Aida32 (Driver/Service)

Discussion in 'ProcessGuard' started by spy1, Jan 27, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    26 Jan 18:59:38 - [DRIVER/SERVICE] g:\windows\system32\services.exe [716] Tried to install a driver/service named AIDA32Driver.

    My question about this one is this: If Aida32 is still working fine - then didn't it actually go ahead establish whatever "driver/service" it needed to work?

    I went through all of the information fields, checked to see that Aida32's plug-ins would kick in if I needed them to (they did) - so, "Golden Rule" time here again?
    Pete
     
  2. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    Checked with TDS's "Registered NT Services Explorer" - and Aida32 definitely isn't running as a service.

    If i go to the "Preferences"/"Stability" section of Aida32, I suppose I could UN-check "Load Device Driver under WinNT/W2k/XP" - but I really don't know what effect that would have on Aida32's performance - and - since it's working fine as is.... Pete
     
  3. Dan Perez

    Dan Perez Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    May 18, 2003
    Posts:
    1,495
    Location:
    Sunny San Diego
    Hi Pete,

    There are other applications which will "trip" this flag in PG, such as Sysinternals' "Process Explorer", "Regmon", "FileMon", etc.

    With regard to these, however, the allow flag needed to be set or they would not work, but as they were downloaded from the originating site I and they are too useful to do without I went ahead and allowed each of them Service/Driver rights.

    In all three of these cases (and presumeably with Aida) there is a driver that starts (or tries to) when the respective application is launched.
     
  4. Jason_DiamondCS

    Jason_DiamondCS Former DCS Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2002
    Posts:
    1,046
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    If you lose major functionality and you need to use that program, it is always best to Allow what it needs.

    Process Explorer for example, won't start if you have blocked drivers/services from being installed unless you allow procexp.exe to Create Driver/Services. For some things I don't mind losing small functionality in a program, like the Internet Explorer issue I mentioned before. For other things I trust I allow them to do what they want.

    -Jason-
     
  5. siliconman01

    siliconman01 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2003
    Posts:
    780
    Location:
    West Virginia (USA)
    What's "confusing" me a bit on threads such as these is basically this:

    I have a trusted program under protection of PG with the basic blocks in place. PG issues a log print that says this trusted program tried to do a Global Hook (for example).

    Why would not I as a user just give that trusted program that Option? It's protected from being tampered with by PG, so it shouldn't be able to do harm. :p
     
  6. Jason_DiamondCS

    Jason_DiamondCS Former DCS Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2002
    Posts:
    1,046
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    Yes I agree Siliconman, it is more of a precuation thing I think, the more things you stop a program from doing the better really. :)

    -Jason-
     
  7. siliconman01

    siliconman01 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2003
    Posts:
    780
    Location:
    West Virginia (USA)
    Whew! Thanks Jason, ;)

    That makes me a LOT better about my overall understanding of PG.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.