Messages

5926

Living Room / Re: Windows Secrets jumps shark

« on: February 14, 2009, 01:28 PM »

Giving them quarter is one thing, but it would take a complete do-over to forgive/forget/fix that one. Getting an acronym wrong is one thing (like DNS vs DSN), but getting the technology wrong when completely spelled out? Zoiks! That's a kick to the groin credibility dent for sure.

On a side note; I thought they fixed the VNC Man-in-the-Middle vulnerabilities a while ago.

5927

Developer's Corner / Re: MS Visual Studio Update Killed T-Clock x64

« on: February 08, 2009, 11:08 AM »

That's cool (I gota work for a living too)

I haven't had time to explore Eoin's input in depth either. Altho I did spend quite a bit of time (back when) tracing through the buffers to make sure I wasn't going to blow myself out of the water by adding:
#define _CRT_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE 1

to the main header file (Don't yell at me I know it's bad...). There were too many (200+) depricated API warnings when I compiled it to fine the (other) errors I was looking for ... So I put that part on the To-Do-Later list (mayhapps it is haunting me?).

I do appreciate your looking into it for me

Stoic Joker

5928

Developer's Corner / Re: MS Visual Studio Update Killed T-Clock x64

« on: February 07, 2009, 08:55 AM »

You guy's forgot me, didn't you.

5929

General Software Discussion / Re: Looking for simple backup software

« on: January 27, 2009, 11:09 PM »

One of our clients has a user that spends most of their time on the road which makes backing up to the server impossible. Given that heavily used laptop hard drives are grenade prone ... I set them up with an external hard drive and setup MS's (free) SyncToy as a scheduled task that runs every night.

So far it's worked fine.

@Carol - I agree but, if a traveling user blows a drive in Kanses there is no guarantee they'll be able to restore the NTbackup job file to a usable state (e.g. I don't want to spend that much time on the phone, do you?). The external drive will leave them functional enough to get the job done in a pinch.

5930

Living Room / Re: Going Into Frugality Mode -- What are your Tricks and Tips

« on: January 27, 2009, 10:54 PM »

• Cultivate cheap hobbies. Hunting, fishing, season tickets to Pro sports, motorcycles, etc. will eat you alive over the years.
  

-zridling (January 26, 2009, 10:24 PM)

Oh no, you don't get to pick on my hole-card. When gas here hit $4.25 a gallon I parked my truck which ran $60+ to fill (a week), and got my 1987 Harley FLHTP back on the road (Dress up job be damned). My scoot gets 54mpg and will still go 0-60 in under 3sec ... Try that in a Toyota Prius

Beyond that my job is my hobby (60-70+hr weeks), I have always done all of the general household/vehicle/etc. repairs (altho at 44 it's starting to take longer), and the wife and I haven't "Gone Out" much in years.

*Sigh*

These days my life is to boaring to be expensive. ...I did try to quit smoking awhile back, and was then told not to as a public safety issue (guess I was a bit tense that day...)

5931

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: Neobyte's Titan Backup v1.5 free full version over at TechSupportAlert

« on: January 27, 2009, 10:30 PM »

Most cool, Thank You!

5932

Developer's Corner / Re: MS Visual Studio Update Killed T-Clock x64

« on: January 26, 2009, 10:07 PM »

It should; currently the only available shell I can afford to keep crashing is a RDC to my Server 2003 x64 Domain Controller (They're both based on the same code branch).

5933

Developer's Corner / Re: MS Visual Studio Update Killed T-Clock x64

« on: January 25, 2009, 02:54 PM »

If the program was just straight crashing on load, I'd agree but it isn't. (Perhapps I described the issue badly). The program doesn't actually crash (x64 only) until it's forced out of memory (e.g. task manager-> end process tree) ...Which is actually kind of normal behavior for a shell hook being treated that way.

The program typically inserts the hook in the Windows Clock window erases the contents, and then inserts its own. Most of this is still happening. Only the last (inserts its own) part fails, which makes it impossible to get the (modified) clock's context menu and exit the program gracefully. If the clock is left to run (albeit clocklessly) the shell is perfectly fine, it's only the forced exit that "kills it".

Not to mention that the x86 version still runs fine which gives me the impression this is a 64bit only issue. Either way I need help in resolving this as I've not a clue how to even get started addressing it.

5934

Developer's Corner / MS Visual Studio Update Killed T-Clock x64

« on: January 25, 2009, 11:19 AM »

Okay bear with me on the topic title as I wasn't really sure what to call this issue. But here's a thumbnail sketch of how i got here.

About 2 years ago I created a 64bit version of TClock which Kazubon originally wrote back in 1995.

I had a catastrophic motherboard/disk array failure that resulted in the loss of most of my code library, including the as released code for T-Clock32 & T-Clock x64.

I work for a living so it has taken some time to (try and) put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

I still have an intact ("Working") copy of a pre-release build of the project that I'm trying to get back off the ground with ... But the 64bit code doesn't run correctly anymore (e.g. it crashes the shell).

Now... I'd been asuming that part of the project file was damaged, but the copy I'm working with was on my web server at the time of the crash and therefore not involved in the crash. The compiled binaries included with it run fine. problem is when I recompile the project, the binaries are slightly larger than they should be (were) and the crash the shell instead of displaying the clock.

My version of the code was originally developed on an XP x86 machine and tested on an XP x64 machine. Now I'm running Vista x64 with all servicepacks & updates, and it appears that therein lies the issue.

As a measure of last resort, I created an XP x86 VM, installed MSVS 2005(RTM), updated nothing, and compiled the code. It ran perfectly. ...Which now begs the question...Why?

So far I have run the following (compile & run) tests:
Vista x64 SP1 & MSVS2005 SP1 with all updates applied - Compiles fine (is 1KB larger) and crashes the shell
Vista x86 SP1 & MSVS2005 SP1 with all updates applied - Compiles fine (is 1KB larger) and crashes the shell
XP x86 SP2 & MSVS2005(RTM) with no updates - Compiles fine (is the "right" size) and Runs fine.
XP x86 SP2 & MSVS2005 SP1 with no other updates - Compiles fine (is 1KB larger) and crashes the shell

Notes:
All combination of the 32bit(x86) version of the project compile and run fine.
The TClock project consists of two files tClock.dll which contains the ShellHook code and always compiles to the same size, and Clock.exe which compiles to either 152KB (working code) or 153KB failing code.
Both T-Clock32 & T-Clock x64 use a single common source code pool that allows the project file (and some conditional #define statements) to define if it will be compiled as 32 or 64bit code.


So, does anyone have a clue why one of the changes in MSVS2005 ServicePack 1 would cause a 64bit shell hook to fail?
I'll gladly make the project file available to anyone willing to help.

Thank You,
Stoic Joker

5935

Living Room / Re: Secure deletion: a single overwrite will do it

« on: January 18, 2009, 03:40 PM »

The multi pass thing always did bother me as it just didn't make sense. As tightly packed as data is on modern drives the possibility of information being left over in the between space just never struck me as rational. Sure on the old magnetic tapes (Like 8-Tracks) there was plenty of room for that to happen but as tightly as they're packing data these days I doubt there is really between space left.

Thanks 40hz

5936

General Software Discussion / Re: I am looking for easy to set up, small memory print ,free smtp server

« on: January 17, 2009, 03:24 PM »

No. Spam filter black lists don't block domain names, they block IPs. One of the more common ones (i forget which) specifically blocks all of the dynamic IP ranges used by (most) ISPs. Dynamic DNS may (sort of) get you past the MX record requirement (reverse DNS and other filter checks look for it) when validating the sending server but future reliability will be next to nonexistant with that type of setup.

5937

Living Room / Re: Can a Linux man survive in Windows Land?

« on: January 17, 2009, 03:12 PM »

Stoic Joker: it's nice to see that he's giving it a fair shot, yes. And I don't feel that I'm "picking apart the details", I just find it's relevant noting that buggy drivers can bring down an OS whereas a usermode application won't... and I've been bitten by ACPI bugs (I assume ) on linux.

-f0dder (January 17, 2009, 10:00 AM)

lol I wasn't trying to imply you were wrong for targeting the details, I simply ment I wasn't going to jump into it also (it's too easy at that angle) as any Windows guy knows IRQ_NOT_LESS_OR_EQUAL is flakey driver issue.

I was just taking a stab at being positive about the article's intent.

P.S. Did you ever get my PM, or are you trying to ignor it?

5938

Living Room / Re: reporting group policies

« on: January 17, 2009, 02:37 PM »

Have you tried the (Resultant Set of Policy (RSoP) snap-in) graphical version of gpresult?

5939

Living Room / Re: 7.7.7.0 Browser Hijack Virus

« on: January 17, 2009, 02:11 PM »

Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware = Yes

When dealing with end user/client machines 90% of the time Spybot Search and Destroy works for me, the other 10% requires Malwarebytes.

...Okay, 5% of the time I just flatten the box... But Malwarebytes is an excellent utility which is also (highly) MS MVP recommended.

5940

General Software Discussion / Re: windows 7 beta available for free Jan 9 (!)

« on: January 17, 2009, 01:52 PM »

Well given the tone of this thread, I’ll have to sign in as one of the Idiot Virtual PC users … however I have ran upwards of 8 OS simultaneously on this box with it and experienced zero lag anywhere (so it works for me).

That being said, I already had a (alternately sourced) copy of Win7 Milestone2 (unsure of the build, but it was just before the new taskbar was added) running in a VM so I took a shot at upgrading it to see what would happen. The VM was only given a 20GB HDD and 512MB RAM to work with to make things nice and difficult…

The upgrade took 2 hours… and 5 reboots.

While the host machine has an extremely fast SATA RAID5 array, due to the enormous I/O load the upgrade caused this was the first time I have ever seen this machine lag. Processor usage never went over 50% and memory usage wasn’t even worth mentioning, but getting anything on or off the hard drive wasn’t gona happen soon … and waiting for things a clicked to happen (eek!) was new…

All went back to normal after the install finished. The VPC addons had to be reinstalled to get them working, and the (Win7 VM) sound didn’t work. The volume icon had a red X and the new Action Center had a (persistent)” Can I fix” it balloon message sticking out of it. Being in the habit of dismissing wizards, I told it to go ahead (and fail since it wouldn’t go away) and damn if it didn’t actually resolve the issue…without asking any silly questions.

While I haven’t had time to beat on it extensively, I did browse around looking for the basic move it, find the network, get on the internet, & open a bunch of dumb stuff to see if it will complain behavior. Surprisingly even with only 512MB RAM it never managed to violate my “If it takes more than 1 second to get a response, you suck” rule. Vista (RTM) failed that test (with 512MB RAM) on native hardware opening MS Word.

Granted the transparency doesn’t work and fancy graphics render badly in VPC, but I don’t give a damn if it’s pretty … I want it to work, and Windows7 (works) is looking like a very good thing.

5941

Living Room / Re: The last Mac vs. PC video?

« on: January 17, 2009, 10:43 AM »

I'm guessing here, but...
the moral of the story is it takes 3 Macs with automatic weapons to beat 1 PC in a fist fight...?

5942

General Software Discussion / Re: I am looking for easy to set up, small memory print ,free smtp server

« on: January 17, 2009, 10:18 AM »

I've been using the IIS POP3/SMTP combo included with Windows Server 2003 for years here in my home office with zero issues. I even virtualized it about 6 months ago.

however depending on your intended usage and configuration, you could run into major (reliability)issues with mail being refused/blocked by spam filters if you're on a residential connection (Even business connections can be a bear to get setup these days).

Can you give a bit more detail about what you are planning to do, and what was wrong/missing/bad about the options you've tried?

5943

Living Room / Re: Can a Linux man survive in Windows Land?

« on: January 17, 2009, 09:51 AM »

Meh, it's too easy to pick apart the details...and the auther is a Linux guy that is giving Windows a (second) shot. He's aloud to miss some stuff (Hell I do every time I try screwing with Linux).

He seems to be giving it a fair shot, and is actually happy with some of his findings. So it apears that the answer to the Title Question (so far...) is yes.

...Hopefully the story will continue as it should have an interesting ending.

5944

General Software Discussion / Re: Firefox not safe at all

« on: January 12, 2009, 02:59 PM »

Even being an IE fan, I'd have to call that "report" total BS. And if Symantec was doing a crappy software list...I can think of a few of their own products that should have been on the top of that list...

5945

Living Room / Re: Anonymous I-net surfing ?

« on: December 17, 2008, 10:58 PM »

Nothing social engineering, or a warrant couldn't fix...

I'll have to investigate this TOR thing when I have time.

5946

Living Room / Re: Windows software RAID

« on: December 17, 2008, 10:46 PM »

Cluster size has to do with formatting, not with dynamic disk partitions, really. Default cluster size is based on partition size though,

-f0dder (December 17, 2008, 05:36 PM)

I thought that went out the window when LBA showed up?

and I imagine dynamic disks are often used for huge partitions, so it would make sense having large cluster sizes there.

No actually they're for many small ones. With DD you're not limited to only 4 primary partitions (or the 3+extended with logical madness). It was designed to make segregating data easier so the stuff that constantly fragments can be isolated from the more static data, while allowing space to be reallocated with out complication. Resizing, merging, etc. can be done without reboots or 3rd party software with DD volumes...and you can create a virtually unlimited number of "partitions" (volumes) using folder mount points if you run out of (26...) drive letters. ...Not saying it's wise, just saying that's what it's for.

16kb clusters isn't that bad anyway, if you're doing a stripe (or just huge partitions) you really ought to have relatively large files and not a crapload of smaller ones

16KB is an atrocity no matter how you slice it. I've got a 500GB partition I use for backup storage on my server and it still gives only a 4KB size on disk for the hello file test.

...on 2nd thought, I may have been thinking about the oformat utility prep which was part of the early Win2k Fat to NTFS conversion process on the 4-16 point. ...or maybe it was FAT32 that did that *shrug* I'm over due for a vacation.

5947

General Software Discussion / Re: Outlook & 2GB PST limit

« on: December 17, 2008, 03:11 PM »

With an Exchange Server and IMAP, the whole PST filesize limit becomes moot.

-40hz (December 11, 2008, 03:55 PM)

Not Exactly... With Outlook's cached mode default (handy for laptops etc.) you're only going from .pst to .ost which can also go poof for misc. reasons. I've seen them in the 3-4GB range many times.

5948

Living Room / Re: Anonymous I-net surfing ?

« on: December 17, 2008, 02:57 PM »

Anonymous I-net surfing is a myth.

Every TCP/IP packet going from point A to point B contains the identifying IP address of both A & B, it's part of the protocol, there is no geting around it. Using a proxy only complicates things a bit...it doesn't make it impossible to identify you.

5949

Living Room / Re: Windows software RAID

« on: December 17, 2008, 02:51 PM »

Crap, I wish I hadn't been tied up with an emergency server migration last week, I could have saved you a lot of time.

Dynamic Disk is something I've played with extensively in the past. It's a little wasteful space-wise as the cluster allocation size tends to be high even if the drive is prepped right so I generally try to avoid it. But it is fun.

Type hello (or some other short single word) in a text file and then check the size on disk. with plain NTFS it will generally be 4KB. With DD if the drive isn't prepped properly it could be as high as 16KB.

5950

General Software Discussion / Re: Is it finally time to abandon IE?

« on: December 17, 2008, 02:25 PM »

As Josh said, people are quick to jump all over MS, but other parties have just as many problems. Perceptions aside, FF has had as many days vulnerable to critical exploits as IE (sorry, I don't have citation handy, but I have seen the actual numbers). Flash has had problems, and I believe that Adobe Acrobat Reader has had a critical exploit sitting unpatched for months.

-CWuestefeld (December 17, 2008, 12:37 PM)

Quite true, this is the first real IE Security Hole that has been found in a while. The other batch of nasties that have showed up as of late were specific to plug-ins that are used (to exploit) all browsers currently on the market. Flash (which sadly is Adobe these days) had its share of holes and between being way more powerful then it should be for a graphics plug-in, and being developed by a graphics company with no clue about security outside of piracy... is apt to be a PITA for some time to come.

Then there is Sun's Java with ALL the VMs memory preallocated as writable, Cripes! Who's bright Idea was that? I've hated it ever since there last fight with MS when they wanted everyone to have the "Full Benefit" of their complete package instead of the stripped down version MS was providing. The stripped down version was lighter, faster, and safer IMO. I refuse to install Java on anything these days, it's just too bloody risky.

I use IE, I like IE, I have no problem with FF ... But the last time the (Media Circus and so called) Security Mavens started chanting switch to FF it got clobbered with new exploits two months after the (Lemmings) public started to move to it.

All the (System Crippling baby-sitter) security suites in the world will not help the typical uninformed end user that will randomly click on anything that shows up on the screen just to get back to what they were doing. Reduced permissions (both simple & free) have however quickly proven effective as if the user doesn't have permission to break the machine...neither does the bug.

The only thing that will truly "Fix" the internet security issue is a change of attitude. People need to stop thing of their computers in the context of a TV or radio, and start thinking of it in the (exact) same context as their car.

Not paying attention on the Interstate highway, you die (or have a costly repair).

Not paying attention on the information highway, you die (think identity theft, etc.) or have a costly repair.

Same Same...It's not a friggin Radio...