Windows 10 Problem Reporting Thread

[Cyclone Boom 16,851]

14 hours ago, dannyd1993 said:

Also, it is version 1.1.641. This was in August 2018. Apparently, they got the message.

Thanks for posting with the current info.

This does sound promising for anyone looking at replacing their disc version with a functional digital download at no extra cost. I wonder whether the same also applies if purchasing directly from Origin? Previously the unpatched and unpatchable game was reportedly being sold there. But then some people like yourself found they received the fully updated 641 which includes the EP1 patch and nightlighting support for custom BATs. In any case, it's nice to know Origin could be a viable option to recommend for those who own the original CD based game. Without needing to spend a penny by contacting EA support and making the request, it sounds well worth a try.

A possible thing worth being wary of is to check Origin doesn't update SC4, then proceed to downgrade back to the unpatched version. As this article by @Tarkus explained in April 2017, there had sadly been reports of this happening. Otherwise providing the game remains patched, it should be good to go.

[Tarkus 6,932]

Origin redemption copies have always been 1.1.641, so there's not really any change there.  It's the retail copies (the ones people are buying off Origin or getting via Origin Access subscriptions) that have been the issue.  There was actually a recent report from a user here at ST that Origin did switch the retail copy from 1.1.610 to 1.1.638, however.

-Tarkus

[apeek 190]

I've been playing the DRM version of SC4D/RH natively since Windows 8. I've never used the digital version, but ultimately it does sound like the best solution. That said, is there still any need for instructions to make the "disc" installation work in Windows 10? Perhaps I should have spoken up earlier

[T Wrecks 10,209]

It looks like you're out of luck with Windows 10. You see, the removal of support for SafeDisc copy protection was introduced via an update for Windows 7 and 8. This means that you could remove this update and re-enable support. However, Windows 10 didn't come with support for these legacy DRM solutions in the first place, so there is no working status to roll back to. This article sums the situation up.

[apeek 190]

What can I do to convince you that I am and have been playing the DRM version for years on Windows 10? I am not soliciting information, but rather offering it.

[CorinaMarie 29,569]

5 hours ago, apeek said:

... is there still any need for instructions to make the "disc" installation work in Windows 10?

I mis-read this part myself.

Yes, if there is a solution that would help several peeps.

[apeek 190]

OK. The first step is to locate a copy of SECDRV.SYS (13KB x86 version). It's included with every copy of Windows XP/Vista/7 and found in %systemroot%\system32\drivers. Should I just post the remaining steps here, or is there a special section/format you'd like me to use?

[rsc204 21,805]

I've always said that you could take the old driver, digitally sign it for use with Windows 10, then activate it. However, fair warning there are potential security risks with this setup, which considering the $5 cost of SC4 (sale price) digitally, simply makes little sense. Of course, if you are aware of the risks and either don't care or think you can secure Windows despite it, well it will work. Likewise, many users may not have access to an older version of Windows. The temptation will be there to download this driver from the internet, there is no official way of doing so. Once more, this opens users up to potential risks.

So feel free to give a step by step here, but I do caution people it's not necessarily a great idea to go down this path. In any case, only enabling the driver briefly to validate the disc on startup is far safer than simply installing and enabling this service.

[T Wrecks 10,209]

Ah yes, looks like I misread that. I guess it can't hurt to post a step-by-step instruction here for people who are aware of the risk, can get their hands on the driver from a halfways trustworthy source (ideally one of their own or a friend's older computer) and want an immediate workaround.

[Cyclone Boom 16,851]

2 hours ago, apeek said:

Should I just post the remaining steps here, or is there a special section/format you'd like me to use?

You're most welcome to open a new topic if you'd like.

I personally feel doing so would make it more visible for people to find, and useful info can often get hidden away in long-running discussions like as we're in now. As an idea, perhaps it'd be worth posted in the current Bugs & Tech forum. Then add a link in here pointing to your guide explaining the process, so then anyone who comes across this current thread researching Win 10 problems can consider it as a way forward.

A title along the lines of "How to use the CD based version of SimCity 4 on Windows 10" would help by including common search terms related to this problem.

As @rsc204 said above, I highly suggest adding a disclaimer to say this is very much a case of "proceed at your own risk". There are potential security concerns here in a similar way to enabling the secdrv service on Win 8.1 and below. Since technically speaking the driver contains known vulnerabilities, which in a certain set of circumstances, could be exploited to expose one's system to attacks. Therefore it might be worth reiterating how it's not recommended, even if perfectly viable for functionality with running the disc based version of SC4 on Win 10. Using a batch script method may help to only have the service enabled for the split second when starting SC4, and then it can be shut down.

For sourcing the actual secdrv.sys file, there is (at least in my CD version) the file included on Disc 2 of SimCity 4 Deluxe.

As follows:

(Which is 12,400 bytes and rounded up to 13 kB in Windows Explorer.)

This file is identical to the one included in the game's installation at:
"C:\Program Files (x86)\Maxis\SimCity 4 Deluxe\Apps\SECDRV.SYS"

So perhaps it's worth suggesting the CD itself is where to locate the driver, and it can then be copied off to the appropriate location should this need to be in System32 also. Otherwise how there are certain security issues with sourcing it from other sites, which may or may not even be legal to obtain. I suspect there are some out there which are specially crafted with malware, and so due caution would very much be worth expressing.

On the whole, I think it can be done as documenting the steps as you've succeeded in doing. Then to clarify how the digital version (such as to GOG.com) is the best option, where otherwise manually signing the driver is another possible approach for those who understand the potential risks posed.

[rsc204 21,805]

27 minutes ago, Cyclone Boom said:

There are potential security concerns here in a similar way to enabling the secdrv service on Win 8.1 and below.

No, it's actually way worse using this on Win10 than Win8/7 etc. Because underlying changes and increased use of sandboxing have significantly hardened the security in Windows 10. They pretty much overhauled the way the O/S works at a low level, following on from some of the work done for Win8.

One of the easiest ways to undermine this security, is to forcibly install a system-wide driver. Which is even worse when you use files from an unknown source.

27 minutes ago, Cyclone Boom said:

So perhaps it's worth suggesting the CD itself is where to locate the driver, and it can then be copied off to the appropriate location should this need to be in System32 also.

That would certainly be better than downloading it, it does remove one concern, but it's still far from ideal.

Because it's been publicised, that the very driver you are installing has a known security hole in it. That's like owning a safe, then leaving the door open because you didn't want to pay $5 to fix the locking mech. Now, if you know the risk and are OK with it, that's your business to decide. I also understand, for those using more older games and not just SC4, this issue would be much more than $5 to sort.

But know that you are basically undoing all the work of MS to harden the security of Windows, by providing an easy route into a critical level of your system. It's why you need to manually digitally sign the driver, on a per-system basis. Because part of this security is only allowing verified digitally signed drivers on your system. Actually this has been in place since Windows Vista, but on older versions it was possible to force an unsigned driver to be loaded. That's no longer the case, so if you really need to load such a driver, you must digitally sign it yourself. But, this work-around only exists because developers need to have a way of testing any work in progress drivers. Hence why when you sign a driver this way, it only works on the one machine you signed it for. Once all the kinks have been worked out, then you submit it for verification, it gets digitally signed by Microsoft, then it can be installed on any Windows 10 machine. Yes it will work, but I seriously wouldn't recommend it unless you fully understand the risks involved.

[apeek 190]

I find it humorous that I haven't even disclosed what I plan to do with the file yet. The potential controversy is what discouraged me from publishing the hack all this time. Personally, I've never encountered any threats and doubt I ever will. Believe me when I say I've taken much greater risks. The question of ownership is not a new one. We can only hope that others share our integrity and like us, legitimately own both the software and the platform it runs on. Above all, I just love the game and wish to make it as accessible as possible to other customers who feel the same. Moving on, I'll follow Cyclone Boom's suggestion by starting a new topic and reference this ruckus with a footnote... in bold typeface.

[Cyclone Boom 16,851]

1 hour ago, apeek said:

We can only hope that others share our integrity and like us, legitimately own both the software and the platform it runs on. Above all, I just love the game and wish to make it as accessible as possible to other customers who feel the same.

I like that mindset and couldn't agree more. With these sorts of things, I feel it's a case of giving people options. Making aware of the potential risks which are relative to how one uses the internet, and then allowing each person to make their own measured judgement call on whether it's worth doing. Accessibility is crucial, and I can imagine there have been many people with Windows 10 who've tried installing the disc based game, before giving up after finding how out why. Then moving onto other interests after not wanting to purchase the game again from GOG or other online retailers. That's completely understandable, and so this info will be helpful for anyone in that situation to consider.

For a new topic, if useful you may wish to add a couple of placeholder posts after your initial one. It's possible to Hide these from the "Options" menu below each, and then they'd be no longer visible from public view. However at any point in future, as staff we can unhide them and keep your posts in sequence (if of benefit to add extra info).

[rsc204 21,805]

2 hours ago, apeek said:

I find it humorous that I haven't even disclosed what I plan to do with the file yet. The potential controversy is what discouraged me from publishing the hack all this time.

There is no controversy here, because everyone with a disk will have a copy of the file on the disk. Even if they didn't, it's not controversial, simply there is an inherent security risk that comes with getting it from a source that will be distributing it without permission.

There are only two solutions to the Windows 10 problem and SC4's use of SafeDisc 2 copy protection:

1. Add the driver to Windows 10 forcibly, as a workaround.
2. Bypassing the DRM - This we will not allow to be discussed on ST. 

I had assumed that you are taking the 1st option, since otherwise you don't need the SecDrv.sys driver in the first place. If I'd have thought differently, I'd already have called you out on it.

2 hours ago, apeek said:

Personally, I've never encountered any threats and doubt I ever will. Believe me when I say I've taken much greater risks.

Opening a security hole into your machine, does not by itself allow an attacker to do anything, it simply is one part of a greater system. However, it's really a bad idea and if a suitable warning is not included, some people will come across the information and may simply not realise there are drawbacks to this method. As I said, we're talking about $5 v.s. the potential for a PC that gets infected with Malware, my advice to most people would be to pay the $5 and avoid the risk.

That said, I'm happy not to patch every vulnerability on my system. But, I wouldn't have to pay someone to recover it should everything go wrong. I also have confidence in knowing I can recover my precious data from backups, that would remain unaffected. However, you have to think of the average person here, not only those with the technical nous to understand the risks and protect themselves. Just because you've never encountered malware, doesn't mean it can't happen, it's a real everyday risk that most users would do well to mitigate.

2 hours ago, apeek said:

The question of ownership is not a new one. We can only hope that others share our integrity and like us, legitimately own both the software and the platform it runs on.

Nothing in any of my posts (or others here), has got the slightest thing to do with ownership. Digitally signing a driver, assuming this is what we're talking about, doesn't even present any such problems. Unless again you are suggesting you are also going to bypass the DRM. It's not as simple as choosing a side, as a site, we can't allow such instructions to be hosted here, because it causes potential legal liabilities.

Like it or not, bypassing DRM is against the law in most countries. Once again though, assuming we're just finding a way to restore the driver to allow the DRM to validate, i.e. SecDrv.sys, that's not a problem. I simply wanted to make it clear that this is not without the potential for problems, so a disclaimer to that effect should be included.

[apeek 190]

Without quoting terminology or questioning semantics, I detect a distinctly nonpositive, almost adversarial tone. I hear heavy criticism and worry whether I'm about to proceed with my own execution. It's been said that every breakthrough breeds resentment. However, there's been ample time for others to come forward with the idea. Now I'm ready to share it on simtropolis unless someone with authority orders me not to. I will proceed knowing full well critics will likely find fault in anything I produce.

[CorinaMarie 29,569]

1 minute ago, apeek said:

Now I'm ready to share it on simtropolis unless someone with authority orders me not to. I will proceed knowing full well critics will likely find flaw in anything I produce.

Ofc, @Cyclone Boom already gave the go ahead for you to post and I'll add my endorsement too.

[rsc204 21,805]

7 hours ago, apeek said:

It's been said that every breakthrough breeds resentment. However, there's been ample time for others to come forward with the idea.

Again, if we're talking about digitally signing the SecDrv.sys driver, I've mentioned that at least 10 times since this problem came to light. Granted, I've not taken the step of publishing a step-by-step guide, but then I've always felt that if, as a user, you couldn't work that out using Google, it's probably not something you should be doing. There is a reason why you can't just install any driver under Windows 10, even if some of MS's decision making is commercially biased, a lot of it is based on industry best practise too. No one here is trying to stop you from doing anything, simply explaining that it's not without it's downsides.

[apeek 190]

I just want to add that there's nothing illicit about signing a driver. It's done using Microsoft tools, with the sole intention of playing the game as it was intended. The driver nor the operating system is altered in any way. Although the functionality can be reproduced on another computer, it cannot be transferred. Every single person performing the procedure explicitly grants their approval for the driver to operate on their own system. It's exactly why digital signatures were invented. The sole difference here being instead of the end user trusting a known commercial authority, they impart that trust on the person(s) from whom they acquired the capability. Just because functionality was removed from a core operating system, does not mean it is forbidden. The driver is active only during game play. Any conceivable threat, no matter how unlikely, is defeated upon closing the game. Furthermore, this particular example doesn't merely sign a file, but implements extended features of security certificates. Like he said, you won't find these instructions on google.

[apeek 190]

Thanks all for your patience. It's been awhile since I needed this, so I had to walk myself through it all over again. In the process, I was able to shave off several steps, making the whole thing shockingly simple. Now, I just have to stitch together a few screenshots and inject some formatting. As it turns out, SECDRV.SYS is found in the Apps directory of Disc 1 (Go figure).

[Cyclone Boom 16,851]

27 minutes ago, apeek said:

In the process, I was able to shave off several steps, making the whole thing shockingly simple.

Sounds great. This whole process which has never been formally documented on ST, has previously been renowned as incredibly complex. To have your guide explaining a series of simplified steps will surely make the method more approachable for those willing to go down this route.

 

27 minutes ago, apeek said:

As it turns out, SECDRV.SYS is found in the Apps directory of Disc 1 (Go figure).

Cool. I'd only checked on Disc 2 and noticed the driver in there (directly in the root). For me I found this has an identical file size and modified date to the SECDRV.SYS present in my game's "Apps" installation directory. I wonder if the Disc 1 file is any different to this, and whether there's a reason to be included on both CDs.

[apeek 190]

I'm currently trying to isolate a few bugs that surfaced during testing. I expect even the least technical user to successfully complete this procedure using primarily copy/paste. I might eventually even assemble a script consisting of only a few basic prompts. I actually have a handful of platform tweaks (not mods) that enhance the SC4 gamer's experience under Windows 10... Kindly excuse the delay.

[T Wrecks 10,209]

No worries - you're not working under a contract or bound to any deadline, after all.

Speaking of scripts, I remembered that antivirus software often issued false positives on harmless content such as STEX downloads. I'm wondering whether a custom script might trigger security warnings that might worry less tech-savvy users.

Those "other platform tweaks" you mention sound interesting, not least because there are several things that could work better on modern systems. I don't know what you have up your sleeve, of course, but things like the bugged region view when playing in widescreen resolutions, to mention just one example, can sure be annoying. Some tweaks to make SC4 run better overall might be helpful.

[apeek 190]

1 hour ago, T Wrecks said:

No worries - you're not working under a contract or bound to any deadline, after all.

Thanks for that, it's a work thing. I can't overstate how thrilled I am to chat with the pros. Each of you are undisputed masters of your chosen skill area, and therefore possess my full attention. I will eagerly look into to your requests and provide you my assessment. Making stuff work better brings me great satisfaction, especially when it involves one of my favorite pastimes.

[apeek 190]

UPDATE:

Hammering a solution into place on one PC is quite different than making it work consistently across many. Naturally, I aim to amend my instructions periodically, but they will always generate a non-zero percent failure rate. I recently stumbled across the convoluted procedure Cyclone Boom likely referenced and others surely noticed. I'll refrain from naming its source in the interest of public safety. Nonetheless, it is an impressive attempt to manufacture a guide that considers every possible application and contingency. Fortunately, the limited scope of our objective allows me to bypass the bulk of it's content ergo reducing complexity, increasing stability, and heightening security. However, as we've already established, it's still not the foremost strategy. Prior to releasing my procedure or alongside it, I insist we post a clear guide to acquiring and installing the Digital Download too. If necessary, I'll procure the software myself and document the process. Moreover, I seriously consider this project central to the game's continued viability and therefore desire maximum exposure. What conflicts, if any, arise from simultaneously submitting my work on sc4devotion?

 

On ‎12‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 3:58 PM, T Wrecks said:

I'm wondering whether a custom script might trigger security warnings that might worry less tech-savvy users.

I agree. A script will come later, if ever, and is certainly not a priority.

On ‎12‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 3:58 PM, T Wrecks said:

but things like the bugged region view when playing in widescreen resolutions, to mention just one example, can sure be annoying.

Believe it or not, there does indeed exist a comprehensive solution to practically every visual anomaly or glitch caused by the game's outdated graphics. Once I can reproduce the problem, an answer won't be far behind.

  Edited December 14, 2018 by apeek  
Changed "Non-DRM Package" to "Digital Download"

[Silur 3,301]

It's sometimes empty talk about Win 8 and Win 10... SC4 from Gog works fine on win 8 platforms and on all early ones (I work on WinXP and Win 7 system) 

[CorinaMarie 29,569]

4 hours ago, apeek said:

What conflicts, if any, arise from simultaneously submitting my work on sc4devotion?

While I cannot give a definitive answer to this since I'm not a member (nor staff) over there, I'll beep @Tarkus who is an Admin of Devotion and hopefully he'll pop in with his opinion. I can say from Simtropolis's viewpoint (aka mine as an admin here) we have no objection to said dual posting.

[rsc204 21,805]

4 hours ago, apeek said:

I insist we post a clear guide to acquiring and installing the Non-DRM package too

OK, time to ask a very clear question. Do you mean a NoCD patch when you say "Non-DRM package"? Otherwise can you please clarify what you mean, because if you are circumventing the DRM, that is a a problem from the perspective of distributing and describing the methodology either here or on SC4D.

Note again, finding a method to legitimately validate the DRM with a work-around to restore the SecDrv.sys driver is NOT circumventing DRM and therefore would be acceptable.

[CorinaMarie 29,569]

1 minute ago, rsc204 said:

Do you mean a NoCD patch when you way "Non-DRM package"?

Ofc I'm guessing, but I took that to mean the GoG version. (At least I hope so.)

[apeek 190]

1 hour ago, rsc204 said:

Do you mean a NoCD patch when you say "Non-DRM package"?

I'm referring to the existing, accepted, and preferred method of playing SC4 on Windows 10.

[rsc204 21,805]

17 minutes ago, apeek said:

I'm referring to the existing accepted preferred method of playing SC4 on Windows 10.

No, you are giving an answer as clearly as Donald Trump does. When you refuse to answer a simple question directly, all you do is make people suspicious.

As such, let me be abundantly clear with you. Any attempt to circumvent DRM or redistribute copyrighted works is illegal. We can not and will not, allow such files and/or instructions to be posted here. This isn't because of my beliefs, it's because Simtropolis can not be involved in illegal acts. If you attempt to do either of these things, there will be swift and (because you choose not to engage with us reasonably), big consequences.

Likewise, if that is NOT what you are doing, why don't we just discuss this like civilised people and dispense with all the other shit? Because seriously, I would be much happier working with you, than fighting you on this. Have you considered that I might just know something you don't, or just generally do know what I'm talking about? For example, whatever you are trying to achieve, can be done without using any illegal hacks or copyrighted files, so if that's your big secret, it's not even necessary.

In which case, I'm more than happy to assist you in your goal to help others get their game working. Albeit with the caveat I've already stated, that it's only fair to explain the risks so users can make a free and informed choice. Your argument, at least as I understand it, that there is no risk, is simply wrong. I'm sorry if that statement hurts your feelings, but it's a fact that you are wrong and not just my opinion. I could bore you to death for weeks with factual arguments, linked source material and general computer security best practise. However, I feel doing so will neither allow you to see this from another point of view or enlighten you in any way to the reality.