Respectfully, kanmani shanmugam, can you offer evidence of this, as the following quote from you seems at first blush to be patently false.
"Unfortunately, you’ll find more unsigned than signed drivers on the market right now."
At least offer up three examples of hardware that cannot work without disabling Driver Signing, and the version of Windows used. Perhaps this would be of assistance to find properly signed drivers from official channels. 
You may be correct, yet you should offer some proof, not just blanket statements which could mislead people.
"As with any other system modification and administration tool, system instability, failure or unresponsiveness may be encountered when using Atsiv - so use is at the user's own risk."
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/07/30 … iver_tool/
It is good that you do acknowledge this.
"Of course, you’re giving up a little extra reliability and security to use this feature — at least in theory."
Another note; your link to Atsiv comes up "404 Not Found" on my system AND the link to article you mentioned on "avantgo.computerworld.com.au" reveals an all-but blank page!
Edit: I finally got through to Linchpinlabs site you linked to above. It says that Atsiv was declared to be malware by MS & it's digital signature was revoked on August 3, 2007.
Here is some more food for thought concerning drivers, driver signing, & malware:
Quote from Cisco's Cyber Risk Report, July 19–25, 2010
"Microsoft recently collaborated with Verisign to revoke certificates issued to Realtek and JMicron, two hardware companies whose private keys for their driver-signing signatures were apparently compromised. These companies' signatures were used to sign malicious drivers distributed as part of the Stuxnet malware that has recently targeted SCADA systems via USB drives. Realtek and JMicron were issued new certificates to sign future drivers."
...
"IntelliShield Analysis: Some reports, which appear to originate with Sophos' Mike Wood, indicate that signed drivers whose certificates have been revoked will continue to function if they were signed prior to the revocation date. Only drivers signed with a revoked certificate after the revocation date will not load. If this is true, then this action by Microsoft and Verisign will apparently only prevent the malware distributors from further signing additional malware with Realtek and JMicron's compromised private keys. If Wood and others are not correct, then organizations using Realtek and JMicron hardware with signed drivers may soon notice that their hardware is not functioning as expected. "
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/security … -25.html#4
Additional info here --> http://www.securelist.com/en/blog/2236/ … _questions
& here, all from July, 2010 --> http://blogs.cisco.com/security/stuxnet … _behavior/
]"
