Mim0

The File-Checker (HFSLIPFC) for HFSLIP

1,617 posts in this topic

I think it's time for Mimo to sign up an account in GitHub, and host the file-checker there. How would that be?

At least for me, I can commit the code as soon as MS (and Adobe) release a new update, saving time for jvidal and other people.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excuse my ignorance, but what is github?

Yet another filesharing service? OR is it sumthin' else?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excuse my ignorance, but what is github?

Yet another filesharing service? OR is it sumthin' else?

It's not just for file sharing, it's for code sharing.

Some of the open-source software host their source code there. And people can make code commits or file bugs easily in GitHub.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

new file-checker for XP:

2012-11-22
- Added: KB2727528 (MS12-072: Windows Shell)
- Added: KB2761226 (MS12-075: Windows Kernel-Mode Drivers)
- Added: Adobe Flash Player 11.5.502.110
- Added: Malicious Software Removal Tool 4.14.6800.0
- Removed: KB2731847 (MS12-055: Windows Kernel-Mode Drivers, v2, replaced by KB2761226)
- Removed: Adobe Flash Player 11.4.402.287
- Removed: Malicious Software Removal Tool 4.13.6701.0

Download: HFSLIPFC v.2012/05/04 with WindowsXP-update-list v.2012/11/22

Regarding roots upd V37: could we trust this very-silent update? Should I add it to the list?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding roots upd V37: could we trust this very-silent update? Should I add it to the list?

info form this topic:http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=128896#128896

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding roots upd V37: could we trust this very-silent update? Should I add it to the list?

I think I should wait for a few days. MS didn't make an announcement about this update (yet). But, I can try installing it on a virtual machine and compare the difference.

EDIT: Here is my brief compare result.

(rootsupd.exe November 2012)

In "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\SystemCertificates\AuthRoot\Certificates", 5 keys have been added by this update:

06143151E02B45DDBADD5D8E56530DAAE328CF90
0C628F5C5570B1C957FAFD383FB03D7B7DD7B9C6
585F7875BEE7433EB079EAAB7D05BB0F7AF2BCCC
EABDA240440ABBD694930A01D09764C6C2D77966
F138A330A4EA986BEB520BB11035876EFB9D7F1C

There are also 349 registry keys modified by this update in total:

342 keys in "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\SystemCertificates\AuthRoot\Certificates",

1 key in "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\SystemCertificates\CA\Certificates",

6 keys in "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\SystemCertificates\ROOT\Certificates".

EDIT2:

I found another strange thing. Perhaps this is a bug in Microsoft, but the file modified date inside rootsupd.exe seems to be misleading or incorrect.

For example, between the April and the November update, only these files are changed: rootsupd.inf, updroots.exe, updroots.sst.

But two of the modified dates stay the same.

Files inside the new rootsupd.exe (November 2012):

05/31/2012  04:54 PM            91,136 ADVPACK.DLL
11/02/2012 02:24 PM 75,116 authroots.sst
08/29/2011 05:08 PM 16,562 delroots.sst
07/24/2012 03:44 PM 7,273 roots.sst
05/16/2011 03:16 PM 1,610 rootsupd.inf
06/01/2012 11:48 AM 6,656 updroots.exe
08/29/2011 05:08 PM 375,712 updroots.sst
05/31/2012 04:55 PM 2,272 W95INF16.DLL
05/31/2012 04:55 PM 4,608 W95INF32.DLL
9 File(s) 580,945 bytes

Files inside the old rootsupd.exe (April 2012):

05/16/2011  02:52 PM            91,136 ADVPACK.DLL
04/06/2012 12:07 PM 75,116 authroots.sst
08/29/2011 05:08 PM 16,562 delroots.sst
03/14/2012 12:29 PM 7,273 roots.sst
05/16/2011 03:16 PM 1,610 rootsupd.inf
05/18/2011 02:01 PM 5,632 updroots.exe
08/29/2011 05:08 PM 368,180 updroots.sst
05/16/2011 02:53 PM 2,272 W95INF16.DLL
05/16/2011 02:53 PM 4,608 W95INF32.DLL
9 File(s) 572,389 bytes

Edited by Explorer09
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Explorer0. also two updroots.exe in packages have some diferences. bolded.

old one (April 2012):

:

5.632 bytes

5.1.2484.0

5.1.2484.0

Windows NT, Windows 32 bit

Application

İngilizce (A.B.D.), Unicode

5.1.2484.0 (main.010529-2005)

UPDROOTS

Microsoft® Windows® Operating System

5.1.2484.0

Microsoft Corporation

© Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

UPDROOTS

UPDROOTS

new one (November 2012):

6.656 bytes

5.2.3790.4456

5.2.3790.4456

Debug, Private build

Windows NT, Windows 32 bit

Application

İngilizce (A.B.D.), Unicode

5.2.3790.4456 built by: dnsrv(ansaboor)

UPDROOTS

Microsoft® Windows® Operating System

5.2.3790.4456

Microsoft Corporation

© Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

UPDROOTS

UPDROOTS

new one has a flag that Debug, Private build

Edited by ZEUS__
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Explorer0. also two updroots.exe in packages have some diferences. (sic) bolded.

....

new one has a flag that Debug, Private build

I knew the difference already, but you didn't notice that the new updroots.exe is bit-for-bit identical to the one inside the rvkroots.exe.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Explorer0. also two updroots.exe in packages have some diferences. (sic) bolded.

....

new one has a flag that Debug, Private build

I knew the difference already, but you didn't notice that the new updroots.exe is bit-for-bit identical to the one inside the rvkroots.exe.

you totally right, I just realized it sorry.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found an error on the page:

ff801acfa0aae423m.jpg

Bad location of the destination directory for the file WindowsXP-KB2761226-x86.reg.

It should be HFSVCPACK instead of HF

-----------------------------------------------------------

Running HFSLIPFC v.2012/05/04 at 2012-11-24 14:47:52,56

-----------------------------------------------------------

unknown: HF\WindowsXP-KB2761226-x86.reg

missing (S): HFSVCPACK\WindowsXP-KB2761226-x86.reg (Registry-File for MS12-075 (Windows Kernel-Mode Drivers))

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's correct. The reg file goes in HFSVCPACK, not in HF.

Only the latter (the file checker) is correct.

The web page really misses the line about the reg file going to HFSVCPACK.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just a minor glitch. The important thing is the FC is correct.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.