SECDRV.SYS Not Loading in Windows 10; this will break thousands of older games.

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/3086255

I think you've missed the forest for the trees.  Please tell me which step in the following logic chain is non-sequitur or incorrect.

The Logic for Eradicating SECDRV.SYS from Windows

Or, Why Microsoft’s Public Statements are Diametrically Opposed to their Public Actions

The only public statement From Microsoft on the banishment of SECDRV.SYS from its operating systems was made by public statement this issue was made by Microsoft’s (of Germany) Boris Schneider-Johne.  He stated, “…. there are old games on CD-Rom that have DRM. This DRM stuff is also deeply embedded in your system, and that’s where Windows 10 says ‘sorry, we cannot allow that’…”.  This is so stereotypically German – the caricature, “you vill (insert any act of subjugation here) undt you vill LIKE IT!”

This statement seems contradictory to facts, Microsoft’s own actions with respect to other “security threats” and indeed to SECDRV.SYS past problems.  According Rovi (heir to Macrovision), “SafeDisc DRM hasn’t been supported for a few years now, and the driver has consequently not been updated for some time.  Microsoft should have migrated the existing software since Windows 8.  We don’t know if that’s still possible with Windows 10 or if they simply didn’t care about it.”

That statement, and the fact that Microsoft actually included SafeDisc drivers as part of their operating system through the initial releases of Windows 10 (well after the Rovi – Macrovision absorption was complete and SafeDisc was no longer a supported / protected product) seems to indicate that Microsoft actually had the intellectual property rights and source code ownership since before the release of Windows 7.  There are indications also that Microsoft made updates to SafeDisc drivers on at least two occasions – Windows 7 and Windows 8 releases.  Squeezing driver developers (and even applications developers) to give up intellectual property and source code rights to their products is a well-know Microsoft tactic that has been practiced since Bill Gates reportedly stole the rights to and  / or source code for CP/M from Gary Kildall in the late 1980s.

So, when Microsoft tries to point the finger at Macrovision as the responsible party for not fixing security issues with SECDRV.SYS, people who have been in the IT industry for two or three decades simply say, “Yeah… right! And the moon is made of cheese – the Wallace and Gromit documentary, ‘A Grand Day Out’ told me so, and it is as factual as a Microsoft 'technical position'”.

What’s more, having been involved in IT since 1968 and a developer / user on IBM, DEC, Microsoft and the odd UNIX system, I have NEVER witnessed the outright EXPULSION of one file based on “security” or ANY considerations.

The additional act that puts the lie to Microsoft’s public statements regarding SECDRV, is that, BECAUSE MICROSOFT HAS PREVENTED EVEN TESTING THIS DRIVER ON WINDOWS, NO UPDATE CAN POSSIBLY BE MADE TO IT!  That again is an UNPRECEDENTED OVERT ACT TO DENY ACCESS TO WINDOWS PLATFORMS FOR A SPECIFIC USER COMMUNITY.   This ‘c@(&-block’ action must be money motivated.  Microsoft is a big corporation, its only motivation is profit, and screwing users, other corporations, even governments in the name of profit has been their open-book history.   So this is no different.

However, in this case, the hubris that caused Microsoft to essentially say “f#<& you” to users of DRM-protected optical media games, including many popular Microsoft titles, makes little economic sense, and should make Microsoft shareholdersconcerned:  the amount of time and effort (i.e. MONEY) dedicated to banishing this one little 30 KB file from a Windows computer, retroactively to Windows 2000, (and it appears, the same ‘fix’ was applied to my ancient, supposedly non-supported Windows XP system when I turned it on the other day) would be far in excess of the time, effort and cost to fix any perceived vulnerabilities in a file that has for nearly a decade, been included in Windows (i.e. not necessary to purchase separately from a 3^rd^ party vendor).

Singling out this one file, while many other files, including other MS kernel modules, had and continue to suffer from security vulnerabilities (how does one think the Chinese have been able to steal intellectual property, medical data, government personnel data, defense secrets, even White House emails and strategy session notes for at least the last 15 years) yet have never been and are not now “banned” from even TESTING on Windows clearly shows that this is NOT ABOUT SECURITY.

There are many more files that have been identified as ‘vulnerable’, that are still being used by hackers, and yet are still allowed to load on Windows systems outright or at least for testing (either for update or for forensic analysis – ask any anti-virus or cyber-defense developer).  So again, that begs the question.  Why was SECDRV singled out for such UNPRECEDENTED DRACONIAN TREATMENT?

ANSWER:  MONEY!

I have a number of dongle-protected applications that load manufacturer-specific security drivers which have been compromised by hackers, usually within weeks of their initial appearance, to offer cracked versions of these applications for little or no money.  It is clear that these same security drivers / schemes could be hacked for “surreptitious” actions – the same type of “vulnerability” that is the supposed reason for such drastic action against SECDRV.   But Microsoft has not banned these well-known, yet vulnerable drivers from their systems.

At the same time, Microsoft IS pushing its “online experience”:  it gives precedence to signing in to Windows with a “Microsoft UID” as opposed to a local system UID; those who choose to sign in with a local system UID are still bombarded with Microsoft ‘news’ and marketing messages unless they physically disconnect the system from the internet; Microsoft is pushing its online Xbox and Media & TV apps as an additional way to keep users sucking from the Microsoft teat 24-7, thus increasing the income and value of Microsoft’s “online presence”.

But Rovi (the Macrovision heir), entered the online / IP media delivery space a while ago, and in Europe, is a non-trivial competitor to Microsoft in that market.  Could the SECDRV scenario simply be a Microsoft marketing tactic to besmirch the Macrovision (Rovi) reputation as producers of flawed, hackable software (when in reality, there is no such thing as software or online services and / or security systems that can’t be hacked)?  Is it an opening or ongoing salvo in a marketing war in which simple users of CD- / DVD-Rom games are “collateral damage”?

Logic suggests the answer is YES!

The natural inclination of engineers is to solve problems.  Microsoft, having likely gained at least limited intellectual property rights and access to source code for the SafeDisc drivers, undoubtedly has an engineering staff capable of rewriting SECDRV.SYS to the point that it will allow any holder of a valid activation key / serial number to install and run any application dependent on SafeDisc protection.

But engineers are always subject to the whims of “Management” who, from the 1970s onward have been drawn almost exclusively from either finance or marketing.  With “marketdroids” in control of Microsoft (a fact of their existence since the initial release of Windows as an MS-DOS application in the early 1980s) directed irrational expenditures of engineering time, effort and budget to “sock it to competitors” will take precedence over solving problems for (even decades-long) loyal users.

THEREFORE, YOU WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO PLAY DRM-PROTECTED OPTICAL MEDIA BASED GAMES IN WINDOWS OPERATING SYSTEMS EVER AGAIN.

Making comments / votes on the “feedback app” will do nothing but provide info (likely surreptitiously collected) that will allow Microsoft to further “insulate” your system from games / applications / modules / drivers of companies with which they choose to go to war.

Bottom line, there will never be a fix to this problem (unless someone hacks SafeDisc so users can strip its protection from their game discs).  So…

GET THE F#<& OVER IT!!

And if you don't want Microsoft to seek / execute further retribution for your use of non-Microsoft DRM / security / online services, don't attempt to give them 'feedback' that allows them to analyze your system for the next 'market competitor' product to ban from Windows!

Good point but why they seem to stop supporting secdrv.sys in Windows 8.x?

Red stuff nonetheless I hope, or is it blue in your case :D

Well they're reading this thread, too. I'm pretty sure of it.

The whole SECDRV discussion within Microsoft imho would off course be whether to include and (allow people to) enable a piece of code that is rated unsafe, knowing that a single weak link can break an otherwise good (even a perfect) cable. The way I look at it is that disabling and removing it is the responsible thing to do from a security perspective.

That said, I might have to read back the whole thread figuring out whether the sign and enable TESTSIGNING boot mode as mentioned by Adam Bise on August 17 still works, whether it has to be re-enabled and/or the driver re-signed before every boot to work to start games, or that the whole procedure has been forced to not work by making sure the service for SECDRV.SYS doesn't start regardless of the drivers signed status or TESTSIGNING boot mode status?

In the case SECDRV won't load whatever is attempted, dual booting an older SKU is the way to go indeed. Regardless of the above, this has the additional benefit of having only security holes in an OS that is only used to play games. That would help isolating possible security issues with SECDRV. Note that if there is a viable security breach anywhere, there's really no telling how it can be exploited, so this might not be safe anyhow if there are other computers on the network, or you use e.g. any passwords that you also use elsewhere.

That isolating this issue isn't as easy as might seem, even on a separate OS, serves to defend Microsofts apparent position to choose to eliminate SECDRV from Windows 10 all together.

This might have to be done anew for every regional setting Windows supports, as my (Dutch) Windows 10 doesn't find any entries searching for secdrv as K Heinz is obviously on a German, Austrian, Swiss or other German-language Windows 10, even though Heinz Ketchup is actually from Pittsburg, Pensylvania originally... ;)

Dank u wel for your confirmation Eric!

Based on the feedback within the Windows 10 Feeback app I already had the idea there is regional splitup like it is also present in Steam. Very unfortunately though.

I think you are right that the secdrv.sys issue has to be reposted on the feedback app for and in every single language / regional settings Windows supports.

It might be also a good idea to promote so upvote this issue on the Windows 10 reddit channel.

Afaik MS is also reading it. But this would be more optional in addition to the feedback app.

Have no ketchup in my veins, coming from Germany. ;)