XP registry hack DO NOT USE IT

Page 2 of 2  
On 05/31/2014 10:57 AM, trader_4 wrote:
[snip]

When I check the logs for my website, there are usually a few users with XP/IE6.
I'd use Firefox (the newest version does work on XP).
[snip]
--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/31/2014 6:12 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:

Chrome is lighter on resources and faster.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ron wrote:

And reports way too much info on your browsing habits to Giggle . Screw that , I'll stick with Firefox .
--
Snag



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 5/31/2014 10:52 PM, Terry Coombs wrote:

Reports to who? What do you have to hid?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 05/31/2014 10:47 PM, Ron wrote:
[snip]

Often "what you have to hide" is irrelevant. It's what they make up and gets used against you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ron wrote:

Reports to GOOGLE , and while I have nothing I particularly need to hide , it's nobody's damn business what I do , where I go , and what I look at on the internet . Didn't you ever wonder how those web pages you visit tailor those ads just for you ? How did they know you drive a yugo and wear size 48 waist jeans ? It's because they track your browsing habits , web pages , and for all I know they track your keystrokes . As I said , I value my privacy and what I do is none of their business . I go as far as using a program that blocks most of the ads on web pages too . I also change the channel when commercials come on TV ...
--
Snag



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/01/2014 07:56 AM, Terry Coombs wrote:

Ahhhhhhh, I get it now. You're pissed because Google knows your pant size and they are now sending you ads for the Manzierre?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Greer wrote:

Oh you're really really funny .
--
Snag



Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Instincts may tell you not to trust HB...but logic says otherwise. Many ppl with businesses use their PC for everything: surfing; bookkeeping; payroll and such... M$ agreed to continue updating Windows embedded AND Windows XP for those folks (and I believe XP in China). I'm also "testing" the installation...and so far, so good!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, May 31, 2014 10:04:53 AM UTC-4, BenDarrenBach wrote:

That's a new claim and I believe it is false. The only thing I've seen is that MSFT is continuing to update the "Embedded" version of XP which is a specific product with a very different and specific installed base. It is where Embedded XP has been integrated and used as part of a specific dedicated product, eg cash register, ATM, etc. It's not the typical business computer running XP and being used for surfing, payroll, etc.
http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/enterprise/end-of-support.aspx
Note that it includes EOL for enterprise, small, medium businesses as well as home users.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, May 31, 2014 9:40:25 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/183362-windows-xp-rises-from-the-grave-simple-hack-gives-you-five-more-years-of-updates
Also Windows Update is specific as to "Update for Windows XP" and "Windows embedded".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, May 31, 2014 10:56:12 AM UTC-4, BenDarrenBach wrote:

What exactly is your point? You posted:
"Instincts may tell you not to trust HB...but logic says otherwise. Many ppl with businesses use their PC for everything: surfing; bookkeeping; payroll and such... M$ agreed to continue updating Windows embedded AND Windows XP for those folks (and I believe XP in China)."
The link you just provided is just a link to the hack, which is old news. What you posted and I replied to was your above claim, that MSFT was continuing to update WIN XP for business PC's. That isn't true. They are not updating XP for PCs, only for products that contain the Embedded XP OS. If you buy a PC for your business, it never came with Embedded XP to begin with. If you bought a cash register system, an ATM, etc then it might have Embedded XP.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| Instincts may tell you not to trust HB...but logic says otherwise.
It's not a matter of trust, faith, or logic. XP is no longer supported. XPE is not the same thing. Microsoft has no reason to make sure XPE patches are compatible with XP. They do, on the other hand, have motivation to create a situation of, "Woops! Well we did tell you not to use the XPE patches." Support and no support is a big difference. With support they promise not to break compatibility. With no support there's no promise of any kind. If they release an XPE patch incompatible with XP and it destroys your install, that's your problem.
| Many ppl with businesses use their PC for everything: surfing; bookkeeping; payroll and such... | M$ agreed to continue updating Windows embedded AND Windows XP for those folks
They didn't "agree" to. They're selling support contracts, starting at $250,000/year, at about $200/year per PC. So yes, they're still making patches for XP. But those are not the patches you're downloading with this hack. The fact that there are people paying for support is all the more reason for MS to break XP with XPE patches.
And as has been mentioned already in this thread: What's the value in taking the risk? You shouldn't be allowing IE online in the first place. How many other patches are likely to be relevant? Just about any vulnerability is likely to be coming through IE. A few may also come through MS Office, which is a good reason not to use that. But if you're not using MS software online there's little to worry about. (I haven't got an MS patch since SP3 and I'm not worried.)
*This month's patches are not even relevant.*
This month's patches are a good example, as HomeGuy lists them. One is for IE. (Again, no one should be using IE online. All the more so if you're running Vista or earlier, because MS doesn't even have a version of IE for those systems anymore. IE is not a browser in the normal sense. It's best viewed as a Windows component that is vulnerable if connected online.)
The other 2 patches are for privilege elevation. For the vast majority of people using XP there's no such thing as privilege elevation. They're already running without restrictions! So those patches are meaningless.
One patch deals with .Net remoting. There's no reason to even install .Net if it's not needed by some program. There's certainly no reason to let it run remotely. That's as risky as installing Java and letting it run through your browser. Even if you've done all that, all that's at risk is privilege elevation, which is almost certainly meaningless on your PC.
The other patch is for a bug that allows someone who has already logged on locally to go from lackey mode (common user restrictions) to Admin mode by running particular code. All of the code that's running on your XP machine right now is almost certainly in Admin mode. Nobody runs XP in lackey mode. In fact, in many cases there are no restrictions possible. My XP is installed to FAT32 file system, as many copies of XP were. Only an NTFS file system allows for user restrictions. IF you have XP installed on NTFS, and IF you have kids who you've set up with a restricted user account, then they *could* bypass those restrictions if they can figure out how to run the hack. Is that worth risking your system for?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, May 31, 2014 10:04:30 AM UTC-5, Mayayana wrote:

Some other rhetoric: http://betanews.com/2014/05/26/how-to-continue-getting-free-security-updates-for-windows-xp-until-2019/
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| Some other rhetoric: http://betanews.com/2014/05/26/how-to-continue-getting-free-security-updates-for-windows-xp-until-2019/
You keep posting more links to the same hack. Is that the reason you think the hack is a good idea -- because it's mentioned a lot online?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Saturday, May 31, 2014 10:35:59 AM UTC-5, Mayayana wrote:

Possible because it seems to work...so far... And remember I'm not the OP!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

from your own cite In short, you use the updates at your own risk. But just because these POSReady updates will probably work with your Windows XP machine doesn't mean you should do it. Yes, Microsoft has a vested interest in getting you to upgrade to Windows 7 or 8 - but, to be fair, unless you have a really important reason for sticking with XP, it really does make sense to upgrade to Windows 7.
If you do use the hack, don't assume that your XP machine will be safe from exploits. There's also every chance that, one day, one of the updates will make your system unbootable
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.