1 Reply by 5eraph

(8 replies, posted in Software)

Hope I'm replying in the proper thread.

TechDud wrote:

[quoted from: 2015-01-19 09:29:26 UTC]

@Outbreaker - please let 5eraph in on this.  It would be cool if he could use whatever he likes.  I look forward to eventually joining that community, but not at this time.  We need some good members of both communities to help weave a greater community.

He just did.  It's been over eight years since I've replied here.  Nice to know my login still works.  smile


TechDud wrote:

[quoted from: 2015-01-07 09:22:51 UTC]

Note that 5eraph's specific SA3009008 solution appears incomplete at best, and perhaps even erroneous.
Look at the last two lines of that post, where TLS 1.0 is "enabled" with a 0x01.  That is apparently incorrect.

Microsoft wrote:

"To allow this cipher algorithm, change the DWORD value data of the Enabled value to 0xffffffff. Or, change the DWORD data to 0x0. If you do not configure the Enabled value, the default is enabled."
     http://support.microsoft.com/kb/245030   see also:  http://support.microsoft.com/kb/187498 & http://support.microsoft.com/kb/811833

Is this not also true for protocols?

To be fair, I can't take credit or blame for the solution I offer.  It consists almost entirely of Microsoft's recommendations from SA3009008.  Beyond what Microsoft suggests, I made an assumption and added the Enabled values of 1 to the TLS 1.0 registry keys.  I don't know if protocol entries should share the same values as cipher algorithm entries.  Wasn't aware Enabled could take any values other than 0 or 1, despite it being a DWORD.  wink

I'll gladly remove the TLS 1.0 entries if there are any objections.  Don't know how to test the effectiveness of different values on my PC.


Outbreaker wrote:

[quoted from 2015-01-07 04:54:37 UTC]

i think [XP_KB3009008_Schannel_Registry_Mods_by_TechDud.zip] should not be forced unto usesrs because with this patch people won't be able to connect to outdated HTTPS servers.

Don't have this ZIP, so I can't comment on everything it contains.  Haven't looked too closely at the latest release yet:  NT5_IIS_KB245030-3009008_Schannel_Registry_Mods_Jan23-2015.zip.  And can't really comment intelligently on the suggested workarounds for IIS given in SA3009008--don't know how to test them.  But the IE suggestion has already been implemented in Firefox, and is sure to follow in other browsers.

Richard Barnes wrote:

[quoted from Mozilla Security Blog]

SSLv3 will be disabled by default in Firefox 34, which will be released on Nov 25 [2014].

Microsoft has announced in SA3009008 that SSLv3 will be disabled in IE "over the coming months."  When that happens, I'll remove that code from my XPx64 update pack and POSReady addon.  I expect the fix will be included in the ieuinit.inf file of a future cumulative IE update, where an old registry entry for SecureProtocols already exists.

Go to forum: Software

2 Reply by 5eraph

(13 replies, posted in Feature Requests)

Bâshrat the Sneaky wrote:

I'll implement as soon as RyanVM confirms it's good to go. He's the Updates Master, so his word will make or break it.

The PORTCLS.SYS update (KB921401) has now been implemented in the RyanVM Update Pack.

http://www.ryanvm.net/msfn/changelog.html

Go to forum: Feature Requests

3 Reply by 5eraph

(14 replies, posted in Other)

Thanks, Helmi. smile

Go to forum: Other

4 Reply by 5eraph

(7 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)

Helmi is correct.  If you use both the RyanVM Integrator and nLite then the Integrator always comes first and DriverPacks always last.

Go to forum: Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base

5 Reply by 5eraph

(43 replies, posted in Other)

It's good to hear things are going well for you, Bâshrat. smile

I can understand the new time constraints, and I still find it amazing that you can find the time to work on the DriverPacks regardless.  I'm currently settling into a new job and can hardly find time to do anything besides eat, work, and sleep.

That being said, I haven't had much time to test your GUI slipstreamer, but I think it's a vast improvement visually and it appears to be much more functional.  I'll patiently wait to see what else you have planned for it.

You're more noble with your donations than you need to be, in my opinion.  I fully expect donations to be spent on a whim when given toward a personal project, but it is nice to know that you use them to improve upon yourself and your studies.

Keep up the great work and have a beer on me.  wink

Go to forum: Other

6 Reply by 5eraph

(7 replies, posted in DriverPack Sound)

Are you referring to Creative's Extigy or Audigy2 NX?  Those are the only external "sound cards" that I can remember and were for use with notebooks, primarily.

EDIT:  Nevermind.  It appears that Creative has been pretty busy making products that I haven't heard of. smile

Go to forum: DriverPack Sound

7 Topic by 5eraph

(2 replies, posted in DriverPack Chipset)

http://www.nvidia.com/object/nforce_nf4_win2k_6.86.html

This appears to be the new official driver for the following nF4 chipsets:
     * nForce4 Intel x16
     * nForce4 Series AMD (Ultra, SLI, SLI x16)

Go to forum: DriverPack Chipset

8 Reply by 5eraph

(7 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)

You have a point, and I believe Bâshrat is already working toward that with the DriverPacks.  Siginet is making inroads in that department as well with the RVM Integrator that could possibly be used for the Update Packs themselves; he already has an addon that updates itself at integration time.  I don't know nuhi's plans regarding such functionality.

Go to forum: Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base

9 Reply by 5eraph

(2 replies, posted in Other)

Correct, lieblingsbesuch, but let me clarify...

For all devices that have WHQL-signed drivers, those are the ones Bâshrat uses (even if newer, unsigned drivers exist).  Beta drivers aren't used unless absolutely necessary (as with nVidia's video driver because they suck lately wink).  There are rarely exceptions to this rule.  Customized drivers from 3rd parties are never used. Period.

For devices that never had properly signed drivers, the latest known drivers are used.

The check for signed drivers, however, is not disabled permanently.  Disabling the WHQL check only prevents warnings with any unsigned drivers it finds that it must use (signed drivers will still be preferred over unsigned ones).  The check will be reenabled after Windows has all the drivers it needs.

Go to forum: Other

10 Reply by 5eraph

(5 replies, posted in DriverPack LAN)

You updated the link to point to the Windows 98 first edition driver. wink

In either case, [6.41] / 5.641.0209.2006 is already included in DP LAN 6.05.1.  Pay no attention to the "Auto installation program" release dates shown on Realtek's Driver Pages.  We would only need the "WinXP Driver" link in this case because it includes RTNIC.SYS for Win2K.  All of the SYS files are identical between the auto installation program and the raw driver download. smile

Go to forum: DriverPack LAN

11 Reply by 5eraph

(2 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)

Well, I'll be damned.  They actually released a WHQL update that's non-beta!

I wonder what they broke moving to Release 90. roll

Go to forum: DriverPack Graphics

12 Reply by 5eraph

(5 replies, posted in DriverPack LAN)

I think he meant to post this link:

ftp://152.104.238.194/cn/nic/rtl8169rtl … (0621).zip

Apparently, PunBB doesn't like translating parentheses in an untagged URL.

Go to forum: DriverPack LAN

13 Reply by 5eraph

(7 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)

nLite can really mess things up if you use it at the wrong times.  Make sure you're doing things in the correct order.

http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=27074#27074

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?sho … ntry444435

Go to forum: Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base

14 Reply by 5eraph

(5 replies, posted in DriverPack Graphics)

Helmi, Ryan's Update Pack had the exact same problem prior to version 2.0.  His solution was to remove a lot of the updates from the pack.  You can work around the issue by disabling SFC/WFP and deleting all entries under [ProductCatalogsToInstall] in SVCPACK.INF.

The problem is that Windows XP has a very hard time integrating more than around 150 CATs.

Go to forum: DriverPack Graphics

15 Reply by 5eraph

(19 replies, posted in Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base)

The D folder is supposed to remain when KtD is enabled.  This is where the drivers are. wink

Go to forum: Feedback and Support - DriverPacks Base

16 Reply by 5eraph

(1 replies, posted in Other)

I can imagine most graphics drivers for newer cards will fail miserably considering most would need tweaking after the release of each major graphically intensive app every few months (games mostly).

It's really sad that such a system is needed.  I guess that's what happens when you advertise Vista as a gaming platform.  And it really sucks that they're holding back Halo 2 for PC just to sell this point when Halo 3 will be released for XBox 360 before Vista ships.

Go to forum: Other

17 Reply by 5eraph

(76 replies, posted in DriverPack Mass Storage)

There don't seem to be any issues with the Chipset or Audio DriverPacks; these can be left alone.

I would suggest removing the unnecessary nForce driver folders from the MassStorage and LAN DriverPacks.  There have been issues with each of these with other nForce chipsets, particularly between nF3 and nF4.

SpaceCommanderTravis wrote:

Would it be possible to let the slipstreamed installation disc install the drivers that it wants, but then get it to run the v6.70 driver bundle once the set up is complete...

Yes, but you'd need to make a silent installer for it.  That is beyond my level of expertise, but there are guides on MSFN, I'm sure.  An Auto-It script looks to be your best bet.

Go to forum: DriverPack Mass Storage

18 Reply by 5eraph

(76 replies, posted in DriverPack Mass Storage)

SpaceCommanderTravis wrote:

I'm not sure why you think that these aren't the correct drivers for my motherboard...

I'm only going by the versions included in the DriverPacks and assuming that Bâshrat has separated the drivers into their respective folders properly.  I have not tried a manual install or disassembly of nVidia's chipset drivers to compare version numbers.

SpaceCommanderTravis wrote:

Is it possible that the installation has used the earlier signed drivers here in preference to the newer unsigned ones?

Yes, Windows will choose signed drivers over unsigned drivers regardless of version number/date during an unattended installation.

SpaceCommanderTravis wrote:

Since Driverpacks.net says that the Chipset DriverPack includes v6.70 for the Nforce4 motherboards, does this mean that these replaced the previous v6.66 drivers (in the update at v5.11 on 6th Nov 2005) or that the v6.70 drivers were added to the existing pack?

Only Bâshrat can answer that and some of your other questions, but I'd guess he replaced v6.66 with v6.70.

The fastest and safest method (in my opinion) is to simply remove the unrelated nForce drivers from your DriverPacks.  It will save a lot of guesswork and trial-and-error.

Go to forum: DriverPack Mass Storage

19 Reply by 5eraph

(11 replies, posted in DriverPack Mass Storage)

RogueSpear wrote:

You'd think after almost 30 years we wouldn't have to worry about silly things like this anymore with PCs.

Agreed.  Mine is also installed internally in a 3½" bay, but the card reader came with a USB dongle that connects to the motherboard for internal use.  Makes it that much easier, i guess, since i don't have to remove half of my PCI cards to connect the card reader.

Of course, the pinouts on the dongle didn't match up with those of my motherboard when I received it. wink

Go to forum: DriverPack Mass Storage

20 Reply by 5eraph

(11 replies, posted in DriverPack Mass Storage)

Yeah, my problem was that my boot sequence is a bit screwy.  When I upgraded the BIOS before reinstalling Windows I forgot to change the sequence.  Drive C: is my storage array (which contains BOOT.INI and other bootfiles); drive I is my Windows array.  Currently neither drive letter can be changed.  I'll be changing the boot sequence and reinstalling Windows as soon as RyanVM releases the next Update Pack and I tweak the latest DriverPacks. smile

It'll be a while, though.

Go to forum: DriverPack Mass Storage

21 Reply by 5eraph

(11 replies, posted in DriverPack Mass Storage)

I was considering that Mitsumi until I realized it wouldn't accept xD cards.

But, anyway, have you tried disconnecting the card reader to install Windows then connecting it when finished?  I'm considering doing this because the existence of my card reader's four drive letters throws all the others out of whack.  My Windows/system drive is I:. sad

Go to forum: DriverPack Mass Storage

22 Reply by 5eraph

(7 replies, posted in Other)

You ask for a lot of faith from your participants if you expect them to give you so much detail about themselves without knowing exactly who will be receiving this information.  It reeks of an identity theft scam.

Start by providing this information about yourself and how these people will be paid.

Go to forum: Other

23 Reply by 5eraph

(7 replies, posted in Other)

You're not giving us any new information about yourself or the validity of what you're offering to take this very seriously.  Your post here is almost a perfect carbon copy of what you posted at ryanvm.net:

http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2382

Go to forum: Other

24 Reply by 5eraph

(88 replies, posted in Feature Requests)

I don't know if this will help you, but it helped me plenty when trying to get Vista to install.

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?sho … ntry517465

Go to forum: Feature Requests

25 Reply by 5eraph

(88 replies, posted in Feature Requests)

nForce3 is supported natively in Vista x64 Beta 2 (build 5384.4).  So is the Radeon X850 XT PE (and it's recognized as such smile).  I suspect that most modern motherboards and devices will also have native Vista support when it goes final.

The hardest thing I see in creating DriverPacks for Vista is replacing the native drivers with up to date ones.

Go to forum: Feature Requests