|
|
Hello all,
WINFO calls IOMEM.DLL to simple access ring0. but it can't be used on Windows 8. Is any other way for Windows 8?
Vincent
|
|
|
|
|
I am having a problem making libusb0 to identify ANY USB device.
usb_init(); does not return any values and
iResult = usb_find_busses(); returns 1
and
iResult = usb_find_devices(); returns 0
and the DLL is
Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\libusb0.dll', no matching symbolic information found.
The source for the device insists on using "libusb 0.1 ", but there is no such thing.
System and other applications identify ALL USB and the device in question.
Any constructive help will be as always appreciated.
Vaclav
|
|
|
|
|
Vaclav_Sal wrote: usb_init(); does not return any values
Exactly as described in the documentation[^].
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
Why is the topic of discussion here will be deleted it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Are you sure you are American? I know they speak a slightly arcane English, but you.....
|
|
|
|
|
Dude! Yoda wouldn't freaking understand this question!
What are you talking about??
|
|
|
|
|
Check the link in OP's previous message; he/she speaks Spammish.
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
how to break window password from keyboard by any short cut keys???
|
|
|
|
|
1. You can't.
2. It's illegal.
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, because Microsoft put in there a keyboard shortcut that breaks passwords, can you imagine what kind of security hole that would be?
I think you are looking in the wrong place, we will not help you break into computers. If you are trying to recover your own windows password, its damn near impossible and even Microsoft doesn't have a procedure for this. Password encryption is one-way, meaning once you set a password it can never be decrypted.
|
|
|
|
|
Ron Beyer wrote: Yes, because Microsoft put in there a keyboard shortcut that breaks passwords, can you imagine what kind of security hole that would be?
I think you are looking in the wrong place, we will not help you break into computers. If you are trying to recover your own windows password, its damn near impossible and even Microsoft doesn't have a procedure for this. Password encryption is one-way, meaning once you set a password it can never be decrypted.
So I shouldn't tell him about this[^].
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
That resets the password, it doesn't "break" it. My point is still valid, reversing the encrypted data back to the password is damn near impossible. I also dare you to try it on a system that has encrypted folders, you'll never recover the data...
I've tried almost every "recovery" tool out there and none of them worked. The reset tools work (provided you don't have encrypted folders), but even they cause issues on some systems with profile duplication.
|
|
|
|
|
If you have genuinely forgot your password try googling 'password recovery tools' there a few.
not as hard as some make this out to be. 
|
|
|
|
|
There are all kinds of ways of breaking windows passwords but I am not going to tell you them. 
==============================
Nothing to say.
|
|
|
|
|
I have some device simulation framework code in vb.net which I have uploaded here: https://kinectmultipoint.codeplex.com/releases/view/107451[^]
Does anyone in here know enough to figure out what's wrong with the code? (In vbscript it works just fine that's why iam scratching my head). I have tried creating com objects before in vb.net. My best guess is I am using a wrong type or class somewhere in code.
jeffery
|
|
|
|
|
In a preemptive environment, does a single CPU instruction execute atomically, even if it uses more than one clock cycle?
Or can an instruction be preempted during its second of, say, three clock cycles?
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
As far as I know it should execute completely to preempt. If the instruction can be halted in the middle of the process I am pretty sure it will need to be considered as not being executed at all (as the process of changing from one process to another will copy all the registers, including the stack pointer).
So, even if at the hardware level it may be interrupter without completing, I am sure we will never see partial values lost (but I really believe the interrupt itself will only work at the next instruction).
|
|
|
|
|
I just searched and this link gives a good information: http://www.sltf.com/articles/pein/pein9505.htm[^]
There is a part that says this: "Interrupt processing has some basic requirements from the CPU. Before it can respond to an interrupt, the processor must wait for an "interruptible" state in its processing. For example, if the processor's writing to memory, it must wait until the write is done before processing the interrupt."
So, it will never interrupt in the middle of a instruction. The instruction itself is always atomic.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, I see. Thank you for that information. 
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry for the late reply, but I had to chime in here:
It is a common misunderstanding, unless an instruction is designed to be atomic (like x86 CMPXCHG or 680x0 TAS), an instruction can be interrupted mid-execution (e.g. INC [mem] can be interrupted after the read and before the write of the incremented value. This moment would be considered interruptible even tough the operation is not completed). If you need guaranteed atomic operation, you have to either use an instruction that is designed as atomic or you have to implement an access control mechanism that is based on these atomic operation around your non-atomic operations. Semaphores etc. are based on these guaranteed atomic operations to guard complex, i.e. non-atomic, operations.
On a side note, this concept becomes even worse when executing with multiple CPUs or cores where several instructions are executing simultaneously and they can interfere with each other even without preemption. In this situation atomically-designed operations still guarantee atomic execution while others are becoming indeterministic as they are executed in parallel.
|
|
|
|
|
Why break their WDM model? Dumb if you ask me.
==============================
Nothing to say.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, I guess thats about 2000 miles above the heads of most CP members.
|
|
|
|
|
how do i interface with the gprs modem using j2me without using a pc...i want to use it to send a sms through the gprs modem in a home security system to a predefined mobile number...pls help me regarding this...
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
