[farmdve]

What isn't mentioned in the article is why UD2 is chosen. It is a relic from the SecuROM days, in fact, one of the developers on SecuROM is the one who also works or worked at Denuvo.

I would imagine many things from the SecuROM era live on in Denuvo.

But if you read the article you will realize that certain games will not work in the future due to Denuvo.

"This destroyed any exception-based hooking since majority of the time an exception is triggered, Windows will write an EXCEPTION_RECORD high up in unused stack space. You can probably see where this is going. Now, whenever the CPUID is hooked via an exception, that important value will become overwritten with an EXCEPTION_RECORD, causing undefined behaviour later on. I believe this can be bypassed if you attach a debugger to the process and set certain flags when it comes to exception handling, but the method of patching every hardware check is still cumbersome due to randomness anyway."

As Windows matures, behaviour can change, breaking certain stuff.

[musjleman]

> As Windows matures, behaviour can change, breaking certain stuff.

How do you expect the aforementioned tech to break the games it's on? If anything it "breaking" will just make the anti-tamper feature ineffective.

[farmdve]

The anti-tamper codes, if any tampering is detected will crash on undefined/unallocated regions. Meaning that if Windows ever were to overwrite that region for whatever reason, will trigger the crash.

Such was the case for SecuROM in early days. It featured the CRC checks mentioned, if any single byte was changed, including an INT (breakpoint) instruction, it would crash. Here it's unlikely that it wont crash. Rendering the game inoperable.

[ainiriand]

I imagine that if some Denuvo servers enter legacy status at some point they'll be removed entirely.