题外话：
鉴于 The old new thing 博客迁移至 Microsoft Developer Blogs 之后，部分文章 ID 发生了彻底变化（毫不相关），故自本篇起，存在该问题的对应博文，如在本人手中具有旧版备份，则会在标题中以括号的形式标出旧 ID，新 ID 则在其之前，以不带括号的形式提供。如遇文章的新、旧 ID 相同，或可以通过旧 ID 直接在新版 The old new thing 上进行访问，则只会撰写一个 ID。
原文链接：https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20040702-00/?p=102300
Reaching back into the history bucket…
让我们回到历史的故纸堆中。
Some people have discovered that strange things happen if you name your DLL “security.dll”.
有人发现，如果将你（开发）的 DLL 命名为 security.dll，就会发生一些奇怪的事情。
The reason is that there is already a system DLL called “security.dll”; it’s the Security Support Provider Interface DLL, and it used to go by the name “security.dll”, though nowadays the name “secur32.dll” is preferred. If you look into your system32 directory, you’ll see both “security.dll” and “secur32.dll” in there. And if you’re handy with an export dumper, you’ll see that “security.dll” is just a bunch of forwarders to “secur32.dll”. If you browse through the MSDN documentation, you’ll see that everybody talks about “secur32.dll” and hardly any mention is made of its doppelgänger “security.dll”.
这是由于已经有一个系统 DLL 的名字叫 security.dll 了，它是（系统的）安全支持提供器接口（SSPI）的 DLL，并且曾经用过 security.dll 的名字，虽然如今比较推荐使用 secur32.dll 就是了。打开你的 system32 目录的话，你会同时看到 secutiry.dll 和 secur32.dll，如果手头上正好有DLL导出函数浏览器的话，你会发现 security.dll 的导出函数不过是一大堆到 secur32.dll 的转发而已。另外，浏览一下 MSDN 文档，也会发现大多数文章里提及的都是 secur32.dll，而极少提及它的影子弟兄 security.dll。
Okay, here’s where the history comes in. Wind back to Windows 95.
好了，现在让我们来谈谈历史，首先回到 Windows 95 的年代。
Back in those days, the Security Support Provider Interface was implemented in two different DLLs. The one you wanted depended on whether you are running Windows NT or Windows 95. On Windows 95, it was called “secur32.dll”, but on Windows NT, it was called “security.dll”.
从前，SSPI 是通过两个不同的 DLL 实现的，需要使用哪一个取决于是在运行 Windows NT 还是 Windows 95。在 Windows 95 里，SSPI 的 DLL 叫 secur32.dll，但在 Windows NT 中，则叫 security.dll。
This was obviously a messed-up state of affairs, so the Windows NT folks decided to “go with the flow” and rename their security DLL to “secur32.dll”. This was probably for application compatibility reasons: Applications that were written to run on Windows 95 and were never tested on Windows NT just went straight for “secur32.dll” instead of loading the correct DLL based on the operating system.
很明显，这样的安排简直是一团糟，所以 Windows NT 开发组的老哥们决定『随波逐流』，将他们的安全 DLL 改名成了 secur32.dll。这大概是出于对应用程序兼容性的考量：面向 Windows 95 开发、并且从来没有在 Windows NT 上测试过的的应用程序会直奔 secur32.dll 而去，而不会根据操作系统的情况去选择加载正确的 DLL。
Okay, so now pop back to the present day. When you put a DLL called “Security.dll” in your application directory, what happens?
好了，回到现在。当你将一个叫 security.dll 的 DLL 放在你的应用程序目录中，会发生什么呢？
Recall that the rules for the order in which DLLs are searched for checks the application directory before it checks the system directory. As a result, anybody in your application who wants “Security.dll” will get your version instead of the system version.
回忆一下有关 DLL 的搜索顺序的设定（译注：原链接已失效，中文链接为新地址），Windows 会在去系统目录下查找之前，先在应用程序的工作目录下进行搜索。因此，由你的应用程序发起的调用，如果要查找名叫 security.dll 的 DLL，都会拿到你（放在应用程序目录下）的版本，而不是系统（目录）中的版本。
Even if the system version is the one they really wanted.
即便系统目录中的那个版本是它们真正需要的。
That’s why overriding the system’s Security.dll with your own results in a bunch of SSPI errors. Components you are using in your program are trying to talk to SPPI by loading “security.dll” and instead of getting the system one, they get yours. But yours was never meant to be a replacement for “security.dll”; it’s just some random DLL that happens to have the same name.
这就是为什么以你自己版本的 security.dll 替代系统版本会引发一大堆 SSPI 相关的错误。你的应用程序中的组件尝试进行 SSPI 调用时会去尝试加载 security.dll，而基于以上规则，组件会拿到你的程序目录下的版本，而不是系统目录中的版本。然而你的 security.dll 并不是系统中那个 security.dll 的替代品，只是一个恰好同名的、其它用途的 DLL 而已。
You would have had the same problem if you happened to name your DLL something like “DDRAW.DLL” and some component in your program tried to create a DirectDraw surface. “Security.dll” has the disadvantage that it has a simple name (which people are likely to want to name their own DLL), and its importance to proper system functionality is not well-known. (Whereas it would be more obvious that creating a DLL called “kernel32.dll” and putting it in your application directory is going to cause nothing but trouble.)
同样地，当你的 DLL 碰巧起了个名字叫 ddraw.dll 而你的程序中某个组件尝试创建 DirectDraw 绘图平面时，也会发生类似的问题。Security.dll 的劣势在于其名称太简明了（因而人们可能会把他们的 DLL 起一个相同的名字），并且其对系统运行的重要性并非广为人知。（然而更明显的是创建一个 DLL 起名叫 kernel32.dll 然后放进你的应用程序目录中，那么除了麻烦之外什么也不会产生。）
（译注：事实上 kernel32.dll 由于属于 KnownDLLs（注册表 HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\KnownDLLs），Windows 会仅在系统目录中查找在该列表中的DLL 而不遵守前述的规则，所以并不会发生这个问题，而 security.dll 之所以至今有这个问题，个人认为更多的还是由于首先微软在历史上搞砸了这个文件的命名，然后又替水平参差不齐的软件开发商背了一部分的黑锅）
远嚣 Comment