dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
7901
share rss forum feed


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7
reply to NetFixer

Re: Windows XP: Remove the Cable, Tape Up the Ethernet Port

said by NetFixer:

....How about a 4mhz Z80, 64KB of RAM, and a couple of double-sided high density 8" floppy drives? When I later added an 8" 8MB HDD and a 128MB ramdisk, that system was really all the processing power I thought I would ever need.

 
High Density 8" ?

LUXURY !


StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2

3 edits
reply to NetFixer
Click for full size
SC/MP kit
said by NetFixer:

I didn't know that you were such a young whippersnapper

I'm not. I was picking up on the 486 discussion.

My first computer was soldered together by me. It had 256 bytes of RAM, 512 bytes of ROM and had a 1MHz 8-bit CPU.

I later added, myself, 1KB of RAM (bought and wired the chips in myself). After that I bought/built a cassette tape interface to store programs on.

FYI no keyboard. Programs were entered by switches.

The pic above is not the original but a clone that I built from stuff I bought from eBay in 2003. The clone has an RS-232 interface (110 baud) but only 256 bytes of RAM and no cassette interface.
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!


antdude
A Ninja Ant
Premium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
United State
kudos:4
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
reply to NetFixer
said by NetFixer:

said by StuartMW:

/sigh

I remember when a PC with a 486DX-33, 4MB of RAM and a HD with a 1200KB/sec transfer rate was cutting edge.

I didn't know that you were such a young whippersnapper.

How about a 4mhz Z80, 64KB of RAM, and a couple of double-sided high density 8" floppy drives? When I later added an 8" 8MB HDD and a 128MB ramdisk, that system was really all the processing power I thought I would ever need.

Here's my computer history: »zimage.com/~ant/antfarm/about/toys.html :P
--
Ant @ AQFL.net and AntFarm.ma.cx. Please do not IM/e-mail me for technical support. Use this forum or better, »community.norton.com ! Disclaimer: The views expressed in this posting are mine, and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer.


NetFixer
Freedom is NOT Free
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage
reply to StuartMW
said by StuartMW:

said by NetFixer:

I didn't know that you were such a young whippersnapper

I'm not. I was picking up on the 486 discussion.

My first computer was soldered together by me. It had 256 bytes of RAM, 512 bytes of ROM and had a 1MHz 8-bit CPU.

I later added, myself, 1KB of RAM (bought and wired the chips in myself). After that I bought/built a cassette tape interface to store programs on.

FYI no keyboard. Programs were entered by switches.

The pic above is not the original but a clone that I built from stuff I bought from eBay in 2003. The clone has an RS-232 interface (110 baud) but only 256 bytes of RAM and no cassette interface.

I just chose a commercial product for my previous post because it was something that anyone could have purchased (although not with my custom BIOS and expansion interface), and I thought that some might even recognize it.

My first computer was designed by me and built on a breadboard. I wrote the BIOS and the Tape Operating System that it used. It was installed in a metal test instrument case similar to the one shown below...I don't think I ever got around to taking a photo of the actual computer.




It had an 8085 with 64KB of RAM for its main CPU, an 8070 with 32KB of RAM for an I/O processor, a serial port for interfacing with an ASR33 teletype (that served as both a console and a paper tape I/O device...and it was later replaced by a dumb ASCII CRT terminal), another serial port for a 1200 baud USR modem, a parallel port for a dot matrix printer (because the ASR33 was slow and only printed capital letters), and a dual cassette tape interface. It also had a built-in eprom burner.
--
A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.


StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2

2 edits
My (original) one was also in a "metal test instrument case" but had no top (the guts stuck up too far for one to fit). I don't have any photo's nor can I find an image online.

The 8085 came out 2-3 years after the National Semiconductor SC/MP I had (which was out in 1975-1976 I think).

Your setup had way more goodies than mine
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!


NetFixer
Freedom is NOT Free
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage
said by StuartMW:

My (original) one was also in a "metal test instrument case" but had no top (the guts stuck up too far for one to fit).

The 8085 came out 2-3 years after the National Semiconductor SC/MP I had (which was out in 1975-1976 I think).

Your setup had way more goodies than mine

My first home built computer was in the late 70's (I don't remember the exact year) and the 8085 had just become available for single device purchases (prior to that you had to buy them by the truckload).

I guess mine had more goodies because I was imitating the mainframe and mini computers that I worked with; although some of them also used front panel switches for control like your SC/MP box (such as the one shown below where Ernestine loses Peoria in the Lily Tomlin "We Don't Care" skit). The computer in the skit was a "third generation" small mainframe which was just beginning to use integrated circuits (although some of the circuitry was still discrete transistor-diode logic)

»www.hulu.com/watch/4163




That association with mainframe and mini computers is how I came to have a discarded flood damaged ASR33 (that I refurbished) to use as my initial console device (that would not have been my first choice if it had not been a freebie).
--
A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.


StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2

3 edits
said by NetFixer:

The computer in the skit...

quote:
We don't care. We're the phone company.

I see nothing has changed

PS: You'll find pictures and descriptions of a few SC/MP systems online. Some are now famous (e.g. the Sinclair MK14 kit in the UK). Mine was based on the National Semiconductor evaluation board (not the Introkit) as in the pic I posted above. Next to nothing online about that board.

PPS: I have acquired, over the years, via eBay original documentation, parts (unused) and so on. The board in the above pic is such an item and is in working condition almost 40 years after its release.
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!


intok

join:2012-03-15
reply to patcat88
said by patcat88:

You didn't mention how many hours it will take to render a single html page. Then again, are you claiming to use Lynx?

It was Firefox 1.5 era at the time, it handled pure HTML pages just fine. Rendering HTML was something hardware of that era was capable of.

All the Javascript, Flash and Silverlight Web 2.0 crap is just that, and it's unnecessary for the content on 99.9999% of sites out there. It only serves to bloat page size and load up the CPU to render something that should be instant even on very old hardware.

Flash was not installed for the fact that it's a useless drag on any system and offers no benefit to anyone but DRM obsessed media companies.


intok

join:2012-03-15
reply to neochu
My 800Mhz G4 w/ PC133 can handle WebM and H.264 videos up to 720p depending on bitrate.

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
reply to intok
There's various online solutions these days, including pre-k education for children, and a celeron processor computer couldn't handle these sites as they use flash and javascript. You should go back to lynx if you're going to think that way, apparently you don't use the web for much anway so you don't care, and that is why you are completely irrelevant, along with your opinion.
--
I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires- Susan B. Anthony
Yesterday we obeyed kings, and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to the truth- Kahlil G.


Trihexagonal

join:2004-08-29
US
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest
said by BlitzenZeus:

You should go back to lynx if you're going to think that way, apparently you don't use the web for much anway so you don't care, and that is why you are completely irrelevant, along with your opinion.

What do you mean, go back to lynx?


Davesnothere
No-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
Premium
join:2009-06-15
START Today!
kudos:7
reply to StuartMW
said by StuartMW:

....Your setup had way more goodies than mine

 
Hold that thought, and view this :

»www.youtube.com/watch?v=13JK5kChbRw


StuartMW
Who Is John Galt?
Premium
join:2000-08-06
Galt's Gulch
kudos:2
They'd be (mostly) Monty Python not The Goodies

BTW I had to walk barefoot uphill through the snow, both ways, to school
--
Don't feed trolls--it only makes them grow!

Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
kudos:5
reply to BlitzenZeus
said by BlitzenZeus:

I know for a fact even older dual core processors faster than the last single cores, excluding some xeon processors, couldn't process hd video on the cpu without gpu acceleration, and most of those system have a really old onboard gpu now.

My seven year old XP Pro machine does just fine with Fx 4 showing youtube videos in HTML5 HD at 720p or 1080i. It has a Pentium 4 processor (the last one from Intel - the extreme) at 3.8Ghz with hyperthreading. GPU acceleration is by default disabled on Fx4.
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
Youtube doesn't mean crap, try apple quicktime.

Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
kudos:5
Huh? I haven't allowed that piece of shit on my computers since I got my computer in the late 90's. Utter garbage designed for sheeple (just like all Apple products).
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
I knew you would say something like that. I've seen how the more compressed codecs like youtube uses still display a lesser quality of hd video ok on a machine, but when when you played a real hd video in a player like quicktime at 720 it choked on processing that it couldn't maintain the standard cinema fps. They are not the same. Just like playing a blu-ray movie is not the same as watching a youtube video.
--
I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires- Susan B. Anthony
Yesterday we obeyed kings, and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to the truth- Kahlil G.

Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
kudos:5
I've never seen a blu-ray movie. All the blu-ray stuff that came standard on this new machine is lost on me. I don't watch movies on a computer or TV shows. I will watch some youtube clips. The better ones are available also on my Samsung HD Smart TV that has a youtube app. Ones that are not, I just use Samsung Allshare and watch them on the TV that way. I don't even have a DVD player for the TV. I don't watch movies. I like TV dramas (gasp) on clear qam HD broadcast stations. I'm lamenting the end of the season currently and looking forward to Under the Dome next month.
--
When governments fear people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. Thomas Jefferson


intok

join:2012-03-15
reply to BlitzenZeus
said by BlitzenZeus:

There's various online solutions these days, including pre-k education for children, and a celeron processor computer couldn't handle these sites as they use flash and javascript. You should go back to lynx if you're going to think that way, apparently you don't use the web for much anway so you don't care, and that is why you are completely irrelevant, along with your opinion.

Just because someone refuses to use Flash or Silverlight and has an aversion to sites using a ridiculous amount of Javascript to achieve the same end result as the most basic HTML code would net means that they must use Lynx.

You wouldn't happen to be a web designer by chance would you? Thats the only reason I can see anyone justify this massive waste of resources is to have these sites that are a mangled blob of scripts that will ensure your employment by having to constantly redo the site just because theres some new social networking crap that you want to be able to link to on every page of the site.

See if you can spot the unnecessary Web2.0 cruft on these sites:
»www.salon.com/
»www.geek.com/apps/piracy-researc···1554798/
»jalopnik.com/google-street-view-···93832763


intok

join:2012-03-15
reply to BlitzenZeus
said by BlitzenZeus:

I knew you would say something like that. I've seen how the more compressed codecs like youtube uses still display a lesser quality of hd video ok on a machine, but when when you played a real hd video in a player like quicktime at 720 it choked on processing that it couldn't maintain the standard cinema fps. They are not the same. Just like playing a blu-ray movie is not the same as watching a youtube video.

Have you ever tried ripping the stream and using a video player that doesn't suck completely?

LaRRY_PEpPeR

join:2010-03-19
Wentzville, MO
reply to Woody79_00
said by Woody79_00:

All this hoopla about XP/2003 not being secure after April 2014 is just a running joke.

I'll be reluctant to run it much past May or whenever next year... it'll be a sad time. First kernel exploit (which are generally the same in ALL Windows versions, for anyone saying XP is less secure): it's not safe when there's any possibility of it being exploited on its own (fonts, images, rendering, etc.) or as a result of another exploit in some program.

Nothing you can do about that then. Any other exploits, user-mode, are less of a concern, and can at least be contained by Sandboxie.

1. XP Professional, Enable Software Restriction Policies, white list your known good apps, and nothing else will run on it...malware problem solved....malware can't install if the scripts/executable won't even run.

Yes, I'm an SRP fan (any other "anti-executable" stuff is a joke and sucks... so does SRP but it's built-in and no "cost" basically), and have manually applied it (registry), "2-level," on XP Home-as-Pro (install hack) which doesn't have GPO, etc. Someday I'll release a tool for configuring SRP along with a bunch of other stuff, like hopefully restoring some of XP's SRP functionality on Windows 7/8 so stuff can be run safely as Admin without the HORRIBLE UAC junk.

But what you said is a JOKE. Malware problem solved? So disconnected from reality! 1) SRP can easily be bypassed, by design - I should have a patch for that soon on XP/Vista (8?). 2) Even if not, who cares? You really think blocking "processes" is going to stop malware? No, complete programs (anything and everything) can simply run inside of allowed processes once they're exploited -- all shellcode, or loading a DLL without ever dropping a DLL on the system or even actually "loading" the DLL as far as SRP or any other "security" software is concerned.

2. Install the AV/Security Suite of your choice (XP will be supported by vendors for quite awhile longer because the market is their for them to make money)

ALL AV/"security" software, etc. SUCKS! Totally pointless and doesn't have a chance against the right kernel exploits. That includes my beloved Sandboxie (the only thing I'd consider using since it actually serves a purpose and is very useful), although there's a small chance that it could break or interfere with some kernel exploits by "accident."

Remember: You're dead, period, once the kernel is exploited. That is what WILL happen once the first exploits aren't patched in XP next year. It'll be the blood in the water. Each missing update results in more blood, and unlike now, the bleeding can never be stopped!

3 enjoy your XP/2003 system for as long as you want....if you want to be evne more secure install Windows SteadyState..works just fine for XP.

Against kernel exploits? I don't think so -- simply disable/remove/delete that [then-stupid] SteadyState.

in terms of security one "could" argue that newer versions of Windows are more of a security risk...because Windows 7 Code base, for exmaple, is huge in comparison with XP...just look at the amount of hard drive space each install takes...more lines of code = greater chance a flaw exists somewhere.

No, I don't think anyone that knows what they're talking about would argue that XP can be more secure than newer Windows. They have things that are better...

But I'm also tired of hearing from "experts" that XP (now, while it has updates) is "OMG so dangerous, WAAAAY less safe" than newer Windows! Month-after-month of updates and other things don't show evidence of that.


Woody79_00
I run Linux am I still a PC?
Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state
Larry, I don't even know where to begin, but i will try.

1. SRP is enough. That post you listed to by Diddier Stevens was patched long ago. Its also only exploitable if you have applications such as Office with macros, or other applications that use scripting languages...no one on this forum enables Office Macro's by default, and Scripting inside PDF readers is the kiss of death here.

»support.microsoft.com/kb/2532445

2. Im not saying AV/Security software is good. However it will do good enough in the 10% of the time SRP doesn't stop something 1st.

3. Your speaking of Kernel Exploits, but your leaving out the mention of those who practice safe hex...those who don't run as admin, those who don't visit unfamlair websites, those who have IE settings cranked to the max except the few sites we trust....under those conditions...XP will be fine for a long time.

Many of these "kernel exploits" are very hyped up...most only work on a "default configuration" of the said OS...you really think people here are not running a tweaked version? DEP makes heap sprays much harder to pull off.

there is a multitude of factors at play here...XP can be secure enough to use after support as long as one plays it safe. The OS will be as safe as whats between the ears of its user.

Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
reply to Smokey Bear
wouldnt companies simply getting rid of IE6 make XP a lot more secure? IE6 seems to have been the primary entry point for bad things with Windows XP.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

OZO
Premium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2
IE6 supported many different ways for configuration. What was offered to public was just a small part of it (the tip of the iceberg, if you will). In corporate environment it could be configured very tightly.
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...

psloss
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Lebanon, KS

1 edit
reply to Woody79_00
said by Woody79_00:

That post you listed to by Diddier Stevens was patched long ago. Its also only exploitable if you have applications such as Office with macros, or other applications that use scripting languages...no one on this forum enables Office Macro's by default, and Scripting inside PDF readers is the kiss of death here.

»support.microsoft.com/kb/2532445

The author notes in the comments to the link that Larry posted that the hotfix blocks that bypass from the SP1 versions (edit: and the RTM versions) of Windows 7 and 2008 R2, but doesn't note a similar hotfix for any other versions/service packs (writing "it will not help you if you use SRP on Windows XP or Vista"). Is there another hotfix for XP?

LaRRY_PEpPeR

join:2010-03-19
Wentzville, MO
reply to Woody79_00
said by Woody79_00:

Larry, I don't even know where to begin, but i will try.

I don't even know where... The first part of your reply -- really?!

1. SRP is enough. That post you listed to by Diddier Stevens was patched long ago.

NO! Not on XP/Vista (8?) as I said. Why else would I be making my own fix? I will release it first for use within Sandboxie (since that's all I care about), and then hopefully system-wide that anyone could use, but I have to be more careful with that.

Its also only exploitable if you have applications such as Office with macros, or other applications that use scripting languages...no one on this forum enables Office Macro's by default, and Scripting inside PDF readers is the kiss of death here.

»support.microsoft.com/kb/2532445

Umm, nooo, not even close. You're actually going by some stupid MS description?

It's simple function parameters that any code running could use...

2. Im not saying AV/Security software is good. However it will do good enough in the 10% of the time SRP doesn't stop something 1st.

Whatever, but, since most anti-... "security" software is useless against against the right kernel exploitation -- everything can be disabled, deleted, whatever, so it's pointless.

3. Your speaking of Kernel Exploits, but your leaving out the mention of those who practice safe hex...those who don't run as admin, those who don't visit unfamlair websites, those who have IE settings cranked to the max except the few sites we trust....under those conditions...XP will be fine for a long time.

Many exploits can come from those "familiar" sites!

Don't run as admin, do you really think that matters? That's what I do (dropped rights).

It makes NO difference! Why do you think it's a kernel exploit? Whether directly, or as a result of elevation (from any sort of user), it has full, better-than-admin access.

The only stuff that non-Admin helps with is strictly user-mode stuff. e.g. stuff that Sandboxie can [do extra to] contain...

Many of these "kernel exploits" are very hyped up...most only work on a "default configuration" of the said OS...you really think people here are not running a tweaked version?

So... you have a secret to preventing kernel exploits? The ones I'm thinking of have NO defense. What sort of non-default config is going to prevent them? I've never been able to come up with anything, though I'd like to and continue to run XP longer. But like I said, the first kernel thing that can't be patched in XP (look at the other Windows updates, same will apply to XP, as usual), it will no longer be safe.

Obviously never, ever use IE on the public Internet after updates end.

DEP makes heap sprays much harder to pull off.

DEP on its own these days (without ASLR: "DEP effectiveness") probably doesn't mean that much, can be bypassed, etc. Should of course use EMET on high-risk stuff.

That said, tomorrow I will release my "Permanent DEP" DLL which will make sure that DEP is effectively AlwaysOn while running with OptOut. (AlwaysOn is great if you can run that way.) It also enables "opt in" support of permanent DEP with /NXCOMPAT programs for XP (just like Vista SP1 and later).

there is a multitude of factors at play here...XP can be secure enough to use after support as long as one plays it safe. The OS will be as safe as whats between the ears of its user.

Not a chance online. If there's still a large install base: blood, blood, blood.

Frodo

join:2006-05-05
kudos:1
reply to Smokey Bear
On XP, SRP can be bypassed by using the Runas command.
Block C:\Windows\system32\calc.exe

Then issue:
runas /trustlevel:unrestricted calc
... and it runs, even for a restricted user. How that gets remotely executed escapes me.

LaRRY_PEpPeR

join:2010-03-19
Wentzville, MO
Not if runas.exe is blocked/Disallowed. (Or, for just inside Sandboxie, it can be blocked there instead.)

And if I (you) still want to run it as Admin (e.g. programs without dropped rights), with my 2-level SRP (only readable with Administrator permission), just set a more specific allowed/Unrestricted entry for: %WinDir%\system32\runas.exe

I've never tried it, but that's what I was gonna do, and it should work...


Woody79_00
I run Linux am I still a PC?
Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state
reply to LaRRY_PEpPeR
Larry...with all due respect, your missing my point totally.

1. you talk about kernel exploits, and "blood, blood, blood" while missing the crux of my argument altogether....

"In order for exploit code to run on the system the user must be tricked into opening a bobby trapped file via email, etc or be tricked into clicking on a booby trapped web site that hosts said code. If the user does neither, the exploit can't happen. "

is that spelling it out clear enough for you....be it the attacker uses social media, email, instant message, etc...in order to pull off a kernel exploit they would have to trick the user into visiting the infected web site or opening a booby trapped file...if the user does neither..the XP machine is fine. Under these conditions XP is no more secure or insecure then the any other OS. Its always up to the user.

The users of XP have the same options as other OS, which is remove the vector of attack (not visiting booby trapped sites, and not opening untrusted attachments) in doing so no exploit code can even be run to begin with.

If the user takes away the attackers avenues to attack the system, booby trapped links and attachments from various sources, then the stalker has no teeth....you seem to have this notion that most XP user's aren't too bright, but I assure you they are very smart....they have their reasons for using it.

i migrated off XP last year to 7 and 8 respectively, but to say a user can't be safe using Windows XP with some basic common sense is just nonsense. The average everyday joe, maybe, but most of them are on new Windows...guys and gals on this forum...they are more then capable of using XP safely..as long as they practice safe hex

BlitzenZeus
Burnt Out Cynic
Premium
join:2000-01-13
kudos:3
Software, and driver developers will stop supporting xp. Software will use compilers which xp won't support, drivers changed with Vista and up also. Some new software, and drivers will still work in xp, however the company no longer has to pander to these people.

The fact is most people who use xp still run as a full admin all the time, and won't use a user account, otherwise try to use methods to try to force software to run as a user. Hell there's still new software put out by companies which wants to be ran as a full admin all the time which is completely unnecessary as they are not admin tools. There's members here to claim they can't stand uac, or using a user account even on the latest operating systems, and use 3rd party claiming they will be protected, yet not allowing them to be ran as an admin in the first place is a far better step. I was trying to get people to use a user account in xp, and vista, however with all the badly written software, especially those written also for Win9x legacy they always required full admin for stupid reasons like they had to write to their program files directory, however even that could have been solved with a simple ntfs permissions fix for just that program if they were not still running fat32 which had no file security at all within the os.

People can try to shoehorn their xp to be secure, or be anal with whitelists, however you know full well the average person won't do this so these machines will be prime for botnet infections. The fact is most malware is ran by users, not by exploits, and with most of them elevating it, otherwise already running as a full admin they let that trojan horse onto the system themselves.
--
I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires- Susan B. Anthony
Yesterday we obeyed kings, and bent our necks before emperors. But today we kneel only to the truth- Kahlil G.