Path: news.mitre.org!blanket.mitre.org!philabs!newsjunkie.ans.net!newsfeeds.ans.net!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.bbnplanet.com!news.sprintisp.com!sprintisp!not-for-mail From: "James M. Finnegan" Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel,comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.nt.kernel-mode,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: This code will lock up any P5 machine under Windows NT! (F0 0F C7 C8) Date: Tue, 2 Dec 1997 16:52:59 -0500 Lines: 57 Message-ID: <6620v0$bhp$1@newsfep1.sprintmail.com> References: <3462ADCD.135B@noname.com> <63uaca$nss$1@halcyon.com> <63uuh8$jm0@zwei.siemens.at> <63vhrp$39d@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca> <64uoes$od1$9@kohl.informatik.uni-bremen.de> <01bcf5d3$c0ed1a00$0200000a@kld_mcs> <3489b939.9524124@news.uq.edu.au> <660d9b$d8@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: 168.191.47.63 X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 Xref: news.mitre.org comp.sys.intel:143705 comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.nt.kernel-mode:5545 comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:77233 comp.os.linux.advocacy:135928 Hi Navin, Clearly, you misunderstood my e-mail to you regarding my patch. Here are the facts: 1: A contact at Microsoft PSS informed me that MS is *not* releasing a fix for 95, NT or any future OS. PSS, in fact, is supposedly referring support questions regarding the F0 bug to my page (after all, I do write for their magazine! Is my patch, then, the "official" fix??? Ask MS!!!) 2: My patch, for both Win95 and NT, implements the fix as perscribed by Intel. In short, mapping the IDT so it straddles two pages, and mark the first page (with IDT entries 0 thru 6) as not present. Yes, there are other methods to fix it, but they are not appropriate under 95/NT. How do you do this? Read the 95 or NT DDK docs! Any developer worth his salt can hack it up in KM in short order. 3: No, I did not use any illictly obtained source code, contact people at MS, use or do anything else that isn't publicly available to anyone to develop this patch. 4: Source code is currenly not publicly available. Under NT, there really is no magic to this (see #2). Under 95, however, its a little more complicated then doing an LIDT. However, I don't feel like forever explaining how to hack up 95s VM's to anyone who would happen to be easter-egging thru my source. 5: How to implement such a "thing" -- a single Win32 executable that does privileged mode stuff under 95 and NT will be the subject of a fothcoming article in MSJ (probably the March, 1998 issue). I'm hoping not to create a religious flame-war here regarding the validity of an MS OS vs. the rest of the world. However, where the rubber meets the road, dammit, it's just code! -- Regards, James Finnegan Contributing Editor Microsoft Systems Journal Navindra Umanee wrote in message <660d9b$d8@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca>... >In comp.os.linux.advocacy John Wiltshire wrote: > >> Patches are available for Linux, BSDi, NT and 95 that I know of. > >Patch for NT and 95, eh? Hardly. Unless you're willing to install that >www.windows.to thing which does god-knows-what god-knows-how, of course. >The last time I asked the author about his source code, he told me it was >more "write-only code" than anything else... shudder, shudder, shudder. > >Question: Have you installed *that* patch? Or has an official patch been >released that I haven't heard of? .