Entries:
Comments:
Posts:

Loading User Information from Channel 9

Something went wrong getting user information from Channel 9

Latest Achievement:

Loading User Information from MSDN

Something went wrong getting user information from MSDN

Visual Studio Achievements

Latest Achievement:

Loading Visual Studio Achievements

Something went wrong getting the Visual Studio Achievements

Discussions

cheong cheong Recent Achievement unlocked: Code Avenger Tier 4/6: You see dead program. A lot!
  • Microsoft kills autopatcher :(

    PaoloM wrote:
    Please, do not use the words "free speech" in this context. They make no sense.

    Besides, have you ever checked the EULA on ALL Windows updates? The one that explicitly specifies that you cannot redistribute them?

    There's no problem if Microsoft kills Autopatcher because they did violates the EULA, but please Microsoft provide some alternatives for people so they can easily install the updates without internet connection.

    You know, people used to burn them into a disk (or perhaps on a flash disk now) and use it to patch machines conveniently, in unattended manner.

    While WSUS could be a convenient alternative, it does require you to install the WSUS client on the machine first, which is not quite desirable when the machine is to be delivered to customers.

  • Microsoft kills autopatcher :(

    Oops, my ex-company use it heavily to patch the systems before delivery. I guess they would have to leave it for the customers to update themselves now... Tongue Out

    kettch wrote:
    
    The problem with third party patching comes down to accountability. What happens if a Microsoft patching system screws up a system? Microsoft is accountable. What happens if a third party patching system screws up? Microsoft is accountable. What happens if little Timmy gets cancer? Microsoft is accountable.

    People using any community driven project more or less known about the implicit risk imposed by using it.

    And to know whether Microsoft screws up is easy. Just see if others running Windows Update the normal way have problem. If the autopatcher user got a problem that Windows Update users don't, they probably screws up themselves.

    However, from my memory this situation occurred - none. The autopatcher team members have done a really good job to make sure the patches works as it should.

  • PCI-e 16x to PCI-e 1x converter!

    RichardRudek wrote:
    
    Can someone confirm (from their description - Chinese ?) that it doesn't have an addition power connector(s).

    Then there is the issue of mounting the now taller card into the chasis.

    That page is actually in Japanese, so maybe Sven can help.

    However, at their performance page it seems there's the power problem you predict on some samples. (i.e.: 電源供給がつらそうかも)

  • How to protect Aspnet DLL against decompiler??

    milkcan wrote:
    Hi,

    understand from some articles that there are decompiler tools that can decompile Aspnet DLL into sourceCode like C#,Vb.net and other supported languages by .netframework.

    So, is that means Aspnet DLL of your application can be decompiled  into sourceCode and there is no protection.

    It might help if you use NGen to generate native DLL first, but then again you need to know exactly what version of .NET the target platform is running, and which type of CPU it's using.

    However, since .NET have to support reflection, it still leaves significant amount of information in the DLL and can decompile easier than other type of DLLs.

    milkcan wrote:
    
    So, it means that it is not saved to host your aspnet application in Web Hosting service??

    Note that it's still relatively more "secure" than ASP, PHP, JSP, etc. as their pages are saved in plain script text. And even Java binaries can be decompiled.

    If you're really that concern about "security", you might take a look at CGI programming. They're normal console application (that could have been written in whatever language) so it's relatively difficult to decompile (really, you can't stop someone decompile it to ASM codes), however their functionalities are quite limited.

    Then you can also write your ISAPI extension in C++ to directly intercept the call and emit the pages. An ISAPI can do lots of things, but it's very difficult to written and get it correct. And web hosting companies seldom (if not possible at all) allow you to install such a thing on it, because that'd essentially give permission for you to access web pages of others running in the same application pool.

  • PCI-e 16x to PCI-e 1x converter!

    But... PCI-e 16x have lots more pins than PCI-e 1x version. Even if considering some of them are just ground pins, the number just doesn't make sense unless it pass the data/control in multipass session, then in the OS they use a special driver to recreate the origional data... however even if it's successful to work this way, the performance is in doubt...

    Or, did they just instruct the card to pass data through the SLI bridge to the other card, so this adapter just provide the functionality of drawing power from the motherboard?

  • MSDN Keys

    My keys remain the same, none of them is changed/missing.

  • Worldwide WGA outage... Vistas invalidate ​themselves..​.

    So it's preproduction code accidentally goes to production, not a failed server... now I can understand...

    As they promised to add more checkpoints to the checkin procedure, I can say I'm satisfied it'll unlikely to happen again. Smiley

  • Worldwide WGA outage... Vistas invalidate ​themselves..​.

    Ray6 wrote:
    

    There is a report on ArsTechnica that says that Windows Defender is reduced in functionality. Is this true?

    And is it true that MS didn't actually spot the problem? It sounds to me as if the community was responsible from preventing this from becoming a disaster.


    My only observation is that Windows Defender shows update failure no matter how many time I told it to. And of course on a system that has not installed Windows Update and Antivirus program, I dare not use it to navigate much site, let alone try out how function the Windows Defender is in that situation.

  • Worldwide WGA outage... Vistas invalidate ​themselves..​.

    Bas wrote:
    

    While I understand that this thread is a hornet's nest that most MS employees would rather stay out of, it would be interesting to hear the official word on what, exactly, gets disabled when.

    In this Ars Technica article, Microsoft's Alex Kochis states that "the full reduced functionality mode was not triggered for users because no 30-day grace period had been passed." So what about that 3 day period people keep bringing up?

    I realise how hard it is to get answers on questions about Vista (wink at Charles), but a clear breakdown of exactly what happens when would at least clear up some of the FUD about people having their systems rendered useless this weekend.

    Anyone?

    I'm sure that I didn't seen any "30 days" or "3 days" warning, so the disabling must be effective on the next login. (i.e.: I'm sure these two are just wrong information)

    Probably others who doesn't experienced the failure but try to bring up the issue read it from the description of reduced functionality mode page.

  • Worldwide WGA outage... Vistas invalidate ​themselves..​.

    Not sure. I've not took any screenshot when the dialog pops up because I already know what does it trying to say.

    I just switch back to the machine I'm using, and then searching WGA forums for the tool to try validate on the testing machine... you know, the patches are not installed, and even no antivirus was installed at that time... Then I see abnormally huge threads there (threads there usually ends less than 10 posts) and acknowledged what had happened.