[Winpcap-users] Does WinPcap on Vista x64 require being
wgao at broadcom.com
Wed Aug 13 00:59:30 GMT 2008
Got it and thanks for the resply. It worked fine on Vista x64.
From: winpcap-users-bounces at winpcap.org [mailto:winpcap-users-bounces at winpcap.org] On Behalf Of Gianluca Varenni
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 4:55 PM
To: winpcap-users at winpcap.org
Subject: Re: [Winpcap-users] Does WinPcap on Vista x64 require being signed?
On 64bit Vista (and 2008) a driver should be signed. Not necessarily WHQL'd. The WinPcap driver is signed with the CACE Technologies digital signature and cross-signed with the verisign-Microsoft cross certificate. All of this applies to kernel components. You do not need to sign any user level component like packet.dll (although the ones provided in the installer are signed).
Are you encountering any problem on Vista x64?
HAve a nice day
----- Original Message -----
From: Wei Gao<mailto:wgao at broadcom.com>
To: winpcap-users at winpcap.org<mailto:winpcap-users at winpcap.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 4:06 PM
Subject: [Winpcap-users] Does WinPcap on Vista x64 require being signed?
I am trying to use the packet.dll APIs in Winpcap 4.0.2 on Vista 64 bit. There is no problem to install Winpcap. After UAC is turned off, I can start the "NPF" protocol driver (command "net start npf") successfully. As the "NPF" is a protocol driver, I wonder in order for the packet API to work properly, if the driver need to get signed via the WHQL?
I don't have any problem using the Winpcap APIs on on 32 bits XP/Vista though. Thanks
Winpcap-users mailing list
Winpcap-users at winpcap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Winpcap-users