jaclaz

Well, I have used for a few years a Psion 3c with a modem, and also connected to an Ericsson phone that worked as GSM modem (and I liked it ), what gives? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psion_Series_3#Psion_Series_3c As a matter of facts it was a nice, handy, little tool. jaclaz

Since cables are (hopefully) excluded, next thing I would check (besides the event logs) would be three things; the order/exact way the drives are connected to the motherboard the PSU the effectiveness of grounding (since it is a new machine it is possible that some screws have not been tightened properly or that they do not make contact properly)In my experience you never know the kind of troubles a defective PSU can cause. (or a ground loop/ineffective ground) Then I would try - for a reasonable stretch of time - the thingy with one of the drives (one by one) disconnected. But really, often the logs may provide some hint. jaclaz

Well, the technology dates back to at least NT 3.5 (or possibly even 3.1), so you must have lived on another planet or you were so d@mn lucky to never had an issue (possibly hardware related) in all these years :. Seriously, in theory a number of "standard" actions of the OS are logged in one of the three "base" event logs by default. Besides those "standard" loggings (like boot and shutdown) each and any error or warning - of any kind - that the OS *somehow* senses should be logged there. What you should do (at least this is what I do normally) is to save the current events log to a backup file (for future use) and delete/clear all of them logs. Then restart the machine (the restart is not strictly needed, but is useful to provide a timestamp of first boot with the new, empty event logs) and use the machine normally until one of those "disk blackouts" (or whatever) occurs, then wait until the disk become accessible again, and then have a look at the logs. The last few events logged are likely to be related to the issue and may give a hint (usually no more than a hint but still a hint is better than nothing) about the kind of error that happened (if the OS sensed it). You might want to use a tool like the excellent Nirsoft one: http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/my_event_viewer.html to convert the data in a more suitable format (and then use a spreadsheet or a similar software) to list/order etc. the events. jaclaz

Oww, come on : http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/08/researchers-say-tor-targeted-malware-phoned-home-to-nsa/ Hmmm. A personal e-mail sent to the researcher has mysteriously leaked : jaclaz

You joking? Or unfortunate accident broke your google ? http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/open-event-viewer http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/what-information-appears-in-event-logs-event-viewer http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/226084-event-viewer-open-use-windows-7-a.html jaclaz

What is the various event logs? jaclaz

Not really, it does not work on your specific machine and/or OS, which is another thing. Why do I have this "deja-vu" feeling? http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/162523-winxp-sp10a-czech-setupapidll-hack/ http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/162427-editing-setupapidll-file-win2k-sp4-czech/ The suggestion was to study the tool, and this is normally done (JFYI): in a VM (and NOT on your "main" system)using a more common version of Windows, possibly an "untouched" base VM image, like the ones you can get from MS for testing purposesBTW it seems that the SP 1.0a Czech version of XP, as well at the Czech Version of Windows 2000 and more losely *anything* you run is not compatible with what the rest of the world uses successfully, while 2 out of 2 is ALREADY a preoccupying 100% of failure, 3 out of 3 is 50% worse than that.... The idea (and suggestion) was (and still is) a perfectly good one , your practical implementation of it maybe not so good . jaclaz

No. The US sticker would be either of: "It is an offence under Federal law to use this toilet model as a toilet." or: "The Surgeon General has determined that the use of this novelty item as a toilet may not be compliant with section §118.24 of the Safety and Health Code" http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/158485-international-translations-of-common-signs/ jaclaz P.S.: As a side note (and to keep the post not too much Off Topic) see the actual "Release note" of the newish "IE test VM's" here: http://www.modern.ie/en-us/virtualization-tools#downloads https://modernievirt.blob.core.windows.net/vhd/virtualmachine_instructions_2013-07-22.pdf At least TWO Bachelor of Laws (of which at least one at Harvard) are needed to have even a faint idea of what actual License clause apply to what and which terms are conflicting (and are thus superseded).

Would a tool called "FileOpenPatcher" be of use? http://www.netcult.ch/elmue/ElmueSoft-en.htm (or possibly be useful to study waht exactly it does ) jaclaz

Excel 2010 ? I thought you were about Office 2013 (and a broken one ) . This is related to Excel 2013: http://peltiertech.com/WordPress/intelligent-excel-2013-xy-charts/ But the principles are the same. A series suitable for an XY "scatter" chart needs to be made out of both X and Y values. Normally you have a "same" interval for the X values and one interval of Y values for each series, but nothing prevents you for having "single" X and Y intervals for each one of the series. jaclaz

OK: http://internetsiao.com/mini-remote-controlled-moving-toilet-bowl/ http://www.fastcompany.com/3007149/fast-feed/japanese-company-unveils-remote-controlled-toilet Let's say that I wouldn't consider "good taste" among the qualities of some Japanese toy/gadget designers. jaclaz

@mike13 There are several "methods" through which a "recovery partition" can be implemented. The most common one is a "disk image"->basically a "snapshot" is taken in factory on a "given machine", and when you initiate the recovery the whole disk is overwritten with the content of the image. If this is the case, there is no need to partition, format or wipe, once the recovery image has been restored the whole disk is EXACTLY like it was at the time the PC was first switched on the first time. In some cases the recovery partition may instead contain a sort of "unattended install", i.e. something that once run will re-install without user intervention the OS. If this is the case every file that is part of the OS install will be overwritten by the "original", but files belonging to anything else may be left on the hard disk. In some (few cases) the user can even choose to perform the first (what -X- defined "destructive") or the latter (what -X- defined as "non-destructive"). There may be even "intermediate" approaches, just as an example a "smart" sort of installer that only re-formats the system volume if the filesystem is found to be invalid (but leaves it "as is" if CHKDSK or the like finds not any error) or something that (say) leaves data in the "C:\Documents and settings\<username>" (or whatever "user" folder) untouched. Without knowing the make/model of the actual PC or - better - the contents of the "recovery partition" it is hard to say which "type" of recovery the manufacturer has implemented and thus the effects it produces. jaclaz

¡ʇı llɐʇsuı puɐ ʇuoɟ pǝʇɹǝʌuı uɐ ʎnq oslɐ plnoɥs ǝɥs/ǝɥ ʍoɥ ɹǝqɯǝɯǝɹ jaclaz

Use an "F6 floppy" No it doesn't need anymore to be a floppy, it can well be a USB stick - or a second cd/dvd: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/272320-32-loading-drivers-installing-windows and no, you do not actually press F6 anymore , you click on "Load Driver" at the screen where you choose the destination drive for the install. BUT, the issue here may be a misleading error, see: http://en.kioskea.net/forum/affich-185843-windows-7-install-cannot-find-dvd-driver It seems like the Windows 7 built-in drivers can have some issues (on particular motherboard) and still the WIndows 7 pretends to have the right drivers and that the (right) ones you provide are "not compatible". jaclaz

There is nothing bad in a "peer-to-peer" forum, as a matter of fact all forums - exception made for those created to support a specific product/tool where it may happen that someone actually officially "in the knows" posts answers/advices - are peer-to-peer, the issue may be - as always - with the actual peers taking part to the discussion topics . jaclaz

Hello . Why do you think that at the beginning of each forum there are a few topics "pinned"? Have you checked the "pinned" topics in this forum (yes the same where you started this thread)?: http://www.msfn.org/board/forum/167-unattended-windows-7server-2008r2/ Would tools like: 7Customizer http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/139077-7customizer-a-windows-7-customization-and-deployment-tool/ RT Seven Lite http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/142382-rt-seven-lite-rc-build-170-and-beta-build-260/ do nicely? Hint: Yes jaclaz

Not only it makes NO sense whatsoever to wipe a hard disk (if not in the single case where you are going to sell or dispose of the hard disk, for privacy reasons), it will take HOURS and it will needlessly stress a hard disk, and generate a lot of heat that, particularly in the case of a laptop, may be complex to dissipate/reduce properly. In any case "Wipe Drive Pro" (not that product particularly, that one like any of the tens of senselessly complex software solutions) is, more than "fluff", "pure Bull§hit™" (and you actually pay money for it ). There is NO NEED whatever for "military grade", "several passes", "passes with random data" and all the FUD that has been spread around since the (in)famous Peter Guttmann's paper (and it's worldwide misinterpretation). JFYI: http://www.forensicfocus.com/Forums/viewtopic/t=10808/ If you really-really want to ( unneededly ) "wipe" that disk, apply a single pass of 00's to the actual volume or \\.\LogicalDrive (i.e. format the volume under Vista or later WITHOUT the /q switch) and be done with it. jaclaz

Here IMHO it is not about "radical" positions (which are legitimate, just as opinions are) it is about opinions expressed as apodictical statements or - if you prefer - represented as the one and only truth (and about the assumption that someone that doesn't agree with you necessarily must be less educated, less knowledgeable and /or downright dumber than you are) The nice .pdf paper that I "revived" in order to help enzx bring forward the discussion is made along a three points template: here is what has been available till nowhere is what we have added to increase mitigationhere is why the steps we took should be effective.As said it is clear, simple (besides the nice graphics) but is saying nowhere that the result is working/effective and particularly it does not say how much that is effective (it does say how good are the good MS guys and to which extent and how hard they tried to add these mitigation factors, but little more than that). It simply cannot do that since it was published BEFORE Windows 8 was even released. A quantification is made in the (cited) statement by Chris Hallum, which - obvioulsy - is "commercial" fluff. If we are going to say that some "mitigation factors" were added: to Windows Vista when compared to Windows XPto Windows 7 when compared to Windows Vista to Windows 8 when compared to Windows 7we do not need to discuss the matter, as it is obvious. If we are going to say that an OS is more secure than another (or that one is less secure than another) we need some proof that besides and beyond theory, it is actually so. I will risk an electrical comparison, by means of three nice pictures (shamelessly taken from http://www.aspeterpan.com/survival/elett106.htm ): The circuit in last image is safer (in theory) because each plug is protected by a dedicated thermal magnetic breaker (of suitable class) AND the line is protected "as a whole" by the 25 A breaker. BUT some will argue that the circuit in the first image (with only one 16 A breaker) is (besides much cheaper) actually safer because if *anything* below the breaker "hits" 16 A, mains will be cut off, whilst in the last one if *anything* below the main breaker but above the various plug breakers hits 16 A mains will be not cut off (until it hits 25A of course). The debate is still open since what? 20 years? On the opportunity of making "few lines" with protection at the end of them or "many lines" with protection at the start of them. jaclaz

Maybe you could boot from a PE of some kind, and attempt the "full scan" on the "offline" filesystem/system (that could be able to remove the "bigger part"). Then boot "normally" and perform only a scan of Registry, RAM and "running files". I would personally - next thing - have a run with Combofix: http://www.combofix.org/ as it is usually oine fo the most effective tools for "bad things" that are "live". jaclaz

But he did describe where the password was: And he also reported how the Nirsoft tool "dialuppass" did reveal the password. Hence an educated guess would have been that it was a "dial up password dialog" or "connection dialog". A quick check on the page of the tool used successfully would have revealed: http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/dialupass2.html I do trust that piece of info, particularly since it is coming from someone that wrote a tool that can (and actually did in the specific case) reveal the password. My bad I should have specified It seemed to me like your otherwise interesting post might unwantingly induce the OP to go on a "wild goose chase", that password (besides being possibly also on the DSL modem) is definitely on the PC's hard disk (*somewhere*), and the OP expressed the wish to look for it there. Sorry for the misunderstanding. jaclaz

A few not-so-random (and I believe also not-so-known) articles more or less connected to the NSA, Big Brother, power grids, world domination and stuff: http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/06/university-maryland-edward-snowden-nsa http://gawker.com/5686847/the-national-security-agency-trains-its-superspies-at-shady-diploma-mills http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/world/asia/21grid.html (if there is no escape from technology, maybe there is still hope because of the inadequacy of those that have access to that technology) Now, really OT, some insecurity news: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/jul/26/scientist-banned-revealing-codes-cars http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2285482/luxury-car-hacking-findings-blocked-by-high-court Besides the (nice) work by Mr. Flavio Garcia and paper's co-authors Roel Verdult and Josep Balasch, the interesting part is the effectiveness of the (London) high court injunction in preventing the information to be available. I would say a great success of the Volkswagen Group legal team: jaclaz

Check the meaning of "integrate" (and compare it with "install" . Seriously , if the Windows Update service finds "about ten updates" still needed, it would logically mean that "all updates BUT those ten" went through and were integrated successfully. Most integrated updates will NOT be listed in "Installed programs" for the simple reason that they cannot be UNinstalled (as they were integrated), but a few may show up as well (since, even if integrated, they can be uninstalled). jaclaz

Not really. Related papers are what you may need to provide, together with your clear explanation on how the relevant parts of them apply to the topic at hand. It is kinda difficult for us hairy reasoners to understand how a paper stating how ASLR implementation on a Linux HTTP Server is to be considered ineffective as a form of increased security leads to attribute to the lack of it on a XP a decrease in it's security . Carpenter's example: Formal statement by the Carpenters' Guild Official Spokesperson (press release): jaclaz P.S.: I really-really shouldn't do this , but this Blackhat presentation paper: http://media.blackhat.com/bh-us-12/Briefings/M_Miller/BH_US_12_Miller_Exploit_Mitigation_Slides.pdf represents something that most members will be able to understand and supports your opinion , though the source is not as "independent" as it might be required by many MSFN members . The paper is simple, clear, has nice graphics (that even those that cannot read will surely appreciate) and contains most of the points you previously addressed (in what I consider vague and smart-alecky manners).

Well, it did sound (and it still sounds) like an insult, but much worse than that, it is an unjustified assumption. You have NO idea who we are BUT you assume that we won' t be able to understand your arguments, and thus drop on us, from the top of your superior knowledge, the "verb". It may be different in the US, but at least here in Italy/Europe that kind of stance is considered seriously impolite. On the other hand you are not even consequential. If you believe we won't be able to follow your arguments because of our little brains and experience, we are simply not worth your time, it is a lost cause. You could shift your postings and arguments to an environment where - presumably - onlookers and members will be able to understand what you say - just as examples, more "focused on security" forums, like: http://forums.windowsecurity.com/ http://forum.pcsecurityworld.com/ http://www.topix.com/forum/tech/computer-security I personally appreciated very much your attempt to lower yourself at our "average Joe" level, making us aware of the risks of running XP because it is insecure, as said your opinion on the matter has been set on records, but we cannot go further than that. BTW, and strangely ON topic , interesting conclusions in the Stanford Uni paper you just posted a link to (about ASLR): http://www.stanford.edu/~blp/papers/asrandom.pdf but of course those tests were made on Linux systems, which are notoriously insecure, having been largely written, designed and mantained by someone who is not a security expert and against a software - Apache - which is not AFAIK the typical app that would be run on XP systems at home.... jaclaz

Sure, I understand that , and I do know about your accident that led to the broken google , so here are a couple definitions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluff http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fluff I have for you a nice article on .inf file syntax that is luckily at a level that both of us should be able to understand : http://www.wd-3.com/archive/InfFiles.htm jaclaz