Gurgelmeyer Posted November 11, 2005 Author Share Posted November 11, 2005 Hi Just a quick update: USP 5.1 is now in beta. Everything (including IE6) integrates perfectly.Best regardsGurgelmeyer B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-I- Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 Cewl.. hope it will check out OKE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_guy Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Gurgelmeyer,I have found the modified version of explorer.exe. It is attached as a file ready to go on a cd. You will need to run expand explorer.ex_ explorer.exe to make it a regular version. Please download with care. It is the same version as the one included with the USP50.the_guyexplorer.zip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-I- Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 so whats its value anyway??? - will it JUST improve the icons in 256color-mode? cuz realy (who uses that any ways). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash&Burn Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Who uses it? Take a look at a 16x16 icon in the quicklaunch and the same 16x16 icon in the system tray, Opera would be a good example. The system tray icon looks like crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Targaff Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 It is the same version as the one included with the USP50.Is that the one I did? Just curious, like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgelmeyer Posted November 12, 2005 Author Share Posted November 12, 2005 @the_guy @Targaff - Looks like both of you patched this file succesfully @Crash&Burn - I totally agree, and this is really a "must have" for the Extreme Edition (the standard 16 color tray icons are not exactly a feast for the eye )Thanks, guys! /G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slippykillsticks Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 (edited) Gurgelmeyer, I have a question.Will this patched version of explorer.exe still be protected by Windows File Protection? If not, I think we should stick with the regular explorer.exe. Edited November 13, 2005 by slippykillsticks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_guy Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 The new one will probably be. It is installed with this, and it is the same version.the_guy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgelmeyer Posted November 18, 2005 Author Share Posted November 18, 2005 @slippykillsticks - Yes - it will be cached in the dllcache and WFP will protect it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanVM Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 How are you getting a hacked file to be protected by WFP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slippykillsticks Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 How are you getting a hacked file to be protected by WFP?See, that was my question. I don't understand how it is possible, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-I- Posted November 21, 2005 Share Posted November 21, 2005 (edited) probebly because it is installed with an MS sp- installer. yet still it probebly stil needs to check agains a md5 checksum? so my question: where is the checksum hosted??? on the MS-update site, or in a local inf file on your cdrom. (in the later case) just editing the file would be enought (als long as MS wont update the file with a newer version - wicht, seams probebly rather unlikly since win2k aint in mainstream anymore..... Edited November 21, 2005 by -I- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurgelmeyer Posted November 27, 2005 Author Share Posted November 27, 2005 Hi I'm in and out of hospitals these days (I'm not well at all), which is why I haven't been able to sign in here as often as I want to. To make things even worse, the CPU fan on my computer just broke, so I cant keep it on for work for more than 10 minutes or so (sigh!). I'll get a new (used) one tomorrow!!To make WFP protect an unsigned file is not as easy as I anticipated. Now, there's no such thing as "impossible" - but I'll look into this later on. sfcfiles.dll has some interesting undocumented entry points, and the MS .cat's also have some interesting undocumented attributes, which Setup uses to determine stuff. And - let's not forget - NT5 does to some extent support load-time executable patching - although this is undocumented too.Best regards,Gurgelmeyer B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-I- Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 (edited) I'm in and out of hospitals these days (I'm not well at all)Well stop being sick, you ........[my mom doesn't like these kinds of words so ive put a bigg BLEEP in this message instead.]....... cuze im waiting my a** OFF ... (ow BTW i got my hand on windows 2k server / advanced server versions, to test this SP on)....But realy i wish you, a **** quick recovery now, (and that goes for ur computer as well )...To make WFP protect an unsigned file is not as easy as I anticipatedSo whats wrong with using MODPE ... or am i completely beside the point now?????? Edited November 27, 2005 by -I- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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