developing secure software"
- Maybe in reply to: lsi: "PGP scripting (reprise)"
- Next in thread: lsi: "RE: PGP scripting (reprise)"
- Reply: lsi: "RE: PGP scripting (reprise)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|