reintom@rocky2.UUCP (Tom Reingold) (11/10/86)
In article <579@bucsb.bu.edu.UUCP>, madd@bucsb.bu.edu.UUCP (Jim Frost) writes:
<
<How about:
<Go through COMMAND.COM and find the COPY command. This is really easy to do
<with Norton Utilities. Make it anything you want, the more bizarre the better.
<This should disable the COPY command within DOS. Then just write your own,
<naming it anything you want. This way, you can restrict access better. It's
<hardly foolproof, but it oughta work to keep at least some people from
<copying things. This is simple and quick, and should help until some real
<guru comes along with a better way.
<
< - Jim Frost * The Madd Hacker -
That's not so hard to thwart unless there are no floppy drives on the
machine. Someone can walk in with a DOS disk, boot from it, and copy any
file off the hard disk. I really don't know how you can effectively do
what you want to do, except the following:
Rewrite the file BIOS functions in DOS and rearrange the FAT so that it is
non-standard. This is very risky and I would not think that it would be
safe, but I guess it's possible.
--
Tom Reingold -- Rockefeller Univ, 1230 York Av, NY 10021; (212) 570-7709
UUCP: {seismo|philabs|phri|harvard|ihnp4}!cmcl2!rna!rocky2!reintom
ARPANET: reintom@rockefeller.arpa
BITNET: REINTOM@ROCKVAXsmvorkoetter@watmum.UUCP (Stefan M. Vorkoetter) (11/10/86)
In article <278@rocky2.UUCP> reintom@rocky2.UUCP (Tom Reingold) writes: >Rewrite the file BIOS functions in DOS and rearrange the FAT so that it is >non-standard. This is very risky and I would not think that it would be >safe, but I guess it's possible. Rewriting the BIOS and rearranging the FAT won't work since someone could still come in with their own DOS disk, with "copy" on it, which only accesses the disk through the BIOS. Thus, the BIOS changes, and the new FAT format would be transparent to the thief's DOS.
toma@tekgvs.UUCP (Thomas Almy) (11/10/86)
Regarding disabling the copy command and otherwise modifying the DOS, what is there to protect someone from just bringing a disk with PC/DOS on it and booting it? Tom Almy
rha@bunker.UUCP (Robert H. Averack) (11/10/86)
In article <836@ur-tut.UUCP> akk2@ur-tut.UUCP (A Kacker) writes: >Maybe someone can help me with this one : > >At the University of Rochester, we have a Microcomputer Information >Center which serves as a repository of both commercial and PD >software. The University community is thus able to try out a lot of the >packages before actually going out and buying it. We have some of this software >installed on hard disks on XT's and AT's. We try our best to keep anyone >from surreptitiously copying any of the commercial software, including >posting of signs against copying. What we would like to be able to is >to somehow make it difficult for users to copy anything off of our hard disks. > >Atul Kacker How about if you write a program to set/reset the "hidden file" attribute bit (bit-1), using CHMOD, a.k.a. Function 67 of DOS Services (INT 21H). By setting the file as hidden, you prevent the user from using DIR, COPY, ERASE, etc. on that file. When you need the file, reset the bit. -- ?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~? { (Bob Averack @ Bunker Ramo/Olivetti) {decvax!, ittatc!, philabs!} } } { { ## "Q: What do you call a cell USENET: bunker!rha } } #oo# on a spread sheet?" UUCP: bunker!/usr/spool { { ###### /uucppublic/rha } } ##\/## "A: A Lotus Position...Yoga OFFLINE: 35 Nutmeg Dr. { { ###### Humor, arararararar..." Trumbull, CT 06611 } } L L { ?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?~?
akk2@ur-tut.UUCP (11/11/86)
In article <579@bucsb.bu.edu.UUCP> madd@bucsb.bu.edu.UUCP (Jim Frost) writes: > >How about: >Go through COMMAND.COM and find the COPY command. This is really easy to do >with Norton Utilities. Make it anything you want, the more bizarre the better. >This should disable the COPY command within DOS. Then just write your own, Well, I tried this as follows: I opened up COMMAND.COM with NU. Searched and found the string COPY. Changed COPY to KOPY and saved the changes. Rebooted my AT. Issued the command COPY A:foo B: and to my surprise it understood the COPY command just fine and copied foo over to B:. It also failed to understand KOPY and thought it to be a Bad command. Do I have to do something else to rename COPY to KOPY. After this all I really have to do is to write a batch file COPY.BAT that will invoke KOPY except when the source drive is C:. Any suggestions, anyone ? -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Atul Kacker UUCP : {allegra|seismo|decvax}!rochester!ur-tut!akk2 BITNET : AKK2@UORDBV
ignatz@aicchi.UUCP (Ihnat) (11/11/86)
Check the 'Secret Disk' package from Lattice. It's the only security program that I'm aware of for the IBM PC family that is both relatively transparent when running, and seems reliably difficult to crack. Provides both a proprietary, fast-but-not-impossible-to-crack algorithm, and a DES version. Both are run as installed drivers on either directories or entire disks; and can be enabled and disabled on the fly. The cost? About $49.95. (Steve Hersee told me he may have to raise the price to get people to take it seriously!) More details available on request. I don't work for Lattice, get kickbacks, or any other bennie out of this. Dang it. -- Dave Ihnat Analysts International Corporation (312) 882-4673 ihnp4!aicchi!ignatz || ihnp4!homebru!ignatz
akk2@ur-tut.UUCP (A Kacker) (11/11/86)
In article <1877@tekgvs.UUCP> toma@tekgvs.UUCP (Thomas Almy) writes: > >Regarding disabling the copy command and otherwise modifying the DOS, what >is there to protect someone from just bringing a disk with PC/DOS on it >and booting it? > >Tom Almy I agree that there is no easy way to prevent user's with their own DOS disk to copy stuff; the only thing I am trying to prevent is when the hard disk DOS is in control. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Atul Kacker UUCP : {allegra|seismo|decvax}!rochester!ur-tut!akk2 BITNET : AKK2@UORDBV
mjwingrove@wateng.UUCP (Mike Wingrove) (11/11/86)
In article <278@rocky2.UUCP> reintom@rocky2.UUCP (Tom Reingold) writes: >In article <579@bucsb.bu.edu.UUCP>, madd@bucsb.bu.edu.UUCP (Jim Frost) writes: >< ><How about: ><Go through COMMAND.COM and find the COPY command. This is really easy to do ><with Norton Utilities. Make it anything you want, the more bizarre the better. ><This should disable the COPY command within DOS. Then just write your own, ><naming it anything you want. This way, you can restrict access better. It's ><hardly foolproof, but it oughta work to keep at least some people from ><copying things. This is simple and quick, and should help until some real ><guru comes along with a better way. You could try encrypting all of the executables and then patching the DOS EXEC call so that it decrypts the file as it loads it. Thats what is done on some of our on campus pc-nets here at U of W. That doesn't prevent people from copying them but what they get won't execute on their machines. I'm not sure how you could make this secure in a non network environment. You might need a special peice of hardware to perform key management. Encryption might be able to be done in software, or again using special hardware, with a DES chip. Mike Wingrove Computer Communications Networks Group U of Waterloo Waterloo, Ontario. Disclaimer: !? I don't need no stinking disclaimer!!!! :-)
mjranum@gouldsd.UUCP (Marcus J Ranum) (11/11/86)
The problem as I understand it is that you want to prevent users from copying something from the hard disk of a PC ? The real problem with a system like the IBM is that it will NEVER be secure unless the hardware is secure. Unless you do something like encrypt the directories and rewrite the boot block.(as WatchDog does) How about providing some physical security instead ? Take the floppy drives out. :-) Live Free mjr -- Ah, me, I am one ! Stretching over Sado island Blooming on my hill
ben@catnip.UUCP (Bennett Broder) (11/12/86)
In article <278@rocky2.UUCP> reintom@rocky2.UUCP (Tom Reingold) writes: >In article <579@bucsb.bu.edu.UUCP>, madd@bucsb.bu.edu.UUCP (Jim Frost) writes: ><How about: ><Go through COMMAND.COM and find the COPY command. This is really easy to do ><with Norton Utilities. Make it anything you want, the more bizarre the better. >That's not so hard to thwart unless there are no floppy drives on the >machine. Someone can walk in with a DOS disk, boot from it, and copy any >file off the hard disk. It occurs to me that an easy way to implement this idea might be to cut the power line to the floppy and install an IBM-AT style keyswitch at this point. That way, the machine can be accessed by authorized personnel, but other users would only be able to use the hard disk. -- Ben Broder {ihnp4,decvax} !hjuxa!catnip!ben {houxm,topaz}/
cabbie@chinet.UUCP (Richard Andrews) (11/12/86)
How about a key switch like the AT only tied to the write protect switch on the floppy's? Read all day long but never write unless you have the key. Sounds like a sure fire thing to me. -- ******************************************************************************* Any opinions expressed above are my own. Rich Andrews They can be yours too. Please send $19.95 to.....ihnp4!chinet!cabbie *******************************************************************************
tj@mks.UUCP (T. J. Thompson) (11/18/86)
In article <836@ur-tut.UUCP> akk2@ur-tut.UUCP (A Kacker) writes: >What we would like to be able to [do] is >to somehow make it difficult for users to copy anything off of our hard disks. >Two things come to my mind on ways of implementing this : > >1. If only there was a way to set an attribute of the program to > 'protected' a la macintosh programs, that would come up with a > message saying that this program can not be copied. > >2. Another way would be to somehow modify DOS so that copying from > C: was disabled. If COPY had been an external command, a batch file > would have done the job. > I replied to the original author indicating the impracticality of implementing any effective copy protection scheme. I was subsequently distressed to see several postings suggesting ways of implementing notion 2 above. This is worse than useless; because it wastes the administrator's time to achieve a totally false sense of security; and because it only encourages users to defeat the scheme, since they are no longer on their honour, and circumvention of the scheme is TRIVIAL. My first inclination to bypass this so-called protection was to write a program: it is simple enough that i would even do it with the `a' command in debug, and not even save it in a file (and i habitually eschew assembler). For someone less inclined to quick hacks the program is still trivial in C or even BASIC. But for the naive user it is even easier! She can simply use debug as a copy program (this is left as a simple exercise for the reader; just remember that a .exe cannot be directly written out). So the system administrator removes all copies of debug (draconian, but right in line with modifying EVERY copy of command.com (including any that users may privately own)). Then the naive user simply resorts to backup and restore; all it costs her is another diskette. So the SA banishes all copies of backup... Then our user, losing naivete, opens up the DOS manual and discovers assign and subst (again, the use of these to circumvent a copy program checking for a source of C:... is left as an exercise). So the SA banishes... Then the poor user struggles through the development of her first program; so the SA banishes all compilers and interpreters... Trevor John Thompson {allegra|decvax|ihnp4}!watmath!mks!tj
towns@alberta.UUCP (11/20/86)
Back about 6 months ago, someone from the University of Texas mention a program that would protect a Hard Disk at boot-up time. It also controlled the smart user with their own Dos disk which could be placed in drive A:. This program "PC-LOK10.ARC" was said to require a password for access to the Hard Disk, Otherwise any disk access to the Hard Disk (C:) would return the standard message "Invalid Drive Specification". Once entry of the password was given the drive would now be accessable. Could this person, possible post this program to the net if it's PD. I would be very interested in any other info about this program.