Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble

MSFN is made available via donations, subscriptions and advertising revenue. The use of ad-blocking software hurts the site. Please disable ad-blocking software or set an exception for MSFN. Alternatively, register and become a site sponsor/subscriber and ads will be disabled automatically. 


MDGx

Q891711 + U891711 = Unofficial MS07-017 + MS05-002 .ANI fix

Recommended Posts

U891711 update:

Author's note:

KB891711.EXE and Q891711.DLL do not use any GDI functions or GDI objects.

Therefore, it is highly unlikely that any image/icon editing tools crashes are

caused directly by any of the unofficial or official versions. Nor would I

expect the changes in the 'LoadImage' function to be the direct cause. GDI.EXE

(all Win98 + WinME versions) has serious bugs that often lead to heap

corruption when GDI resources drop below 10%. However, this corruption may

manifest itself only much, much later when GDI resource levels are again

higher or even at more than 70%.

Edited by MDGx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is that I never experience a GDI crash with any of the many image editing programs I use except sometimes when I run this patch.

I use my computer enough to be able to assess that.

On my system (WinME) I get GDI crashes only when I try to go below 0% but this affects all standard applications of course. I have been testing stability in this respect by running scores of applications until reaching 1 or 2% of free resources left. The system remains rock stable. Closing most of the apps then frees most of the resources and the system never GDI crashed afterwards.

If I recall well, some GDI stability problems already begin to arise on Win98SE below 30%. Maybe what is written above by the U891711 author applies to Win98SE but certainly not to WinME which has apparently benefited from great improvement in this respect.

What I am interested in, with respect to resources, is whether the possibilty exist to increase the size of the available resources by hacking/patching certain system files and have, say, the double to start with, which would allow to run more applications at once without falling in the red.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All I can say is that I never experience a GDI crash with any of the many image editing programs I use except sometimes when I run this patch.

I use my computer enough to be able to assess that.

On my system (WinME) I get GDI crashes only when I try to go below 0% but this affects all standard applications of course. I have been testing stability in this respect by running scores of applications until reaching 1 or 2% of free resources left. The system remains rock stable. Closing most of the apps then frees most of the resources and the system never GDI crashed afterwards.

If I recall well, some GDI stability problems already begin to arise on Win98SE below 30%. Maybe what is written above by the U891711 author applies to Win98SE but certainly not to WinME which has apparently benefited from great improvement in this respect.

What I am interested in, with respect to resources, is whether the possibilty exist to increase the size of the available resources by hacking/patching certain system files and have, say, the double to start with, which would allow to run more applications at once without falling in the red.

I have a HP pavilion machine with pre-installed ME, I used to have those GDI problems several years ago. I just got rid of the apps that have caused those GDI crashes; some apps I have upgraded to reduce the chances of the GDI problems from happening. I no longer have those GDI problems anymore, regardless whether I had the U891711 patch or not. it's usually those 3rd party apps that arent written well and more likely to cause those GDI crashes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

eidenk:

Here's U891711 author's answer to your comments:

I am afraid the brief answer to 'eidenk's' question is: virtually

impossible w/o a major revamp of GDI.EXE. More details below.

------------------------------------------

'eidenk' wrote:

All I can say is that I never experience a GDI crash with any of the many

image editing programs I use except sometimes when I run this patch.

I use my computer enough to be able to assess that.

On my system (WinME) I get GDI crashes only when I try to go below 0% but

this affects all standard applications of course. I have been testing

stability in this respect by running scores of applications until reaching

1 or 2% of free resources left. The system remains rock stable. Closing

most of the apps then frees most of the resources and the system never GDI

crashed afterwards.

If I recall well, some GDI stability problems already begin to arise on

Win98SE below 30%. Maybe what is written above by the U891711 author

applies to Win98SE but certainly not to WinME which has apparently

benefited from great improvement in this respect.

What I am interested in, with respect to resources, is whether the

possibilty exist to increase the size of the available resources by

hacking/patching certain system files and have, say, the double to start

with, which would allow to run more applications at once without falling

in the red.

--

The amount of GDI resources is largely determined by the GDI 16-bit data

segment. This 16-bit segment is limited to 64 KByte. Unfortunately, there

is no easy way to increase it as a 16-bit offset can only address 65536

bytes max. GDI.EXE 4.90.3000 has fewer bugs and is far more stable than,

for example, 4.10.2225, but it still is very buggy. Fatal GDI heap

corruption shows up mainly in three ways, (1) a GPF in GDI.EXE, (2) a GPF

in USER.EXE, and (3) a BSOD in KERNEL32.DLL (address depends on the

version of KERNEL32.DLL). Depending on the system configuration, (3) &

even (2) may happen more often than (1). Before fatal heap corruption

occurs, some GDI objects may not have been used and/or freed properly (in

particular, when resource levels drop below 10% - even with 4.90.3000!)

and the system may still appear 'rock solid', may never crash or may only

crash when the system is shut down.

Please post original crash error messages if you have them. I have not had

any real GDI.EXE crash in a long, long time and it did not change after I

installed KB891711.EXE 4.10.2222. What I suspect here is the following:

'LoadImage' is called thousands of times by most applications and the

system itself and so is the code in KB891711.EXE/Q891711.DLL. This may

trigger some bug in the 16-bit subsystem, a bug that is there all the

time, but is almost never triggered unless KB891711.EXE is running. For

example, KB891711.EXE allocates and releases additional GlobalMemory

through the 16-bit subsystem (KRNL386.EXE) whenever 'LoadImage' is called.

Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please post original crash error messages if you have them.

Unfortunately I did not make note of them but I will run the patch again and will post them if those occasional GDI crashes arise again.

If I understand you well, the GDI resources are exclusively 16bits. Have you got any knowledge of the 32bits part of the resources, which may not be GDI but USER and SYSTEM. I understand that the 32bits resources are of an arbitrary size far below their theoretical limit unlike 16bits ones and that it should be eventually possible to set a larger amount of memory for them quite easily for someone who's got the knowledge of those inner workings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

eidenk:

The answer from the author:

'eidenk' wrote:

Unfortunately I did not make note of them but I will run the patch again

and will post them if those occasional GDI crashes arise again.

If I understand you well, the GDI resources are exclusively 16bits. Have

you got any knowledge of the 32bits part of the resources, which may not

be GDI but USER and SYSTEM. I understand that the 32bits resources are of

an arbitrary size far below their theoretical limit unlike 16bits ones and

that it should be eventually possible to set a larger amount of memory for

them quite easily for someone who's got the knowledge of those inner

workings.

--

TWEAKUI.CPL has a setting that turns on 'fault logging' - very useful for

that. I also start DrWatson.exe at boot-up time whenever I use Win98SE

(occasionally these days, it is mostly WinXP SP2 now).

Unfortunately, the answer is: not possible. GDI resources are from a

"combined" 16-bit and 32-bit heap in the GDI data segment. The 16-bit heap

is the real bottleneck. It is the same situation with USER resources, it

is just a different 16-bit/32-bit heap in the USER data segment. The level

of system resources is the lower value of either GDI or USER resources,

but not another heap.

Edited by MDGx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've tried the official one old and new

Tihiy's TI891711

and now U891711

I'm sure U891711 is better than MSN's

But it still slows my system down(less responsive).

I think is the fact that KB891711.exe is running as a service(always)

Tihiy's TI891711 doesn't run KB891711.exe upon bootup.

So i will continue to use use Tihiy's TI891711, I'm a gamer and I need the resources.

PIII 450MHz 256MB

WIN 98SE, sesp21a-en.exe, 98SE2ME.EXE(ver 3.7), TI891711, 98KRNLUP.EXE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've tried the official one old and new

Tihiy's TI891711

and now U891711

I'm sure U891711 is better than MSN's

But it still slows my system down(less responsive).

I think is the fact that KB891711.exe is running as a service(always)

Tihiy's TI891711 doesn't run KB891711.exe upon bootup.

So i will continue to use use Tihiy's TI891711, I'm a gamer and I need the resources.

true that TI891711 doesnt load a startup but TI891711 has weaker protection than U891711.

Quote from author of U891711:

----

"Tihiy's TI891711 is a nice piece of work, but, unfortunately, is no real

replacement since it offers only limited protection. 16-bit programs

including USER.EXE (!) can load animated cursor files, etc, and they

bypass TI891711.DLL completely, that is, there is zero protection."

----

The U891711 patch only slowed down my Win98 & ME computers slightly. So I didnt

noticed much of a performance drop with U891711.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The U891711 patch only slowed down my Win98 & ME computers slightly. So I didnt

noticed much of a performance drop with U891711.

the w98 machine I used was a pentium one [100 mhz] w/ 64 megs of ram

and the ME machine was a pentium 3 [766mhz] w/ 256 megs of ram

this was assuming I did NOT have any antivirus software installed or loaded at startup.

firewall & antivirus utilities gobble up more resources than U891711

Edited by erpdude8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to insist on using Tihiy's TI891711 patch, but playing online games(tactical ops, unreal tournament, etc..) I did notice a significant performance drop with U891711 and MSN was worst.

Also windows reaction time is slower, startup too.

The question now is what security risk am I in using TI891711 patch (will i get infected with viri)

"bypass TI891711.DLL completely, that is, there is zero protection."

PLS explain further, if u find some time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry to insist on using Tihiy's TI891711 patch, but playing online games(tactical ops, unreal tournament, etc..) I did notice a significant performance drop with U891711 and MSN was worst.

Also windows reaction time is slower, startup too.

The question now is what security risk am I in using TI891711 patch (will i get infected with viri)

"bypass TI891711.DLL completely, that is, there is zero protection."

PLS explain further, if u find some time!

The difference between U891711 and Tihiy's TI891711 patch is explained in U891711.TXT [see "AUTHOR'S NOTES" = NOTE #1]:

http://www.mdgx.com/files/U891711.TXT

Hope this helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I haven't tested this fix yet, but I have an important question.

Can anyone tell if KB891711.exe shows up in the Task list after pressing CTRL-ALT-DEL, using this patch?

It's important for me to have it hidden, so people won't kill it accidently and getting BSOD's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can anyone tell if KB891711.exe shows up in the Task list after pressing CTRL-ALT-DEL, using this patch?

Nope, it doesn't show up in the Windows Task List window. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DEMO

Proof-of-concept example demo of malformed animated cursor [.ANI]using 'LoadImage':

http://www.xfocus.net/flashsky/icoExp/

This applies *only* to Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.5 SP2 and newer:

http://www.mdgx.com/toy.htm#IEX

First try demo above without any update/patch/fix installed.

Then install official MS05-002 fix, reboot, and try the demo again.

Then install unofficial U891711 fix, reboot, and try the demo again.

Please notice differences in behavior between these 2 fixes.

http://www.mdgx.com/files/U891711.TXT

Can someone please explain what exactly the vulnerability is ? As clicking on any of the flashsky links with IE 5.5SP2 on WinME and without a patch running does not make me feel vulnerable to anything, really. If clicking on one of the link would, say, launch Notepad, I'd be scared.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-yes, I'd like a better demo, as well... it's a bit confusing to me, too...

(-there was one other test website, which was able to freeze up every Firefox window, with 100% cpu... which was annoying, but not a security threat...) ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...