Recent Posts

4851

Living Room / Re: Show us the View Outside Your Window

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 17, 2010, 01:01 PM »

Cool effects ... How'd you do that?

4852

Post New Requests Here / Re: IDEA: Wireless sensor

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 17, 2010, 07:02 AM »

Joker, I am not sure what your template is like but am willing to give it a whirl.

-techidave (December 16, 2010, 08:36 PM)

The template is just the source code for a roll-your-own Windows System Service. The compiled version in the download just beeps every X seconds (which isn't really useful in and of itself). But (it's a demo) the included source code is a complete (self installing & uninstalling) Windows service framework which is well commented to make it easy to modify for other purposes. Just replace the beep code and variables with the work & values needed, compile, and you're done.

Windows Service Template.rar (78.99 kB - downloaded 504 times.)

@4wd - IIRC, all the service will need is the interact with desktop right which is configurable (if need be) in Services.msc

4853

Finished Programs / Re: The Mouser Utility - Requested by App103

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 16, 2010, 03:00 PM »

Either that or if the user hovers over the context menu more than X seconds, it goes inactive, detaches and drifts (away) off the screen.

4854

Post New Requests Here / Re: IDEA: Wireless sensor

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 16, 2010, 02:53 PM »

I may not be following you SJ, but what I need is something that the student can see on the laptop.

-techidave (December 16, 2010, 08:33 AM)

Understood, I was speaking more to the how than the what. Actually it should be a service that flags the user that the connection is active and then shut itself down to avoid unnecessary resource usage. <But I'm wandering off my own point>

Here is the thing, with network utilities the tempting easy out it to shoot for (/with) ping, but... It ain't actually that easy. If you use the default MS .dll based ping the fastest you can reliably recover between pings (to a dead connection) is about 30 seconds. If you want really fast ping recovery times (like 5 sec or less) you will need to use raw socket ICMP so you can customize the socket to respond (live/die/connect/close) quickly.

This is why I am/was suggesting a way around that using a method of monitoring the LM adapter for a default gateway of something other than blank or 0.0.0.0 and then verifying that it is up/active with an ARP test. These can both be done very fast without causing other issues like hung sockets, desktop handle (leaks/) exaustion, or logs full of half open socket errors.

It would also make it possible to be used universally as the target would not need to be hard coded using this method as it is just iterating through the local adapters looking for one with an active gateway. Then it gives the go-ahead and shuts down.

Honestly I wish I had time to jump in on this - I love doing this kind of stuff. I've got a working Windows Service template project in C++ for MSVS2k5 ... If it'll help let me know I'd be happy to post it when I get home. Hell its even includes self install & uninstall functions iirc.

4855

Post New Requests Here / Re: IDEA: Wireless sensor

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 16, 2010, 08:30 AM »

not sure what your little program means but one school has about 60 laptops that this would need to be done with.

-techidave (December 16, 2010, 07:33 AM)

It's just a snippet of code for doing an APR check on/for a given IP address. I thought it might help skwire if he was inclined to go that route for the app. SendARP(...) is a standard call but it was incredibly hard to find back when I went looking for a method of getting MAC addresses for Page Countster.

4856

Post New Requests Here / Re: IDEA: Wireless sensor

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 16, 2010, 07:31 AM »

Pinging might get blocked by an over zealous firewall. But if the adapters were scanned for a DGW, the DGW could then be ARP'ed. If the ARP call came back with a valid result connected = true.

Firewalls won't affect ARP, and nothing needs to be hardcodded so it'll work anywhere.


Here's a ARP call/test in C++ It took me weeks to figure this out (because everything I Googled said it couldn't be done):

Code: C++ [Select]

1. //======================================================================================================
2. //======================================================================== Hay MAC, WTFs Your Address...?
3. bool GetMACAddress(char *szIPAddr, char *szMAC) { //=====================================================
4.     ULONG   DestMAC[2],ulLen = 6;
5.         LPBYTE  lpBuff;
6.  
7.   memset(DestMAC, 0xff, sizeof (DestMAC));
8.   if(SendARP(inet_addr(szIPAddr), 0, DestMAC, &ulLen) == NO_ERROR) {
9.           lpBuff = (LPBYTE)DestMAC; // Now Convert - Address to a String.
10.          StringCbPrintf(szMAC, GEN_BUFF, "%02X:%02X:%02X:%02X:%02X:%02X",
11.                                         lpBuff[0], lpBuff[1], lpBuff[2], lpBuff[3], lpBuff[4], lpBuff[5]);
12.    return TRUE;
13.   }
14.   // <-- IF False, Then the Target is on a Different Subnet and is therefore out of (ARP Required)
15.   StringCbCopy(szMAC, GEN_BUFF, "Not in ARP Table"); // <------------- Broadcast Range ... Say So!
16.   // <------------------------- Note: This Was Added as Part of Build 88 to v1.0.0 <--++++---<<<<<
17.  return FALSE;
18. }

4857

Finished Programs / Re: The Mouser Utility - Requested by App103

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 15, 2010, 06:55 PM »

I may expand on this project and have it do something interesting in the future...

-Stephen66515 (December 15, 2010, 06:18 PM)

How about something like Esheep, but with a cat that roams around the desktop totally ignoring the user?

4858

Finished Programs / Re: The Mouser Utility - Requested by App103

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 15, 2010, 06:49 PM »

Could it be modded to answer to the name 'Peggy' by any chance? 

-40hz (December 15, 2010, 06:40 PM)

...It's happy time...

I can never decide if I should laugh or cringe when I see those commercials.

4859

Finished Programs / Re: IDEA. Create folder icon within folders INI

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 15, 2010, 07:11 AM »

Windows XP also provides a way to do this natively.  You can right-click the folder, choose Properties and use the Customize tab.

-skwire (December 14, 2010, 08:39 AM)

Along those lines if you put a folder.jpg file (usually a hidden file) in any folder it will show that pic on the folder in explorer (tile view works best for this). I used to do this in my music folder so the folders showed the album covers for quicker browsing. This still works in Vista/7 but not as well (but I still do it).

4860

Living Room / Re: Can we compare file transfer protocols?

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 15, 2010, 06:55 AM »

My ideal goal, once again, is to somehow have a drive or folder that I can access from ANYWHERE as a drive or folder.

-superboyac (December 14, 2010, 07:53 PM)

An FTP server can be added (as a location) to Network Places and it just appears/acts like a normal folder. This has been an option in windows since the 9x days. Mind you it's not always real smooth, but it seems awful close to what you're after (hit remote folder X from anywhere).

In XP and below it appears as the Add Network Place menu option. - I'm not sure about Vista - In 7 it appears as a "Connect to a Web site..." link at the bottom of the Map Network Drive dialog.

4861

Living Room / Re: I wish I'd had this when I was learning physics

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 14, 2010, 09:26 AM »

Sounds like some fun reading, thanks.

4862

Living Room / Re: DDOS Ethics

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 13, 2010, 06:12 PM »

Gotta fix the quote tags on that last one man, I'm gonna have a hell of a time trying to stitch this back together.

These aren't drunken ramblings, they are talks between colleagues in order to spread opinions and snap analyses, and weren't spread publicly.

-wraith808

It's an analogy, not a direct reference. The point being if you don't want to risk being quoted on something, don't say it.

In the interest of full disclosure all internal correspondence are to be stored for a period of time just in case they need to be reviewed by a committee of unknown people. So, tossing derogatory comments about foreign dignitaries around (which was "the rub" according to the main stream news reports) in that atmosphere is really pretty dumb ... As there is no actual expectation-of-privacy.

-Stoic Joker (December 12, 2010, 12:58 PM)

I understand the incorrect analogy (), it's just that it's incorrect.

-wraith808 (December 13, 2010, 08:47 AM)

Just because you missed the connection doesn't mean it's not there.

Drunken ramblings tend to be a bit too honest (tactless) - Which the commentary was (according to the story). And they tend to be a bit too sure of their surroundings (as in the-walls-have-ears) - Expectation of privacy being a foolish notion with certain types of information. Like the type of information that may, at some time, need to be read aloud in some committee hearing. Solely because it was available-to-be-read because it was stored electronically, according to policy, for a small eternity.

Never make a record of something that you can't destroy if the situation calls for it.

Now back in the Good Ol' Days, before idiots were allowed to use computers, any truly sensitive information dealing with a confidential source that was written down used a code name for the purpose of protecting said sources identity (Like Deep-Throat from Watergate - What was his real name?) ... Just in case it got found or confiscated.

The secrets game is just that, a game. And a damn dangerous one at that. It's not a bunch of frumpy old women at a coffee clutch who have to state their sources to lend credence to their tales of gossip. Once you decide to be a source you become a commodity pawn in a large game where you could easily be traded for another more tantalizing piece of information. Or you could just trust the wrong person who doesn't handle your identity in an appropriate fashion and blabs in an indiscreet manner. There is no guarantee of privacy on a corporate network. There are measures in place, there are policies, there are all the best of intentions ... But There Are NO Guarantees.


Now as far as what if anything was gained from said leakage... I've not a clue. It could be nothing, it could be the staff in DC learn that loose lips sink ships in glass houses.



@40Hz - Love the cartoon!

4863

Living Room / Re: Crime pays - and our governments love it.

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 13, 2010, 03:07 PM »

More disturbing IMO is the list of whom received money from the financial bail out - like McDonald's, Harley Davidson, Verizon, GE...

-J-Mac (December 13, 2010, 01:44 PM)

Harley Davidson isn't disturbing, it's an American institution (right up there with Chevy, Ford, & Smith & Wesson) - Now if Yamaha got bail out money that would be disturbing. 

4864

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: The BitsDuJour Bundle

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 13, 2010, 11:34 AM »

The Screen Calipers are extreemly handy for all sorts of design stuff. I've been using them for years.

4865

Living Room / Re: Crime pays - and our governments love it.

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 13, 2010, 06:46 AM »

Are there any lip readers that can tell us what was being whispered in her ear during that tap dance?

4866

Living Room / Re: DDOS Ethics

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 12, 2010, 03:20 PM »

I also wouldn't be surprised if several of the principles involved eventually wound up: being arrested and convicted on some serious but unrelated criminal charge; overdosing on drugs or alcohol; committing suicide; or running their cars off deserted roads with no witnesses should they continue to embarass national governments after this.

-40hz (December 12, 2010, 01:15 PM)

History is rather full of strange (but timely for some) accidents isn't it.

4867

Living Room / Re: DDOS Ethics

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 12, 2010, 12:58 PM »

But in these cases, the information is of questionable use, while causing real concern about diplomatic ties and future effectiveness.  I think it's pretty dangerous, personally.

-wraith808 (December 09, 2010, 11:08 AM)

Really? Why? Because some self important blow hard got caught popping off in an internal memo about a foreign dignitary? How about in the interest of professionalism (which isn't too much to expect given what they're paid...) they just kept the snide comments to themselves instead of documenting them on government servers where they're supposed to be archived forever?

It is absolutely no different then two IT pros leaving a location and (after accidentally butt-dialing said client) running the client into the ground. End result? somebody looses a client, and/or gets fired. Quite simple really, don't say anything that you're not willing to stand behind.

...This is the core premise behind why drunken ramblings are bad.

-Stoic Joker (December 09, 2010, 05:54 PM)

These aren't drunken ramblings, they are talks between colleagues in order to spread opinions and snap analyses, and weren't spread publicly.

-wraith808 (December 10, 2010, 08:22 AM)

It's an analogy, not a direct reference. The point being if you don't want to risk being quoted on something, don't say it.

In the interest of full disclosure all internal correspondence are to be stored for a period of time just in case they need to be reviewed by a committee of unknown people. So, tossing derogatory comments about foreign dignitaries around (which was "the rub" according to the main stream news reports) in that atmosphere is really pretty dumb ... As there is no actual expectation-of-privacy.

Sure Wikileaks short-stroked this to a much larger crowd than anticipated, but hay... Once again... For a group of people that are paid specifically for their ability to brilliantly articulate delicate subjects in a tactful manner... There almost just had to be another way of phrasing what ever it is that they said that would have been just as clear yet (some how) less abrasive ... Don't Ya think?

You are going to play the morality/ethics card for credit card companies and banks? Huge fortunes built on corpses and cocaine that haven't paid a dime in taxes because they pride themselves on tax (evasion) "loop-holes" that typically involve storing (hiding) money in other countries.

-Stoic Joker (December 09, 2010, 05:54 PM)

That's such absurd hyperbole that I won't bother to respond.

-CWuestefeld (December 10, 2010, 10:05 AM)

Funny really, some folks seem to understand that part quite well. antidisestablishmentarianism much?

Aside from the morality argument, you haven't addressed my point about the attacks being bad tactics (because they may give incentives for other companies to stay away).

You attempted to address the point about bad strategy:

Do you really think the government needs an incentive to strip away additional rights and freedoms?

-Stoic Joker (December 09, 2010, 05:54 PM)

But this isn't quite right. Of course they don't need any incentive. What they do need is an excuse, some rationalization that they can claim is the reason they need to do this. The fact that millions of dollars in revenue were lost because some of our most important commercial institutions were crippled by terrorists -- and that this happened during the Christmas shopping season, so mommy couldn't buy that doll for little Suzy -- proves that the government is needed to protect the citizens. The DDoS attacks give that fig leaf of rationalization (even though we both know there's nothing they could do about it anyway), and this is the opposite of what (I assume) the Anonymous folks want.

-CWuestefeld (December 10, 2010, 10:05 AM)

Keep your head down. Don't rock the boat. Don't make waves. Do what you're told. These are all popular phrases quipped by people that wish to keep individuality to a minimum so the line remains toed and the status quo enforced. Strangely nothing great has ever been accomplished this way.

Incentive vs. excuse, semantics - opposite sides of the same coin. Both words work perfectly in my sentence above. The point is the government gets what the government wants because it can and will spin-doctor anything into anything for the purpose of attaining a goal regardless of any (inconvenient) facts that may stand in the way. Much like the spaceship weather balloon that made Roswell New Mexico so popular back in the 40s. The only viable roadblock is to get enough people interested in what all the hub-bub is about that they stop and look into what is actually going on instead of just reflexively buying the party line. Then and only then, can you can get a grass-roots movement going that will have a chance of stopping the hammer from falling.

Now as far as tactics go. Is it considered to be a proper and acceptable tactic to try and silence ones opponent by filling all of the available space for communication with senseless chatter solely for the purpose of preventing them from stating their business in a timely fashion, even if this denies them of their right to a proper say? The answer to this - according to the rules of parliamentary procedure - is simply, yes. It's called a filibuster.

If the US government goes after this guy as a terrorist, for tattling on the US government it will most likely blowup in their faces by lending credence to his claims that they are indeed lying and hiding behind half-truths.

4868

Official Announcements / Re: DonationCoder.com New Server Migration Coming Today (sunday 12/12/10)

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 12, 2010, 11:24 AM »

Ah virtual servers! "Nothing is real. And nothing to get hung about."

-40hz (December 12, 2010, 08:48 AM)

A Beatles quote? The last thing we need now is buggs ... You'll get us in a Strawberry (fields) jam.

 

4869

T-Clock / Re: T-Clock 2010 (beta - download)

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 12, 2010, 09:27 AM »

I honestly don't recall ever seeing that option...but I like it. It's possible it appeared in a different code branch than the one I'm on...(I don't know)...I'd hate to think after all this time I managed to miss something like that ... But stranger things have happened.

The functionality certainly was not intentionally removed. If you can let me know which build/version/authors work you saw this in I'll see what I can do about getting it in (or back in) to T-Clock's feature set.

Development has been stalled for a bit as office projects have had me pinned down but I hope to get it back on-track soon.

4870

Living Room / Re: how many posts would one have if ...

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 10, 2010, 07:23 AM »

Ah! ...That, yes (duh!)...

thanks

4871

Living Room / Re: how many posts would one have if ...

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 10, 2010, 06:55 AM »

What is this chat of which you speak? ...I know not of its existence.

4872

Living Room / Re: DDOS Ethics

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 09, 2010, 05:54 PM »

But in these cases, the information is of questionable use, while causing real concern about diplomatic ties and future effectiveness.  I think it's pretty dangerous, personally.

-wraith808 (December 09, 2010, 11:08 AM)

Really? Why? Because some self important blow hard got caught popping off in an internal memo about a foreign dignitary? How about in the interest of professionalism (which isn't too much to expect given what they're paid...) they just kept the snide comments to themselves instead of documenting them on government servers where they're supposed to be archived forever?

It is absolutely no different then two IT pros leaving a location and (after accidentally butt-dialing said client) running the client into the ground. End result? somebody looses a client, and/or gets fired. Quite simple really, don't say anything that you're not willing to stand behind.

...This is the core premise behind why drunken ramblings are bad.

Aside from whether the WikiLeaks release was itself moral...

For a private entity to decide they don't want to do business with someone is entirely within their rights. It is not a censorship question. Quite the opposite: the 1st Amendment guarantees us the right to decide with whom we want to associate. So forcing, e.g., PayPal or Amazon, to do business with WikiLeaks is morally wrong.

-CWuestefeld (December 09, 2010, 11:42 AM)

Seriously? You are going to play the morality/ethics card for credit card companies and banks? Huge fortunes built on corpses and cocaine that haven't paid a dime in taxes because they pride themselves on tax (evasion) "loop-holes" that typically involve storing (hiding) money in other countries. Swell bunch of real down-to-earth folk they are...

The DDoS attacks are wrong both morally, practically, and strategically.

-CWuestefeld (December 09, 2010, 11:42 AM)

...And by that measure so was the Boston tea party back in the 1700s ... But some folk still do thing that was a pretty good idea.

They are wrong as a larger strategic matter because they're pushing the US government's hand over network security. We just may see demands that traffic be monitored by Cyber Command (NSA) so that attacks can be traced if not prevented.

-CWuestefeld (December 09, 2010, 11:42 AM)

Do you really think the government needs an incentive to strip away additional rights and freedoms? The DoH (and friends) have been doing a fine job (waving the "terrorist" boogieman) of turning the US into a police state on their own. They have no need of this silly putz and his website to crack down on anything. Especially when there is zero resistance to the crack down because sheeple really are dumb enough to believe the RIAA's (gov approved) claims that illegal music downloads support terrorism.

The guy is Innocent until proven guilty ... and until that happens, nobody is supposed to be persecuting/prosecuting him - That's vigilantism - Which I've heard is bad.


@40Hz - I love the elegantly simple street rules test ... Now that's how to cut to the chase.

4873

Post New Requests Here / Re: 64 bit version of eject cd and close cd

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 09, 2010, 07:25 AM »

The code 39 issue is typically caused by a bad burning software uninstall (which is strangely common).

Opening and closing the tray is a straight API call that doesn't require adding/removing/changing anything. And a 32-bit utility for that should work just fine on a 64-bit machine.

There's a 32-bit utility for that on my website that I wrote years ago, it's not very polished but it works fine on my 64-bit machine. So it seems unlikely (impossible really) that Skrommel's utilities would cause that type of issue.

4874

Living Room / Re: I figured something out about Apple's device restrictions: file management.

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 09, 2010, 07:06 AM »

And on a Mac all roads lead no where and are unidirectional ... and that's the "wave-of-the-FUture".

-Stoic Joker (December 08, 2010, 06:00 PM)

Freudian typo slip?

-4wd (December 09, 2010, 01:43 AM)

Actually it did start as a typo, and then I realized it was the most perfect flaw to express my sentiments.

after reading all of the above, i can say, once again - i hate Apple even more now. in these cold winters days, this burning hatred is keeping me warm inside. thank you.

-nudone (December 09, 2010, 05:00 AM)

Damn Straight! JavaJones nailed it... Hell if I wasn't at work, I'd be standing up and cheering!

4875

Living Room / Re: DDOS Ethics

« Last post by Stoic Joker on December 09, 2010, 06:54 AM »

As of late I've been on a bit of a slow boil with the big-brother-is-watching direction the government has been taking. Sure a little corruption is necessary (and good) for any system to truly run smoothly. But the good-Ol'Boy-network got way out of hand a long time ago. Now they want to cry the blues because somebody snitched on their too-cool-to-get-busted asses (Whaaa) too bad ... They wouldn't have had anything to hide if they were actually doing their jobs in the first place.

I'm rooting for Justin, Wikileaks, and freedom of speech.

-Renegade (December 09, 2010, 05:59 AM)

Me too. Because Spin Doctoring don't work worth a damn when everybody has actual facts. The Gov needs a Time-Out, so they can sit in the corner and think (real hard) about who they work for.