jaclaz

OK, can we say that specifically, and limited to IPv6 exploits, an OS that DOES NOT have IPv6 is less vulnerable than one that has the IPv6 stack? (while it lasts) I don' t know 1,000 hackers. it seems like you do. Maybe you could do a poll among them and present a proper report (that would be anyway statistical work, not entirely unlikely the experiment dencorso suggested, which would have however provided objective data, as opposed to opinions of people that you shouldn't trust by definition). @JorgeA, JFYI: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/ipv6-when-do-you-really-need-to-switch/2444 and double flip : http://www.zdnet.com/stick-to-limited-ipv6-deployments-businesses-warned-7000003055/ http://ipv6friday.org/blog/2012/08/why-bother-with-ipv6/ jaclaz

But that may depend on the actual way the recovery process has been designed by the manufacturer, or - if you prefer - on the exact contents of the recovery partition and the exact way those contents are deployed to the OS partition. jaclaz

Possibly that feeling is because now computers generally are cheap, flimsy pieces of crap. jaclaz

I don't get it. If some code can initiate an exploit through a stack overflow, then the code may need to be patched and the OS is vulnerable (and the patch has a very high priority , or "Critical"). If some code can initiate an exploit through a stack overflow BUT *something else* in the OS SURELY prevents stack overflows, then there is NO need to patch anything as the OS is NOT vulnerable, or at least the patch becomes very low priority or "Not Critical". The former is "less secure" than the latter. But while the patch is issued with the same priority level, at least here it means that it is needed on both systems and at the same time and with the same intensity in the minds of those that produce the patch. You are saying that because of the big changes in the way the OS works, a same vulnerability has less chances to be exploited in practice. The concept of "probability" of making use of a known vulnerability , which Charlotte The Harlot introduced through the use of "intelligent" and "safe" settings of the setup of the machine is very similar. A well made setup (and intelligent use of the PC ) lowers the probabilities that an existing vulnerability can be used by a malicious attacker. So, we are into "weighting" the efficiency of the "automatic internal mitigation factors" introduced in the OS against the efficiency of "manual external mitigation factors" suggested by Charlotte, right? If this is the case, then the only (anyway approximated) meaningful data we can get is statistical and can only be obtained by a test similar to the one dencorso hypothised: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/163539-are-ms-updates-for-xp-really-necessary/page-2#entry1046197 jaclaz

Naah, I thought that would be Naked WIndows 7 ⅓ : The Final insult! (to MS ) : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_Gun_33%E2'> jaclaz

NO, you don't. You DO NOT EVEN understand how this thread is for 7200.11 ONLY AND NOT any other model AND NOT for 7200.12. (BTW AFTER having been told that) You are POSTING ON THE WRONG THREAD! This is ONLY for 7200.11. Start a NEW thread for your issues with the 7200.12 AFTER having checked (searching) that your issue has been not already addressed in previous other threads dedicated to the 7200.12. In ANY case, BEFORE posting, you should have READ the READ ME FIRST thread here: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/143880-seagate-barracuda-720011-read-me-first/ particularly point #8 of it AND THE FGA's here: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/147532-fga-for-the-seagate-720011-drives/ particularly FGA #4. That do talk of the matter. jaclaz

Well, with Windows 8 also they "have gone bananas" and were "shooting for the goal" of making a good OS , the point is that actually they didn't manage to get it. jaclaz

What is the difficult part in "The Solution for Seagate 7200.11 HDDs" that you don't understand? jaclaz

But - just like getting old - the alternative is worse jaclaz

Sure, I never used TC and I do not personally think I will ever miss that, but you just confirmed what I was trying to say, you "survived" alright using the "old" version. About dependencies, of course there are "static dependencies" and "runtime dependencies", that's why I suggested to trace the thingy with DW on a OS that fulfilled that dependency (if you prefer an OS on which that plugin does work aòright) to get the list of *all* dependencies. jaclaz

Sure, it's your Utah, your taxes, and your "country of Freedom" . Poor ol' Benjamin Franklin's soul (and a lot of other very nice people of the time, like those that signed the US constitution and the Declaration of Independence) must be really sad when observing the world from the *wherever* they are now. jaclaz

Check your Windows 8 license, downgrade rights should be stated there (it may depend on the version of Windows 8, too) see: http://www.zdnet.com/hp-clarifies-windows-8-consumer-pc-downgrade-and-warranties-7000007280/ http://www.pcworld.com/article/2015107/downgrading-from-windows-8-to-7-what-you-need-to-know.html In a nutshell, Pro is downgradable, "plain" 8, NO... jaclaz

normally=daily=everyday="in service"="The phone I currently use is a P910i" jaclaz

Sure, It was a really nice little thingy. But the article is right, the price at the time was the show stopper. I never owned one, but I remember having used some other people's ones, and they - with all due respect - were very little beyond a "nice, technology edge, gadget". The actual "switch" in both usability and "usefulness" (besides processor and OS) came a few years later, with the 9210: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_Communicator http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_9210_Communicator Just like the Ericsonn 380: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ericsson_R380 was in comparable times. The first "real things" (comparable to the 9210) were the P800 and P900: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Ericsson_P800 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Ericsson_P900 And yes, I still own a P910i : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Ericsson_P910 which I use normally :. jaclaz

Well one can always trace the app with (say) dependency walker under a OS that actually has that GetFileSizeEx() and check the list of used functions. About the features, of course it is assumed that a later version (with some exceptions, like a number of MS Windows Operating Systems ) will offer "better" or more "features", I was only trying to (indirectly) state how it is not like for 4 (four) years, i.e. since late 2007 up to late 2011 the "occasional developer or advanced user" had been prevented from "occasionally develop" or "advancedly use" anything because of the crashes . If you prefer the OP - which BTW realized in 2013 how the "latest" versions (since almost 2 years) are not compatible with Win9x - may well risk using the old version, bearing with a few, rare, crashes without a substantial worsening of his overall computing experience, until someone - possibly because of a more "serious" *need*, finds the time (and way) to add that fuinction to KernelEx. jaclaz

A few good questions would be IMHO: WHICH added features/betterings does the current fileinfo 2.21 when compared to the 2.0.10.0 that does work in Win9x? Are this added features/betterings useful on a 9.x machine? Is there among the above a particular added feature that represents a "cannot live without" item? jaclaz

Naah, the disclaimer won't work, a secret sentence allowed by a secret law and emitted by a secret court will void it in no time. But there is a much easier way. Sun-Tzu (or the Art of War): http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data All is needed is starting talking of Xkeyscore, of NSA and similar topics, in such a way that an analyst will be obliged to "tag" us and thus "store" our generated traffic. As soon as enough people will be "tagged", the system will collapse. jaclaz

Hmmm. Try googling for "Internet Password Retrieval" (the title of this thread) Strangely enough FIRST result is http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/network_password_recovery.html jaclaz

I liked much better the : as an argument to support an opinion. What would be interesting (and this is easily doable, it's only a matter of spending some time) is to see how many of MS patches (which BTW are the actual topic) are issued at the same time for the following Operating Systems: Windows XPWindows VistaWindows 7Windows 8my memory is quickly fading, but I seem to remember that usually whenever a vulnerability has been found (and a related patch is issued by MS) the patch is most of the times for ALL of the above OS versions (or more loosely "supported OS versions of the NT family"), I don't remember as "common" that a patch is ONLY for the oldish XP (or ONLY for a given system) and NOT for a later OS. Ideally one could list each month Security bullettin summary, here is an example of the latest: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/bulletin/ms13-jul and check, bullettin by bullettin, which OS's are affected and for which a patch is issued, example: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/bulletin/ms13-053 seems like a "serious" issue and "hitting" any and all OS's in the above list. I did a quick check and it seems to me like the patches are for ALL the mentined OS's, exception made for this one, that only affects Windows 7 and Server2008 R2 (and NOT XP and NOT 8) https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/security/bulletin/ms13-058 By this tentative metrics, XP and Vista and 8 are seemingly on the same level, whilst 7 (and Server2008 R2) are slightly less secure. jaclaz

Well, but that is not fully-fully true, no actual data was provided, but they have been witheld - in perfect good faith - to prevent damages: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/163539-are-ms-updates-for-xp-really-necessary/?p=1046080 jaclaz

I thought you were after attempting to convince everyone that XP is less secure than Windows 8 and Windows 8.1. jaclaz

Well, one of the points thats that I thought we discussed on this thread enough is that the borders between a RC helicopter (quadricopter) and a "drone" and "unmanned aircraft" and "A.I. driven" are pretty much confused. This thingy: http://www.bladehelis.com/350qx/ is sold as "RC controlled quadricopter", but has a "get home" function : See, besides the official video: this UNofficial one : jaclaz

And AGAIN, "xkeyscore" is NOT a "top-secret" program! And it's use is documented since 2008! (so it is not even "news"). Please, read again: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/155290-windows-8-deeper-impressions/page-143#entry1045330 http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/155290-windows-8-deeper-impressions/page-143#entry1045335 jaclaz

But there should be no issue with linking to the google groups postings: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/google-code-hosting/kbugMNXibGM so that everyone can think by himself/herself the same things you cannot express . Ilko, JFYI, Sourceforge should be a much better place for WinSetupFromUSB. And at least judging from the contents of the projects hosted there they seem to be a lot less picky than google code (or possibly it's just Mr. Mark Williams ). However, besides the recent activity by Mr. Williams in searching for files without sources and therefore closing projects: http://www.mail-archive.com/google-code-hosting@googlegroups.com/index.html it seems to me like the people of the google code team are reasonable: http://www.mail-archive.com/google-code-hosting@googlegroups.com/msg11117.html though they do not judge on "copyright issues" : http://www.mail-archive.com/google-code-hosting@googlegroups.com/msg11070.html jaclaz

Yes / No http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/questions-with-yes-or-no-answers.html Now , if you would be so kind as to provide the "standard litany": http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/problem-report-standard-litany.html This might help in giving you an actually useful/appropriate answer (as opposed to "assuming" and then risking to wait time in providing you with unuseful advice). What do you mean by "internet connection"? There are several possibilities about passwords "connected" to "internet usage". How do you know that the password is saved? Why are you talking of the phone line? Is it a Dial up connection to the internet? jaclaz