5 Apr
2011
5 Apr
'11
8:33 a.m.
Hi James,
Yes, most interesting, but isn't it a little beside point?
I mean, we're still targeting the XP kernel in ReactOS, aren't we?
Or have I missed a re-targeting point in my absence?
WBR // Love
2011/3/31 <ros-dev-request(a)reactos.org>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: James Tabor <jimtabor.rosdev(a)gmail.com>
To: ReactOS Development List <ros-dev(a)reactos.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:23:40 -0500
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [gadamopoulos] 51115: [ntoskrnl] -
Implement calling OkayToCloseProcedure callouts to win32k for desktop and
window station objects - Fix a bug that caused ObpCloseHandle to return
success even whe...
Hi everyone,
http://www.alex-ionescu.com/ Main Blog,
http://www.alex-ionescu.com/?p=61 Black Hat 2008 Wrap-up <------- here
http://www.alex-ionescu.com/BH08-AlexIonescu.pdf <------------------ read
I would like everyone (new Developers) that haven't read this blog to
do so and get up to date!
I'm not sure if M$ fixed their issues, it may not be Server 2003 but
at least 2008 plus or 7.
Thanks,
James
ps I have the right to use M$ since 1983........
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Alex Ionescu <ionucu(a)videotron.ca> wrote:
It's hilarious how this new code has the
exact same Windows security bug
I gave a talk about at BlackHat 2-3 years ago
(which Microsoft fixed in
Vista).
It's sad how this code ignores the exported PsSetProcessWindowStation API
and
relevant EPROCESS field.
It's awesome how nothing changes whenever I prop up to see the
"progress".
--
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
5 Apr
5 Apr
8:39 a.m.
New subject: Windows Internals 5th Edition
No. We all changed our minds and are now targeting Windows Millennium
Edition to enhance user experience. :)
On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 18:33:08 +1000, Love Nystrom <love.nystrom(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi James,
Yes, most interesting, but isn't it a little beside point?
I mean, we're still targeting the XP kernel in ReactOS, aren't we?
Or have I missed a re-targeting point in my absence?
WBR // Love
2011/3/31 <ros-dev-request(a)reactos.org>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: James Tabor <jimtabor.rosdev(a)gmail.com>
> To: ReactOS Development List <ros-dev(a)reactos.org>
> Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:23:40 -0500
> Subject: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [gadamopoulos] 51115: [ntoskrnl] -
> Implement calling OkayToCloseProcedure callouts to win32k for desktop
> and
> window station objects - Fix a bug that caused ObpCloseHandle to return
> success even whe...
> Hi everyone,
> http://www.alex-ionescu.com/ Main Blog,
> http://www.alex-ionescu.com/?p=61 Black Hat 2008 Wrap-up <------- here
> http://www.alex-ionescu.com/BH08-AlexIonescu.pdf <------------------
> read
>
> I would like everyone (new Developers) that haven't read this blog to
> do so and get up to date!
>
> I'm not sure if M$ fixed their issues, it may not be Server 2003 but
> at least 2008 plus or 7.
>
> Thanks,
> James
>
> ps I have the right to use M$ since 1983........
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Alex Ionescu <ionucu(a)videotron.ca>
> wrote:
> > It's hilarious how this new code has the exact same Windows security
> bug
> I gave a talk about at BlackHat 2-3 years ago (which Microsoft fixed in
> Vista).
> >
> > It's sad how this code ignores the exported PsSetProcessWindowStation
> API
> and relevant EPROCESS field.
> >
> > It's awesome how nothing changes whenever I prop up to see the
> "progress".
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Alex Ionescu
>
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
8:40 a.m.
New subject: Windows Internals 5th Edition
AFAIK we are targetting 2003 kernel
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Love Nystrom <love.nystrom(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
Hi James,
Yes, most interesting, but isn't it a little beside point?
I mean, we're still targeting the XP kernel in ReactOS, aren't we?
Or have I missed a re-targeting point in my absence?
WBR // Love
2011/3/31 <ros-dev-request(a)reactos.org>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: James Tabor <jimtabor.rosdev(a)gmail.com>
To: ReactOS Development List <ros-dev(a)reactos.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 19:23:40 -0500
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [gadamopoulos] 51115: [ntoskrnl] -
Implement calling OkayToCloseProcedure callouts to win32k for desktop and
window station objects - Fix a bug that caused ObpCloseHandle to return
success even whe...
Hi everyone,
http://www.alex-ionescu.com/ Main Blog,
http://www.alex-ionescu.com/?p=61 Black Hat 2008 Wrap-up <------- here
http://www.alex-ionescu.com/BH08-AlexIonescu.pdf <------------------ read
I would like everyone (new Developers) that haven't read this blog to
do so and get up to date!
I'm not sure if M$ fixed their issues, it may not be Server 2003 but
at least 2008 plus or 7.
Thanks,
James
ps I have the right to use M$ since 1983........
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 9:19 AM, Alex Ionescu <ionucu(a)videotron.ca>
wrote:
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
It's hilarious how this new code has the
exact same Windows security bug
I gave a talk about at BlackHat 2-3 years ago
(which Microsoft fixed in
Vista).
It's sad how this code ignores the exported PsSetProcessWindowStation
API and
relevant EPROCESS field.
It's awesome how nothing changes whenever I prop up to see the
"progress".
--
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
11:29 a.m.
New subject: Windows Internals 5th Edition
2011/4/5 Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo <elhoir(a)gmail.com>
AFAIK we are targetting 2003 kernel
But 2003 is still a 5.x kernel, isn't it ?
Or am I starting to suffer brain coagulation from recurrent heat stroke ?
I'm using 4th Ed as my compass .. and 5th edition address 6.x kernel.
If we're really working on a 6.x kernel now, I need to know where
we transcended
from 5.x so I can archive a private branch of 5.x at it's last known
version.
WBR // Love
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Love Nystrom <love.nystrom(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> Yes, most interesting, but isn't it a little beside point?
> I mean, we're still targeting the XP kernel in ReactOS, aren't we?
> Or have I missed a re-targeting point in my absence?
>
>
11:45 a.m.
New subject: Windows Internals 5th Edition
I think it is NT 5.2 though. I cannot work out why not set the target for
6.x though as that kernel is more stable than the 5.x version.
On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 21:29:58 +1000, Love Nystrom <love.nystrom(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
2011/4/5 Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo
<elhoir(a)gmail.com>
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
AFAIK we are targetting 2003 kernel
But 2003 is still a 5.x kernel, isn't it ?
Or am I starting to suffer brain coagulation from recurrent heat stroke ?
I'm using 4th Ed as my compass .. and 5th edition address 6.x kernel.
If we're really working on a 6.x kernel now, I need to know where
we transcended
from 5.x so I can archive a private branch of 5.x at it's last known
version.
WBR // Love
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Love Nystrom
<love.nystrom(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
>
>> Hi James,
>>
>> Yes, most interesting, but isn't it a little beside point?
>> I mean, we're still targeting the XP kernel in ReactOS, aren't we?
>> Or have I missed a re-targeting point in my absence?
>>
>>
11:55 a.m.
New subject: Windows Internals 5th Edition
AFAIK 6.x has a MAJOR difference in structure.
Swapping target before even arriving at our original destination
sounds like an invitation to a mess beyond description to me.
IMHO we may consider moving on to 6.x, *after* arriving at a stable,
workable, and useful 5.x.
For ex, many of my old colleagues *refuse* to use anything newer than XP
SP2, because of all
the compatibility issues, and they do *not* want that headache in addition
to dealing with their
own application code.
WBR // Love
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Adam <geekdundee(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I think it is NT 5.2 though. I cannot work out why not
set the target for
6.x though as that kernel is more stable than the 5.x version.
On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 21:29:58 +1000, Love Nystrom <love.nystrom(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
2011/4/5 Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo <elhoir(a)gmail.com>
AFAIK we are targetting 2003 kernel
But 2003 is still a 5.x kernel, isn't it ?
Or am I starting to suffer brain coagulation from recurrent heat stroke ?
I'm using 4th Ed as my compass .. and 5th edition address 6.x kernel.
If we're really working on a 6.x kernel now, I need to know where
we transcended
from 5.x so I can archive a private branch of 5.x at it's last known
version.
WBR // Love
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Love Nystrom <love.nystrom(a)gmail.com
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
wrote:
>
> Hi James,
>>
>> Yes, most interesting, but isn't it a little beside point?
>> I mean, we're still targeting the XP kernel in ReactOS, aren't we?
>> Or have I missed a re-targeting point in my absence?
>>
>>
>>
11:57 a.m.
New subject: Windows Internals 5th Edition
Makes a lot of sense I suppose. And it is possible to add new features
from 6.x to a 5.x kernel too. Strictly speaking the 5.x kernel has been
around for a long time; and the 4.x kernel has not that much difference it
would seem, other than lots of new features.
On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 21:55:42 +1000, Love Nystrom <love.nystrom(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
AFAIK 6.x has a MAJOR difference in structure.
Swapping target before even arriving at our original destination
sounds like an invitation to a mess beyond description to me.
IMHO we may consider moving on to 6.x, *after* arriving at a stable,
workable, and useful 5.x.
For ex, many of my old colleagues *refuse* to use anything newer than XP
SP2, because of all
the compatibility issues, and they do *not* want that headache in
addition
to dealing with their
own application code.
WBR // Love
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Adam <geekdundee(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it is NT 5.2 though. I cannot work out why not set the target
> for
> 6.x though as that kernel is more stable than the 5.x version.
>
>
> On Tue, 05 Apr 2011 21:29:58 +1000, Love Nystrom
> <love.nystrom(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> 2011/4/5 Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo <elhoir(a)gmail.com>
>>
>> AFAIK we are targetting 2003 kernel
>>>
>>>
>> But 2003 is still a 5.x kernel, isn't it ?
>> Or am I starting to suffer brain coagulation from recurrent heat
>> stroke ?
>>
>> I'm using 4th Ed as my compass .. and 5th edition address 6.x kernel.
>> If we're really working on a 6.x kernel now, I need to know where
>> we transcended
>> from 5.x so I can archive a private branch of 5.x at it's last known
>> version.
>>
>> WBR // Love
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Love Nystrom <love.nystrom(a)gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi James,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, most interesting, but isn't it a little beside point?
>>>> I mean, we're still targeting the XP kernel in ReactOS, aren't
we?
>>>> Or have I missed a re-targeting point in my absence?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
> --
> Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
4918
days inactive
4918
days old
6 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Adam -
Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo -
Love Nystrom