mjd79 Posted Monday at 11:48 PM Posted Monday at 11:48 PM (edited) 5 hours ago, Dave-H said: The error I'm actually getting on XP is - "Entry Point Not Found : The procedure entry point InitializeCriticalSectionEx could not be located in the dynamic link library KERNEL32.dll." In CFF Explorer, replace the kernel32.dll import with pwrp_k32.dll and copy this file from your Supermium installation. The screenshot was taken on XP RTM Edited Monday at 11:49 PM by mjd79 3
VistaLover Posted yesterday at 12:25 AM Posted yesterday at 12:25 AM 5 hours ago, Dave-H said: The error I'm actually getting on XP is - "Entry Point Not Found : The procedure entry point InitializeCriticalSectionEx could not be located in the dynamic link library KERNEL32.dll." Actually, "supermium_uao.exe" won't launch under XP SP3 (32-bit) because of two missing functions on XP's kernel32 system file: # Report By YY.Depends.Analyzer (Target:5.1.2600-x86) ## kernel32.dll * [ ] InitializeCriticalSectionEx - Supported OS: 6.0.6000, 6.1.7600, 6.2.9200, 6.3.9600, 10.0.10240 - Ref Module: supermium_uao.exe * [ ] LCMapStringEx - Supported OS: 6.0.6000, 6.1.7600, 6.2.9200, 6.3.9600, 10.0.10240 - Ref Module: supermium_uao.exe Above is a log acquired via the YY-Thunks CLI tool; the command I used was: YY.Depends.Analyzer "supermium_uao.exe" /IgnoreReady /ReportView:CheckBox /Target:5.1.2600 As @mjd79 suggested (), if you redirect the kernel32.dll function calls to Supermium's wrapper DLL "pwrp_k32.dll", you'll be able to make the executable XP-compatible ... 2
user57 Posted yesterday at 08:34 AM Posted yesterday at 08:34 AM 8 hours ago, mjd79 said: In CFF Explorer, replace the kernel32.dll import with pwrp_k32.dll and copy this file from your Supermium installation. The screenshot was taken on XP RTM that is a kernel extender it seems to be a overkill just for file read tool - why it cant make a simple text string with normal code it might have been compiled with a newer version of visual studio 2019 i thought i might talked about this already https://msfn.org/board/topic/182888-how-vs-makes-working-code-still-incompatible/ the vistual studio 2019 v16.1 to v16.7 dont have that problem - all after 16.8 - 16.11 have that trick inside it is a hidden .obj file, where in the c-runtime code/ucrt/std depening on how we call this is forced to being used you can see the header and cpp files - but if you edit them it never reads that code - instead it always force to use that .obj file - what is precompiled with that code that use vista+ functions as said in that article that compiler makes a code that runs without your code and it runs before your programm is starting up (and there are these missing functions - even if they are not used in your code) 1
Dave-H Posted yesterday at 11:43 AM Posted yesterday at 11:43 AM 11 hours ago, mjd79 said: In CFF Explorer, replace the kernel32.dll import with pwrp_k32.dll and copy this file from your Supermium installation. The screenshot was taken on XP RTM Thanks, everyone. Yes, that modification makes the file work fine on XP.
mjd79 Posted yesterday at 11:55 AM Posted yesterday at 11:55 AM (edited) 7 hours ago, user57 said: that is a kernel extender it seems to be a overkill just for file read tool - why it cant make a simple text string with normal code it might have been compiled with a newer version of visual studio 2019 i thought i might talked about this already https://msfn.org/board/topic/182888-how-vs-makes-working-code-still-incompatible/ the vistual studio 2019 v16.1 to v16.7 dont have that problem - all after 16.8 - 16.11 have that trick inside it is a hidden .obj file, where in the c-runtime code/ucrt/std depening on how we call this is forced to being used you can see the header and cpp files - but if you edit them it never reads that code - instead it always force to use that .obj file - what is precompiled with that code that use vista+ functions as said in that article that compiler makes a code that runs without your code and it runs before your programm is starting up (and there are these missing functions - even if they are not used in your code) Of course. My suggestion was completely automatic, because I don't use Supermium and wanted to test this tool the easy way. I'm busy porting Chromium for Windows 7 to Windows 2000 SP4 without KernelEx Edited yesterday at 03:42 PM by mjd79 1
VistaLover Posted yesterday at 02:51 PM Posted yesterday at 02:51 PM (edited) 3 hours ago, Dave-H said: Yes, that modification makes the file work fine on XP. ... It would appear that Shane is still monitoring this thread ; inside the Supermium-v144-r4_01 release notes, https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/releases/tag/v144-r4_01 this shows up: Quote The UAO application should also now work on Windows XP. https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/releases/download/v144-r4_01/supermium_uao.zip Edit: Rather the fix was a consequence of the discussion in: https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/1907 ... Edited yesterday at 02:56 PM by VistaLover Added related GH issue 1
Dave-H Posted yesterday at 05:22 PM Posted yesterday at 05:22 PM Yes indeed! He's done the same edit that I did to the file and bundled a copy of pwrp_k32.dll in the zip file with it. 1
modnar Posted yesterday at 06:25 PM Posted yesterday at 06:25 PM Looks like there is a new issue to patch: "Google is aware that an exploit for CVE-2026-11645 exists in the wild,...".
NotHereToPlayGames Posted yesterday at 07:11 PM Posted yesterday at 07:11 PM What does "exists in the wild" *REALLY* mean? ie, does it really affect v144? Or does it just affect those that "thought" they were safe by always running the most recent?
modnar Posted 6 hours ago Posted 6 hours ago 17 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: What does "exists in the wild" *REALLY* mean? ie, does it really affect v144? Or does it just affect those that "thought" they were safe by always running the most recent? It means the exploit exists in the wilderness that google created with their crap, I mean chrome. V 149 (their latest) was patched.
NotHereToPlayGames Posted 5 hours ago Posted 5 hours ago (edited) Okay, but that kind of misses my question. IF this only affects v149, then IT DOES *NOT* EFFECT Supermium. ie, "the sky isn't falling" edit: ie, the "stupidly aggressive" update schedule (that both Chrome and Firefox do!) **CAUSED** the "exploit" so *ONLY* people that "update every d@mn day" (exaggerating for effect) were even effected Edited 5 hours ago by NotHereToPlayGames
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now