Text 18820, 287 rader
Skriven 2007-06-16 13:34:14 av Rich (1:379/45)
Kommentar till text 18818 av Rich Gauszka (1:379/45)
Ärende: Re: INFCACHE.1
======================
From: "Rich" <@>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0190_01C7B01B.084B0BD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
That is why I wrote, "only on non-English systems but only noted so =
far on Swedish and Finish." Unless rck is running a non-English system = this
has nothing to do with whatever corrupted his local cache. The = only
reference to reinstall in all of this is rck whining how he had = resigned
himself to doing so before realizing he was wrong.
Rich
"Rich Gauszka" <gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:46742df0$1@w3.nls.net...
The kb doesn't actually say it's limited to non-English versions just =
that it's been observed in the Swedish and Finnish versions. The kb does =
imply that the patch fixes the problem so I assume that it wouldn't = require
an OS reinstallation?
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/KB934637
'This problem has been observed in the Swedish version and in the =
Finnish version of Windows Vista. However, the problem may occur in = other
language versions.'=20
"Rich" <@> wrote in message news:4674256e$1@w3.nls.net...
"UAC and other file system protection mechanisms in Vista were =
supposed to eliminate this issue altogether by making INFCACHE.1 a = protected
OS file."
This is bull. The file is more protected that it was in Windows XP. =
For example, Imn Windows Vista administrators have the same limited =
read access as non-admins. This means UAC or elevation makes no = difference.
Now maybe the "other file system protection mechanisms" to = which this refers
is the updated ACL which allows write access only to = the system account. The
system account can do as it wishes.
The article has other silly points. It links to someone writing =
about the KB article http://support.microsoft.com/kb/KB934637 though not =
directly to this. This article does describe an issue with potential = INF
corruption but only on non-English systems and so far noted only on = Swedish
and Finnish. Furthermore, it has nothing to do with developers =
exploiting privilege or anything else. It's a simple bug.
Rich
"Rich Gauszka" <gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:467417b1$1@w3.nls.net...
didn't count on developers exploiting elevated privelege? Five =
years to=20
ship and 10,000 people to develop and no one figured that out?
from the same link -
Furthermore, UAC and other file system protection mechanisms in =
Vista were=20
supposed to eliminate this issue altogether by making INFCACHE.1 a =
protected=20
OS file. However, what they didn't count on was developers =
exploiting the=20
elevated privilege level of their installer routines to bypass =
those file=20
protections - a scenario they nwo realize they need to correct for =
by=20
replicating the functionality that was "retired" with XP (but that =
needs to=20
be rewritten from scratch for Vista - hence the delay in the =
service pack=20
delivery).
"Mike N." <mike@u-spam-u-die.net> wrote in message=20
news:6j1873hom1vdfbdtfjlakum5hegrkn9lmr@4ax.com...
>
> =
http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2007/06/vistas_wea=
k_lin.html
>
> "There's a weak link lurking under the covers of Windows Vista. =
It's the
> collection of ".inf" and related hardware "setup" files =
collectively
> referred to as the Windows Device Driver Store
> ...
> After an hour or so of playing "find the driver" with Windows I =
resigned
> myself to having to reinstall the OS, which for me meant 2-3 =
days of
> tweaking, tuning and application installing just to get back to =
a
> reasonably functional level."
>
> "Corruption of the Driver Store by 3rd party installers is a =
known issue
> and one they plan to address by reviving a mechanism from =
Windows XP that
> automatically regenerates the indices if/when they're corrupted.
> Apparently, this particular bit of code was "prematurely =
retired" with
> Vista, a decision I think Microsoft is now regretting. In the =
meantime"
>
> Wow - watch those drivers!=20
------=_NextPart_000_0190_01C7B01B.084B0BD0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type =
content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6000.16481" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY id=3DMailContainerBody=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; = COLOR:
#000000; PADDING-TOP: 15px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"=20 bgColor=3D#ffffff
leftMargin=3D0 topMargin=3D0 acc_role=3D"text" = CanvasTabStop=3D"true"=20
name=3D"Compose message area">
<DIV> That is why I wrote, "only on non-English systems but =
only=20
noted so far on Swedish and Finish." Unless rck is running a =
non-English=20
system this has nothing to do with whatever corrupted his local = cache.
The=20
only reference to reinstall in all of this is rck whining how he = had=20
resigned himself to doing so before realizing he was wrong.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Rich</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich Gauszka" <<A title=3Dmailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com">gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com</=
A>>=20
wrote in message <A title=3Dnews:46742df0$1@w3.nls.net=20
=
href=3D"news:46742df0$1@w3.nls.net">news:46742df0$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>
<DIV>The kb doesn't actually say it's limited to non-English versions =
just=20
that it's been observed in the Swedish and Finnish versions. The kb =
does imply=20
that the patch fixes the problem so I assume that it wouldn't require =
an OS=20
reinstallation?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A title=3Dhttp://support.microsoft.com/kb/KB934637=20
=
href=3D"http://support.microsoft.com/kb/KB934637">http://support.microsof=
t.com/kb/KB934637</A></DIV>
<DIV>'This problem has been observed in the Swedish version and in the =
Finnish=20
version of Windows Vista. However, the problem may occur in other =
language=20
versions.' </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich" <@> wrote in message <A =
title=3Dnews:4674256e$1@w3.nls.net=20
=
href=3D"news:4674256e$1@w3.nls.net">news:4674256e$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>
<DIV> "UAC and other file system protection mechanisms =
in Vista=20
were supposed to eliminate this issue altogether by making =
INFCACHE.1 a=20
protected OS file."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This is bull. The file is more protected that it was in =
Windows=20
XP. For example, Imn Windows Vista administrators have the =
same=20
limited read access as non-admins. This means UAC or=20
elevation makes no difference. Now maybe the "other file =
system=20
protection mechanisms" to which this refers is the updated ACL =
which=20
allows write access only to the system account. The system =
account can=20
do as it wishes.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> The article has other silly points. It links =
to=20
someone writing about the KB article <A=20
title=3Dhttp://support.microsoft.com/kb/KB934637=20
=
href=3D"http://support.microsoft.com/kb/KB934637">http://support.microsof=
t.com/kb/KB934637</A> though=20
not directly to this. This article does describe an issue with =
potential INF corruption but only on non-English systems and so far =
noted=20
only on Swedish and Finnish. Furthermore, it has nothing =
to do=20
with developers exploiting privilege or anything else. It's a =
simple=20
bug.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Rich</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV>"Rich Gauszka" <<A =
title=3Dmailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com=20
=
href=3D"mailto:gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com">gauszka@dontspamhotmail.com</=
A>>=20
wrote in message <A title=3Dnews:467417b1$1@w3.nls.net=20
=
href=3D"news:467417b1$1@w3.nls.net">news:467417b1$1@w3.nls.net</A>...</DI=
V>didn't=20
count on developers exploiting elevated privelege? Five =
years to=20
<BR>ship and 10,000 people to develop and no one figured that=20
out?<BR><BR>from the same link -<BR>Furthermore, UAC and other =
file system=20
protection mechanisms in Vista were <BR>supposed to eliminate this =
issue=20
altogether by making INFCACHE.1 a protected <BR>OS file. However, =
what=20
they didn't count on was developers exploiting the <BR>elevated =
privilege=20
level of their installer routines to bypass those file =
<BR>protections - a=20
scenario they nwo realize they need to correct for by =
<BR>replicating the=20
functionality that was "retired" with XP (but that needs to <BR>be =
rewritten from scratch for Vista - hence the delay in the service =
pack=20
<BR>delivery).<BR><BR><BR>"Mike N." <<A=20
title=3Dmailto:mike@u-spam-u-die.net=20
=
href=3D"mailto:mike@u-spam-u-die.net">mike@u-spam-u-die.net</A>> = wrote
in=20
message <BR><A =
title=3Dnews:6j1873hom1vdfbdtfjlakum5hegrkn9lmr@4ax.com=20
=
href=3D"news:6j1873hom1vdfbdtfjlakum5hegrkn9lmr@4ax.com">news:6j1873hom1v=
dfbdtfjlakum5hegrkn9lmr@4ax.com</A>...<BR>><BR>>=20
<A=20
=
title=3Dhttp://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2007/06/vi=
stas_weak_lin.html=20
=
href=3D"http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archives/2007/06/vi=
stas_weak_lin.html">http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisedesktop/archive=
s/2007/06/vistas_weak_lin.html</A><BR>><BR>>=20
"There's a weak link lurking under the covers of Windows Vista. =
It's=20
the<BR>> collection of ".inf" and related hardware "setup" =
files=20
collectively<BR>> referred to as the Windows Device Driver=20
Store<BR>> ...<BR>> After an hour or so of playing "find the =
driver"=20
with Windows I resigned<BR>> myself to having to reinstall the =
OS,=20
which for me meant 2-3 days of<BR>> tweaking, tuning and =
application=20
installing just to get back to a<BR>> reasonably functional=20
level."<BR>><BR>> "Corruption of the Driver Store by 3rd =
party=20
installers is a known issue<BR>> and one they plan to address =
by=20
reviving a mechanism from Windows XP that<BR>> automatically=20
regenerates the indices if/when they're corrupted.<BR>> =
Apparently,=20
this particular bit of code was "prematurely retired" with<BR>> =
Vista,=20
a decision I think Microsoft is now regretting. In the=20
meantime"<BR>><BR>> Wow - watch those drivers!=20
<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0190_01C7B01B.084B0BD0--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)
|