|
Open more threads for Ncrack?Ncrack is a rdp bruter and doesn't work without visual c++.More threads?more faster ,someone told me to have a look over this functions,but I don't think I can handle alone so please who can help me
thank you
CreateThread(),CreateProcess()?
|
|
|
|
|
Please read the preamble above, especially the words in red.
|
|
|
|
|
First read the text in red above, then go and ask your question in the appropriate forum.
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
ok i will give u coffe, free sugar ?
|
|
|
|
|
FAIL! You need to remember to offer BACON!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
Have you tried clearing the buffer to the stacks so your overflows will dispose as is needed to properly create threads through the process command as part of a task in the io container? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
correct me please if is so so bad command, thanks
|
|
|
|
|
i can't learn all that language and then fix that threads,do u have skype or something? team viewer please?
|
|
|
|
|
thank you,sorry my insistence but i wondering if u have a small tutorial or something with the steps,or give me more details,thank u
|
|
|
|
|
Really man, you're in the wrong forum and I have no idea what you want. I don't know NCrack, or how to spawn threads.
My previous post was a joke (it really made no sense at all)...
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to the lounge. I am aware you have been a member for a while, but as it's a new experience posting anywhere on the site. The other posters are having a bit of fun with you because you don't ask programming questions in the lounge . I wouldn't try the proposed solutions if I were you.
Something to be aware when you ask questions on the site. You have to be as specific as possible and don't expect people to write the code for you. Also, it's very unlikely that you will find people who are going to be willing to Skype with you.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
so come with my on skype to solve this, please hehe just tryng my luck,who knows...plz :P
|
|
|
|
|
Err no. You couldn't afford my daily consultancy rate.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
BURN![^]
I really hope I used it correctly.
"You'd have to be a floating database guru clad in a white toga and ghandi level of sereneness to fix this goddamn clusterfuck.", BruceN[ ^]
|
|
|
|
|
Skype? Really - do you think we want to see what you look like?*
Not just you - any of the grim characters that inhabit this arcane outpost. Yeeech - nightmares would be considered comic relief.
* Or become identifiable, ourselves?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
So I've got this quicksort function in a JavaScript library.
It worked, got some tests, and all was well.
Then I changed the return smaller.concat([pivot], bigger); to a custom bit like return smaller.unionAll([pivot]).unionAll(bigger);
And then my tests started failing.
My tests for unionAll passed, no problem, but my sorting got messed up all of a sudden.
So somehow unionAll did not always return items in the same order as their source, which actually would've taken me a lot of work to accomplish.
Rather weird bug, that.
Hours of debugging later, no code changes (except lots of debugging variables), and all of a sudden everything starts to work 
Had I forgotten a semi-colon? Did I accidentally overwrite some variable which was fixed by the declaration of debugging variables? Was the type of a variable not always what I expected it to be?
I guess I will never know... 
Luckily, I'm not the only one with this problem[^].
The bug seems to be fixed, but I've got mixed feelings about it nonetheless... 
|
|
|
|
|
I know that you are an experienced programmer, but...
Code that works because of "magic" is the work of the Devil.  If I were you, I would debug the code until I understood why it is now working. Doing otherwise is a recipe for mysterious failures down the line.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Code that works because of "magic" is the work of the Devil
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't know why it wasn't working in the first place! 
And I did make that sacrifice to the dark lord Cthulhu, why would I question him now? 
|
|
|
|
|
Writing Javascript doesn't count as a "sacrifice to the dark lord Cthulhu" - it's a punishment for evil deeds elsewhere in your life...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
My deeds were so evil that I was condemned to HTML/CSS a while ago
JavaScript seems like heaven in comparison, so that's the good news
I need the transition anyway, I don't think I could go from HTML/CSS back to C# just like that. The magnificence of C# would look to great in comparison and I'm only mortal, so my head could explode.
|
|
|
|
|
you will have to look at the differences on how concat and Union all work.
By adding debug routines you may have slowed it to allow parts to complete properly.
Or possibly it was the second "union all" that was added.
No Black Magic there.
|
|
|
|
|
I know how concat works, but obviously I don't have the source code.
unionAll is something I wrote, it works pretty much the same way, but lazy evaluated and it doesn't accept multiple parameters, hence the extra unionAll.
I wrote some tests on unionAll to check that it really adds the elements of a and b to a newly created c, and it does (in the order of a and b).
There is no multi-threading, so "slowing down" shouldn't be an issue (unless bits can jump, as well as fall over).
So there should be no difference between the two.
The weird part is that the sorting was off, but the algorithm itself didn't change.
But the REALLY weird part is that it started working after hours of debugging and no code changes (as far as I know).
There's probably a change somewhere, but after hours of debugging I can't find it.
All looks pretty much the same.
If everything was as easy as "look[ing] at the differences" I'd be out of a job
|
|
|
|
|
Could it be pulling the sort from memory then ?
If you reboot and try it again will it fail ?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
