Jump to content

mjd79

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    189

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    Poland

 Content Type 

Everything posted by mjd79

  1. mjd79
    In any case, the disabled sandbox, without any information on github or in the browser itself (other than chrome://version or chrome://sandbox, which 99% of users will never look into), is simply a scandal! https://no-sandbox.io/
  2. mjd79
    Then the likelihood is that Supermium 124 and above are based on Chrome 111 or similar, and Supermium 122 and older are based on 110, 109 or even older. Edit: As I see, I am not the only one who discovered this sandbox problem and it has already been reported on github. It will be interesting to see how the author responds to this. https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/1290
  3. mjd79
    I have reviewed Supermium versions 122 through 132 R1, and I believe that even if the theory about the older engine is true, it uses the same as Supermium 124, not 122. The 122 version differs too much in my opinion, if only in the imports and wrappers used (e.g. since version 124 uses APIs such as DiscardVirtualMemory) . Besides, going into chrome://versions on Supermium 122, 124, 126 R7 and 132 R1, I discovered that the latest version of Supermium probably uses the --no-sandbox flag by default under Windows 8.1, and in the version for older systems, as well as the version for Win 10 and 11, which interestingly continues to work after replacing DiscardVirtualMemory with VirtualAlloc.
  4. mjd79
    I checked and it seems to be a problem with Supermium 132 R1. Even my custom 2830.0 doesn't work, which works on all other Chromium browsers under Win7, including Supermium 126 R7. BTW I also discovered that the pwrp_k32.dll included with Supermium 126 R7 allows 2830.0 to run in any reasonably modern (not tested below v109) Chromium browser in Windows 7. Just open widevinecdm.dll in CFF Explorer and rename the import from kernel32.dll to pwrp_k32.dll
  5. mjd79
    If you are using 10/11 it should work fine. Delete this manually copied Widevine and update in chrome://components https://dl.google.com/widevine-cdm/4.10.2830.0-win-x64.zip Alternatively, try version 2830.0.
  6. mjd79
    Currently, the case is as follows: Windows 8.1 and 8.0 - Widevine is running the latest version, 4.10.2891.0, in every Chromium-based browser as well as Firefox (although 115.21.0ESR is likely to download 4.10.2830.0, which also works) Windows 7 - so far I have not been able to run Widevine newer than the aforementioned 4.10.2830.0, even in Supermium 126 after applying the included patch. I didn't respond to inquiring users earlier because the original method of running Widevine from Firefox on browsers like Chrome 109 or Opera 95 required the use of the kernel64 library, which is a wrapper of kernel32 created by a Russian cracker porting closed-source browsers to older systems. I will try to find another option which is legitimate and presentable on MSFN without breaking the rules.
  7. mjd79
    Apropos of .sig files, an interesting fact is that modified Firefox is not blocked, and also has them.
  8. mjd79
    No, @NotHereToPlayGames has captcha on every browser, hence the suspicion that this is what happens when you enter from an IP outside Poland. I live in this country, have internet from a local provider, and the captcha doesn't show up at all, the site normally works unless I use modded Chromium browsers.
  9. mjd79
    Perhaps this is the case with IPs from outside Poland. In any case, on any unmodified browser you don't have to pass the captcha, and even if you do, it succeeds.
  10. mjd79
    Of course, I perform the tests on a completely fresh profile, without changing any flags or settings and without extensions.
  11. mjd79
    The 100% correct solution to the test always ends up blocked, only on modded Chrome. On unmodified versions or on Firefox at the same time the site runs without any verification, so the browser is blocked, not the IP or MAC address.
  12. mjd79
    It doesn't work in both cases...
  13. mjd79
    As for my Chrome 122 (122.0.6261.112), I tested two scenarios. One was changing the kernel32 import DiscardVirtualMemory to VirtualAlloc in chrome.dll and DWrite.dll to one from Windows 10 1511, the browser was then launched with --no-sandbox. The other is to use a custom kernel32 for chrome.dll, to which I can only provide a link on PM, because the author is generally a cracker, it fixes the sandbox, and a custom modified original kernel32.dll using all the virtual memory functions from the wrapper included in Supermium 132 R0 (which fixed the leaks of that memory) for chrome.dll. DWrite also with W10 1511. In my case, the problem is with allegro.pl.
  14. mjd79
    I have a similar problem with ported Chrome 122 on Windows 8.1 with allegro.pl website. I get blocked by by their counterpart of captcha every time. Flags etc don't help. Could you please check what will happen for you? Thanks.
  15. mjd79
    This appears to be a problem with Ublock Origin MV2. I was able to reproduce this problem on Opera versions 95 and 117 with Ublock 1.62, but it works with Adguard MV2 4.4.22.. In any case, it works fine in Firefox with Ublock 1.62, oddly enough.
  16. mjd79
    I'll check it out, but it seems that it will be hard for me to run anything above Chromium 110. D. Draker as far as I know ran Chromium up to version 125. BTW. that FF 137 has the same problem as FF 130+ on XP with One Core API, that is, any codec like VP9 or H264 does not work on YT. Perhaps someone can solve it, if not, I'll wait to see what the OCA developer does about it.
  17. mjd79
    I don't have time for thorough testing, but FF 137 x64 compiled with patches by e3kskoy7wqk https://github.com/e3kskoy7wqk/Firefox-for-windows-7 works runs on Vista with the extended kernel dated March 9, 2023. It only requires the api-ms-core-win-synch-l1-2-0.dll library from Windows 10 (I used from compilation 10240) and osver.ini, which in my case looks like this. [C:\Users\(username)\Desktop\firefox-137.0.en-US.win64\firefox\firefox.exe] enabled=1 Win7SuperVerFix=1 MajorVersion=6 MinorVersion=1 BuildNumber=7601 CSDVersion=Service Pack 1 PlatformID=2 Of course type your path to the Firefox file, you can also type [global] instead Without this dll library, the browser crashes when loading with 100% CPU usage, and without osver.ini it won't display any text correctly. Edit: No playback of any videos works.
  18. mjd79
    Ximonite hosted the win32ss site for a long time, so I thought it was safe....
  19. mjd79
    https://ximonite.com/misc/tools/ExportTableTester.exe
  20. mjd79
    You guys misunderstood me lol. I only gave a link to the drivers, and above I wrote about the integration tools. But you are right that it is best to use the Gigabyte tool.
  21. mjd79
    https://superuser.com/questions/80151/how-to-setup-custom-dpi-below-100-on-windows-7
  22. mjd79
    The problem starts with version 127, it looks like chrome.dll is not able to create any process. because after substituting chrome.dll along with the kernel32 wrapper (and nothing more) by cracker who you probably known, D.Draker, from github, the browser starts up. Unfortunately the information that x64dbg gives me at this stage of my knowledge doesn't give me much.
  23. mjd79
    Opera will probably work up to around version 110 (Chromium 125?) with DWrite.dll from Windows 10, replacing DiscardVirtualMemory with VirtualAlloc (or what I also recently discovered, DiscardVirtualMemory is in 8.1 in kernelbase.dll, so you can add by ExportTableTester redirection to this function in kernel32.dll exports and using it for opera_browser.dll e.g. as kernel33.dll) and with --no-sandbox. This is completely pointless due to depriving the browser of security, but for viewing DRM content you can do so. In my case, interestingly enough, DRM works on 8.1 after copying the widvine from Firefox to any compatible browser on Chromium. Does it work without --no-sandbox? If so, the differences are unfortunately much greater than DWrite and DiscardVirtualMemory. The biggest problem of Windows versions lower than 10 is the Set/GetProcessMigitationPolicy functions. 8.0 and 8.1 have them, but their implentation is insufficient for Chromium.
  24. mjd79
    The easiest way for a “regular” user is to use, for example, NTlite trial version or, unfortunately, the undeveloped but free WinToolKit 1.7. Integrate drivers for both items in boot.wim and the selected edition in install.wim. As for the drivers themselves, these should work for example (I successfully installed Windows 7 on a ThinkPad X270 with a 7th generation processor using them) https://download.gigabyte.com/FileList/Driver/mb_driver_intel_usb3_200series_w7.zip
  25. mjd79
    Windows 7's standard AHCI drivers support even the latest laptop and desktop motherboards. I'm assuming you have a problem with a no driver error in the installer, in which case you need to integrate the USB 3.0 drivers
×
×
  • Create New...