What is the 'dcrserv.exe' loaded by Drivecrypt?

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D, Sep 20, 2004.

  1. What is the 'dcrserv.exe' loaded by Drivecrypt?

    I disabled it and drivecrypt still works perfectly,
    giving my system an extra meg of free memory.

    I'm sick to death of programmers thinking they
    have a right to waste my resources & memory.
     
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D, Sep 20, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D

    David Shaw Guest

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    > I'm sick to death of programmers thinking they
    > have a right to waste my resources & memory.


    Well, I'm a programmer, and please, let me tell you: we don't
    generally waste resources for no reason. It's very possible that
    dcrserv.exe actually *does* do something, and you just haven't
    discovered what it was yet. My advice is to just keep it running...

    ds

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP 8.1 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com

    iQA/AwUBQU+BXqv/4PyJdfGiEQKRWwCgkeIZzVfTzfvx6zgWLYb2Fc6oqEIAoNyn
    c/Cx3+1mErSB4qrBejytNIdS
    =Iy4U
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    David Shaw, Sep 21, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>, on Mon, 20 Sep 2004 02:04:31 GMT, -=| (ºLº) |=-
    o=[:::::::::::::::> <> wrote:

    | What is the 'dcrserv.exe' loaded by Drivecrypt?

    Why don't you ask them?

    <http://www.securstar.com/contact.php>

    | I disabled it and drivecrypt still works perfectly,
    | giving my system an extra meg of free memory.

    :)

    <davidp />

    --
    David Postill
     
    David Postill, Sep 21, 2004
    #3
  4. "David Shaw" <> wrote in message news:...
    | -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    | Hash: SHA1
    |
    | > I'm sick to death of programmers thinking they
    | > have a right to waste my resources & memory.
    |
    | Well, I'm a programmer, and please, let me tell you: we don't
    | generally waste resources for no reason. It's very possible that
    | dcrserv.exe actually *does* do something, and you just haven't
    | discovered what it was yet. My advice is to just keep it running...
    |
    | ds


    Drivecrypt still works perfectly without it
    and I now have an extra megabyte of free RAM.

    It's Gone for good... No Regrets :)
     
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D, Sep 21, 2004
    #4
  5. =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D

    Wimbo Guest

    -=| (ºLº) |=- o=[:::::::::::::::> wrote:
    > "David Shaw" <> wrote in message news:...
    > | -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > | Hash: SHA1
    > |
    > | > I'm sick to death of programmers thinking they
    > | > have a right to waste my resources & memory.
    > |
    > | Well, I'm a programmer, and please, let me tell you: we don't
    > | generally waste resources for no reason. It's very possible that
    > | dcrserv.exe actually *does* do something, and you just haven't
    > | discovered what it was yet. My advice is to just keep it running...
    > |
    > | ds
    >
    >
    > Drivecrypt still works perfectly without it
    > and I now have an extra megabyte of free RAM.
    >
    > It's Gone for good... No Regrets :)

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    I don't know the exact purpose of the file, but the creators of
    drivecrypt feel that they want to provide as much security regarding
    their product as possible. Perhaps the 'service' makes sure that no
    traces of passwords are left behind within cache, RAM, or whatever.

    So, even it seems to work it might not work as it intended to be.
    Why not ask SecurStar? I'm sure they have a plausible explanation.

    Wimbo

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP 8.1

    iQA/AwUBQVBjeQIW7Y+ImIjiEQK/pACePq/4B5G41sSsBfDld1HRVR/EWfwAoMPu
    SZ53HNxOHCg/h2YOk4U3vsa6
    =mtX+
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
     
    Wimbo, Sep 21, 2004
    #5
  6. =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D

    Agamemnon Guest

    In article <>
    (David Shaw) wrote:
    >
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > > I'm sick to death of programmers thinking they
    > > have a right to waste my resources & memory.

    >
    > Well, I'm a programmer, and please, let me tell you: we don't
    > generally waste resources for no reason. It's very possible

    that
    > dcrserv.exe actually *does* do something, and you just haven't
    > discovered what it was yet. My advice is to just keep it

    running...
    >

    Lemme guess - you work for Micro$oft, right?

    Or want to...
     
    Agamemnon, Sep 21, 2004
    #6
  7. "Wimbo" <wimbo_online@_REMOVETHIS_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:bxZ3d.222$...
    | -=| (ºLº) |=- o=[:::::::::::::::> wrote:
    | > "David Shaw" <> wrote in message news:...
    | > | -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    | > | Hash: SHA1
    | > |
    | > | > I'm sick to death of programmers thinking they
    | > | > have a right to waste my resources & memory.
    | > |
    | > | Well, I'm a programmer, and please, let me tell you: we don't
    | > | generally waste resources for no reason. It's very possible that
    | > | dcrserv.exe actually *does* do something, and you just haven't
    | > | discovered what it was yet. My advice is to just keep it running...
    | > |
    | > | ds
    | >
    | >
    | > Drivecrypt still works perfectly without it
    | > and I now have an extra megabyte of free RAM.
    | >
    | > It's Gone for good... No Regrets :)
    | -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    | Hash: SHA1
    |
    | I don't know the exact purpose of the file, but the creators of
    | drivecrypt feel that they want to provide as much security regarding
    | their product as possible. Perhaps the 'service' makes sure that no
    | traces of passwords are left behind within cache, RAM, or whatever.
    |
    | So, even it seems to work it might not work as it intended to be.
    | Why not ask SecurStar? I'm sure they have a plausible explanation.
    |
    | Wimbo

    Drivecrypt still works *perfectly* without it
    & I now have an extra megabyte of free RAM.

    I can live without it, no problems whatsoever :)
     
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D, Sep 22, 2004
    #7
  8. =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D

    Stefano Guest

    > Drivecrypt still works *perfectly* without it
    > & I now have an extra megabyte of free RAM.
    >
    > I can live without it, no problems whatsoever :)


    Prabably the service protect containers from deletion or dismount
    mounted volume safely at shutdown.
     
    Stefano, Sep 22, 2004
    #8
  9. On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 02:04:31 GMT, -=| (ºLº) |=-
    o=[:::::::::::::::> <> wrote:

    >What is the 'dcrserv.exe' loaded by Drivecrypt?
    >
    >I disabled it and drivecrypt still works perfectly,
    >giving my system an extra meg of free memory.
    >
    >I'm sick to death of programmers thinking they
    >have a right to waste my resources & memory.



    This is rather an unfair accusation I think.......

    We are not "wasting" anyone's resources.

    The service is necessary to ensure that users who are NOT logged in as
    administrators can still dismount disks. Many people prefer to use
    their computers on a daily basis logged in on a more limited account,
    as it offers extra security.

    The service is also there, to allow disks to be mounted in a global
    context, and be accessible and sharable over networks etc. if users
    want to be able to do that.

    DriveCrypt allows "portable" use, when the service is not installed.

    So it will still work without the service, subject to the above
    limitations. Indeed, if it detects that the service is absent, it
    takes over the role of the service *itself*, but is then limited by
    the operating system, and disks cannot be shared, or be global in
    scope, or dismounted by none administrators.

    Shaun.
     
    Shaun Hollingworth, Sep 22, 2004
    #9
  10. =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D

    futureworlds Guest

    On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 19:30:41 +0200, in article
    <bxZ3d.222$>, Wimbo
    <wimbo_online@_REMOVETHIS_hotmail.com> wrote:

    >
    >I don't know the exact purpose of the file, but the creators of
    >drivecrypt feel that they want to provide as much security regarding
    >their product as possible. Perhaps the 'service' makes sure that no
    >traces of passwords are left behind within cache, RAM, or whatever.
    >


    Pffft, don't count on it being a "security" feature. Their DCPP product
    drops a DCPPaid.exe file in your startup folder to check your licence
    status (paid or not) so don't bet that everything they do is in the
    interests of "security".

    Securstar care more about piracy than they do security.
     
    futureworlds, Sep 22, 2004
    #10
  11. =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D

    David Shaw Guest

    > We are not "wasting" anyone's resources.
    >
    > The service is necessary to ensure that users who are NOT logged in as
    > administrators can still dismount disks. Many people prefer to use
    > their computers on a daily basis logged in on a more limited account,
    > as it offers extra security.
    >
    > The service is also there, to allow disks to be mounted in a global
    > context, and be accessible and sharable over networks etc. if users
    > want to be able to do that.
    >
    > DriveCrypt allows "portable" use, when the service is not installed.
    >
    > So it will still work without the service, subject to the above
    > limitations. Indeed, if it detects that the service is absent, it
    > takes over the role of the service *itself*, but is then limited by
    > the operating system, and disks cannot be shared, or be global in
    > scope, or dismounted by none administrators.
    >
    > Shaun.


    Ha! So I was right. Score one for programmers that know what we're doing :\

    ds
     
    David Shaw, Sep 23, 2004
    #11
  12. =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D

    Baldur Guest

    In article
    <>
    futureworlds <> wrote:
    >
    > On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 19:30:41 +0200, in article
    > <bxZ3d.222$>, Wimbo
    > <wimbo_online@_REMOVETHIS_hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > >
    > >I don't know the exact purpose of the file, but the creators

    of
    > >drivecrypt feel that they want to provide as much security

    regarding
    > >their product as possible. Perhaps the 'service' makes sure

    that no
    > >traces of passwords are left behind within cache, RAM, or

    whatever.
    > >

    >
    > Pffft, don't count on it being a "security" feature. Their

    DCPP product
    > drops a DCPPaid.exe file in your startup folder to check your

    licence
    > status (paid or not) so don't bet that everything they do is

    in the
    > interests of "security".
    >
    > Securstar care more about piracy than they do security.


    So use the warez version.

    It doesn't do that.

    -=-
    This message was posted via two or more anonymous remailing services.
     
    Baldur, Sep 23, 2004
    #12
  13. "Shaun Hollingworth" <> wrote in message news:...
    | On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 02:04:31 GMT, -=| (ºLº) |=-
    | o=[:::::::::::::::> <> wrote:
    |
    | >What is the 'dcrserv.exe' loaded by Drivecrypt?
    | >
    | >I disabled it and drivecrypt still works perfectly,
    | >giving my system an extra meg of free memory.
    | >
    | >I'm sick to death of programmers thinking they
    | >have a right to waste my resources & memory.
    |
    |
    | This is rather an unfair accusation I think.......
    |
    | We are not "wasting" anyone's resources.
    |
    | The service is necessary to ensure that users who are NOT logged in as
    | administrators can still dismount disks. Many people prefer to use
    | their computers on a daily basis logged in on a more limited account,
    | as it offers extra security.
    |
    | The service is also there, to allow disks to be mounted in a global
    | context, and be accessible and sharable over networks etc. if users
    | want to be able to do that.


    It it a stand-alone machine so I don't need the 'dcrserv.exe'.

    | DriveCrypt allows "portable" use, when the service is not installed.
    |
    | So it will still work without the service, subject to the above
    | limitations. Indeed, if it detects that the service is absent, it
    | takes over the role of the service *itself*, but is then limited by
    | the operating system, and disks cannot be shared, or be global in
    | scope, or dismounted by none administrators.
    |
    | Shaun.

    Why aren't these features mentioned in the manual?
     
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D, Sep 24, 2004
    #13
  14. "farkus" <> wrote in message news:...
    | On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 10:39:18 GMT, -=| (ºLº) |=-
    | o=[:::::::::::::::> <> wrote:
    |
    | >"Shaun Hollingworth" <> wrote in message news:...
    | >| On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 02:04:31 GMT, -=| (ºLº) |=-
    | >| o=[:::::::::::::::> <> wrote:
    | >|
    | >| >What is the 'dcrserv.exe' loaded by Drivecrypt?
    | >| >
    | >| >I disabled it and drivecrypt still works perfectly,
    | >| >giving my system an extra meg of free memory.
    | >| >
    | >| >I'm sick to death of programmers thinking they
    | >| >have a right to waste my resources & memory.
    | >|
    | >|
    | >| This is rather an unfair accusation I think.......
    | >|
    | >| We are not "wasting" anyone's resources.
    | >|
    | >| The service is necessary to ensure that users who are NOT logged in as
    | >| administrators can still dismount disks. Many people prefer to use
    | >| their computers on a daily basis logged in on a more limited account,
    | >| as it offers extra security.
    | >|
    | >| The service is also there, to allow disks to be mounted in a global
    | >| context, and be accessible and sharable over networks etc. if users
    | >| want to be able to do that.
    | >
    | >
    | >It it a stand-alone machine so I don't need the 'dcrserv.exe'.
    | >
    | >| DriveCrypt allows "portable" use, when the service is not installed.
    | >|
    | >| So it will still work without the service, subject to the above
    | >| limitations. Indeed, if it detects that the service is absent, it
    | >| takes over the role of the service *itself*, but is then limited by
    | >| the operating system, and disks cannot be shared, or be global in
    | >| scope, or dismounted by none administrators.
    | >|
    | >| Shaun.
    | >
    | >Why aren't these features mentioned in the manual?
    |
    | I don't like unnecessary background tasks either, and I bet most folks
    | don't need the services that this one performs. Now that I know what
    | it does, I feel safe to disable it as well. Thanks to the OP for
    | asking the question!


    Yeah, if you don't keep 'culling' all those *annoying* little
    'thingies' that keep getting loaded by soooo many programs,
    you soon end up with a really sloooow computer with very
    fragmented dissapearing RAM, which REALLY SUCKS !!!

    Regards.
     
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?-=3D|__=28=BAL=BA=29__|=3D-____o=3D, Sep 26, 2004
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    2,986
  2. JRS

    Put off DriveCrypt - ? alternative

    JRS, Oct 21, 2003, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    817
  3. Supachai

    DRIVECRYPT - missing memory

    Supachai, Jan 24, 2004, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    490
    Supachai
    Jan 24, 2004
  4. Boship

    Ping group, Drivecrypt weakness?

    Boship, May 28, 2004, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    489
    Boship
    May 28, 2004
  5. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,858
    Charlie Russel - MVP
    Dec 30, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page