[Rel] System File Patches >09/23/08<
Those patched files, while they are patched, do so in an unclean method that causes exception faults to take place.
Fortunately, I can still use them by un-patching them and then re-patching them in a cleaner fashion.
It's just going to take longer to do. I also found it interesting that not a single one of them had corrected PEChecksums (why, I still don't know, but they don't seem to need to have a changed PEC). So, if all you are looking for in a UXTheme patch is no complaint on the installer log AND you don't expect to consistantly and constantly change themes multiple times, or your not going to be switching your display away from the desktop (ever), then I suppose they would work just great.
Again though, thank you for finding those files. They help alot. If there are any other statically patched repositories of other files you would like to see me work on, point me to them.
With this, I can manage a multi-OS and multilingual UXTheme patch at least.
Fortunately, I can still use them by un-patching them and then re-patching them in a cleaner fashion.
It's just going to take longer to do. I also found it interesting that not a single one of them had corrected PEChecksums (why, I still don't know, but they don't seem to need to have a changed PEC). So, if all you are looking for in a UXTheme patch is no complaint on the installer log AND you don't expect to consistantly and constantly change themes multiple times, or your not going to be switching your display away from the desktop (ever), then I suppose they would work just great.
Again though, thank you for finding those files. They help alot. If there are any other statically patched repositories of other files you would like to see me work on, point me to them.
With this, I can manage a multi-OS and multilingual UXTheme patch at least.
request for patch
Hello,
i am searching a long time to find a patch to set the energysaving of xp to 0, the default is always monitor off in 20 min but i want it always on. I'm not shure that this is the right place to ask so sorry if it is not
i am searching a long time to find a patch to set the energysaving of xp to 0, the default is always monitor off in 20 min but i want it always on. I'm not shure that this is the right place to ask so sorry if it is not
For most, beggars can't be choosers. It just so happens that, for the moment, that seems to be the sole source for pretty much all of the Vista SPI/WS2008 UXTheme patched files (that actually work) floating about out there. If you can provide better, by all means, please do.Zacam wrote:Those patched files, while they are patched, do so in an unclean method that causes exception faults to take place.
Fortunately, I can still use them by un-patching them and then re-patching them in a cleaner fashion.
It's just going to take longer to do. I also found it interesting that not a single one of them had corrected PEChecksums (why, I still don't know, but they don't seem to need to have a changed PEC). So, if all you are looking for in a UXTheme patch is no complaint on the installer log AND you don't expect to consistantly and constantly change themes multiple times, or your not going to be switching your display away from the desktop (ever), then I suppose they would work just great.
Not that this is on-topic here, but the mandatory driver signing now enforced for early loading drivers on x86 Vista SP1 really sucks ass. Thank goodness most of my boxes still run XP.
I have a few suggestion for possible other system files which need their limits hacked. IIS and SMB are two that come to mind. IIS 5.1 and 6 can be bumped from 10 -> 40 in the metabase (still not sufficient for running thorough tests on code), but AFAIK IIS7 can't (since it doesn't use metabase). Not that anyone is seriously trying to run a production website on workstation skus, but for development it is annoying. Possible other things would be to allow the use of IIS built-in extensions which are turned off for workstation (thinking primarily of gzip, but there are others which are mentioned in a KB article). I would guess that most of these probably involve a simple jz->jmp to force a server check to always return true, but I could be wrong...
-
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:55 pm
re multipatch aio
Zacam
Any chance of being able to download PatchAddon_AIO_v13d.cab from
a mirror .. having problems downloading from that site
thanks

Any chance of being able to download PatchAddon_AIO_v13d.cab from
a mirror .. having problems downloading from that site
thanks

Re: re multipatch aio
Hmmm... there definatly seems to be an issue with downloading from certain links on your computer. Very weird because some of the links you have trouble with are actually direct links too.creative4rce wrote:Zacam
Any chance of being able to download PatchAddon_AIO_v13d.cab from
a mirror .. having problems downloading from that site
thanks
-
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:55 pm
-
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:55 pm
-
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:55 pm
thanks Zacam
as Vmanda sugested i added 5512 to your ini files for syssetup, SFC ,Uxtheme and the tcpip100 .. did the intergartion ...
all works well except in installation i get the window popup of certain drivers saying mo M$ signatures allow or not ..
only started to happen after the patches
not using Dp_base or any usb addon or modified drivers just happened after the patches on the SP3 5512
any ideas?
Cheers
as Vmanda sugested i added 5512 to your ini files for syssetup, SFC ,Uxtheme and the tcpip100 .. did the intergartion ...
all works well except in installation i get the window popup of certain drivers saying mo M$ signatures allow or not ..
only started to happen after the patches
not using Dp_base or any usb addon or modified drivers just happened after the patches on the SP3 5512
any ideas?
Cheers
Zacam, I have do a comparison between files :
SFC_OS.DLL inside sp3.3244 and SFC_OS.DLL inside sp3.5512
SYSSETUP.DLL inside sp3.3244 and SYSSETUP.DLL inside sp3.5512
TCPIP.SYS inside sp3.3282 and TCPIP.SYS inside sp3.5512
UXTHEME.DLL inside sp3.3244 and UXTHEME.DLL inside sp3.5512
Files sizes is 2 by 2 identical between the 2 sp3 releases (3244 and 5512 for all excluding tcpip.sys (compared 3282 and 5512 )).
And data at offset specified in yours patches are the same.
You can presume that this files are identical excepting files headers, so patching it with parameters used in previous can be safely done.
And this observation aplly to lately (after 3244 and 3282 ) sp3 releases, but I not tested that.
And for creative4rce . You can try to add somewhere : reg patch or manualy edit Hivesft.inf
and put 0x00000000
or make one dosnet addon to do that for you. I have not tried, is just an idea.
Try to add this to an existing addon. I don't know is this way is correct, someone that allready have made this kind of addons can confirm?
EDIT: Seem that using [extrafileedits] is working to disable Driver Signing Policy.
SFC_OS.DLL inside sp3.3244 and SFC_OS.DLL inside sp3.5512
SYSSETUP.DLL inside sp3.3244 and SYSSETUP.DLL inside sp3.5512
TCPIP.SYS inside sp3.3282 and TCPIP.SYS inside sp3.5512
UXTHEME.DLL inside sp3.3244 and UXTHEME.DLL inside sp3.5512
Files sizes is 2 by 2 identical between the 2 sp3 releases (3244 and 5512 for all excluding tcpip.sys (compared 3282 and 5512 )).
And data at offset specified in yours patches are the same.
You can presume that this files are identical excepting files headers, so patching it with parameters used in previous can be safely done.
And this observation aplly to lately (after 3244 and 3282 ) sp3 releases, but I not tested that.
And for creative4rce . You can try to add somewhere :
Code: Select all
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Driver Signing]
"Policy"=hex:00,00,00,00
Code: Select all
HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Driver Signing","Policy",0x00000001,0
or make one dosnet addon to do that for you. I have not tried, is just an idea.
Code: Select all
[extrafileedits]
Hivesft.inf|HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Driver Signing","Policy",0x00000001,0|HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Driver Signing","Policy",0x00000000,0|1
EDIT: Seem that using [extrafileedits] is working to disable Driver Signing Policy.
-
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 9:55 pm
Dear Vmanda
I didnt think it was going to do the job but to make sure i did edit the Hivesft.inf with your suggestions ... did a cd install to be sure ... hasnt affected the "hasn't passed windows logo testing" on the drivers
they still pop up

hey but we tried .. has to count for something!
hehehe
cheers
I didnt think it was going to do the job but to make sure i did edit the Hivesft.inf with your suggestions ... did a cd install to be sure ... hasnt affected the "hasn't passed windows logo testing" on the drivers
they still pop up

hey but we tried .. has to count for something!
hehehe
cheers
"This message displays if the software has not been WHQL certified by Microsoft or the function that looks at the WHQL certificate is damaged or set incorrectly. While HP software is normally certified by Microsoft, there may be some cases where it has not been. This message does not affect the usability of the software."
Similar issue. Read and here or here
Read here
Hivesft.inf
Similar issue. Read and here or here
Read here
Code: Select all
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\ SOFTWARE\ Microsoft\ Windows NT\ CurrentVersion\ Winlogon
SFCDisable (REG_DWORD)
;this key or
0 = enabled (default).
1 = disabled, prompt at boot to re-enable (debugger required).
;barely this key
2 = disabled at next boot only, no prompt to re-enable (debugger required).
SFCScan (REG_DWORD)
;and this
0 = do not scan protected files at boot (default).
1 = scan protected files at every boot.
2 = scan protected files once.
Code: Select all
HKLM,"SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon","SfcDisable",0x00010001,0xFFFFFF9D
Code: Select all
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon]
"AutoRestartShell"=dword:00000001
"DefaultDomainName"="COMP123457X86"
"DefaultUserName"="Administrator"
"LegalNoticeCaption"=""
"LegalNoticeText"=""
"PowerdownAfterShutdown"="0"
"ReportBootOk"="1"
"Shell"="Explorer.exe"
"ShutdownWithoutLogon"="0"
"System"=""
"Userinit"="C:\\WINDOWS\\system32\\userinit.exe,"
"VmApplet"="rundll32 shell32,Control_RunDLL \"sysdm.cpl\""
"SfcQuota"=dword:ffffffff
"SfcDisable"=dword:ffffff9d
"
and few other keys that is finded here
- Outbreaker
- Posts: 703
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am
Seem that nLite can do that.Outbreaker wrote:Could you make a TCPIP.SYS Patch whit 16777214 Concurrent Connection = MAX (No limit)
Comparing TCPIP.SYS not patched with the patched by nlite
Off_Data Before_Data After
326213 ...... 00 ...... 00
326214 ...... 0A ...... FF
326215 ...... 00 ...... FF
326216 ...... 00 ...... FF
326217 ...... 00 ...... 00
326218 ...... B8 ...... B8
Try to add this line at end of Zacam addon [HexEdit] section
Code: Select all
I386\TCPIP.SYS|5.1.2600.5512|326214|0A0000|FFFFFF
But even is possible to patch, is not practical to put so many concurrent connections, due to bandwidth limitations.
(Remember a)is per second connections , b)every connection transfer a package) Read more about TCPIP and about IP Packet Structure
More than that, in past, I have been tried to use 1000 conections, and seem that Mozilla fail to complete downloads
more frequently than using a practical 100-200 connections( not tried with IE )
-
- Posts: 255
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:56 pm
- Location: Netherlands
-
- Posts: 255
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:56 pm
- Location: Netherlands
So I presume that I actually can go ahead and create such add-on(s) with the same hexedit infos?vmanda wrote:Zacam, I have do a comparison between files :
SFC_OS.DLL inside sp3.3244 and SFC_OS.DLL inside sp3.5512
SYSSETUP.DLL inside sp3.3244 and SYSSETUP.DLL inside sp3.5512
TCPIP.SYS inside sp3.3282 and TCPIP.SYS inside sp3.5512
UXTHEME.DLL inside sp3.3244 and UXTHEME.DLL inside sp3.5512
Files sizes is 2 by 2 identical between the 2 sp3 releases (3244 and 5512 for all excluding tcpip.sys (compared 3282 and 5512 )).
And data at offset specified in yours patches are the same.
You can presume that this files are identical excepting files headers, so patching it with parameters used in previous can be safely done.
And this observation aplly to lately (after 3244 and 3282 ) sp3 releases, but I not tested that.
I.e. for the 5512 versions of the several dll files the same hexedits are apllied to the 3244 version of those files?
Is this right? (excluding TCPIP.SYS)
Would that also be the case for the RAID 5 hack?
Unfortunatly, not apply to RAID. I do not have raid and I have not made any checks. I will look into Zacam RAID addon to see what happens .
EDIT: at first look seem to be some diferences between version 2600.3264.503.0 and 2600.5512.503.0 ( all 2 files first hexedit)
DMADMIN.EXE
offset...........v3264.................v5512
312...........982A04.................373204
7216..7365727665726E74.....7365727665726E74
DMBOOT.SYS
offset...........v3264.................v5512
304.................E50C0D.........3D4C0C
69884.............7A...................7A
69911.............82...................82
Download XVI32 free hex-editor, and check yourself, maybe i have mised something.
EDIT: at first look seem to be some diferences between version 2600.3264.503.0 and 2600.5512.503.0 ( all 2 files first hexedit)
DMADMIN.EXE
offset...........v3264.................v5512
312...........982A04.................373204
7216..7365727665726E74.....7365727665726E74
DMBOOT.SYS
offset...........v3264.................v5512
304.................E50C0D.........3D4C0C
69884.............7A...................7A
69911.............82...................82
Download XVI32 free hex-editor, and check yourself, maybe i have mised something.
Thanks for the patience. Some health and work problems cropped up, but I should have it done by the end of today.mindwarper wrote:I'll just wait until Zacam finds the time to do this awesome he does all the time
Just let us know Zacam, when you actually managed to do all the coding for the several add-ons, now that SP3 has been released...
*Edit: And done. Patches tested and working.
I also created a variety for the HIVESYS.INF patches to support Native Mode resolutions for LCD users (now that I am one). If you see a resolution that is missing, send me a polite PM and I'll add it within 24 hrs.
I saw a lot of good reserch done in the meantime. However, when making these updates, it is critical to NEVER fall to assumption. Simply diff comparing a before and after patch and finding the same values in hex on a new file may not always be the best answer. So far, it's remained true that doing such is possible, but one should never develop that assumption as a habit. I always use PE Explorer's Disassembler to make sure that all the other code and steppings relevant to the patch have not changed in such a way as to make the patch irrelevant.
Again, fortunately, this has yet to turn out to be the case, and stepping through dis-assembly code is not any easy skill to master (hell, I know I haven't, even after 10 years of it). I am still glad to know though that there were still inquisitive minds foraging thier own path and I hope you continue to do so.
Thanks for everybody on your patience, glad to release these updates for you all.
Hi Zacam I found some errors in the files here they are....
Thanks again,
dolivas
Code: Select all
UXTHEME has this error should be a semicolon not a colon
:KB936929 - SP3
I386\UXTHEME.DLL|6.0.2900.5512|104746|83EC1C568D4DE4|33C0C9C2040090
TCPIP_100 has this error the C needs to be removed.
;KB941644 - RVM 2.2.1
I386\TCPIP.SYS|5.1.2600.3244|325830|0A|C64
dolivas
-
- Posts: 255
- Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:56 pm
- Location: Netherlands
Ahh. That. I have not decided wether or not I'll be doing one. There are many TCP options and now a lot of Hivesys options, and not everybody may want to disable SFC or use software RAID5.
In the end, it's about allowing the addon user to have the flexibility to have what they want and what they will use, without making choices for them.
In the end, it's about allowing the addon user to have the flexibility to have what they want and what they will use, without making choices for them.
I applaud your decision Zecam. In the end, it is all about options, and if a person *really* wants an AIO, they should take and add what they need together. Since all your addons have one small ini file each and could easily be combined to a single file for exactly what the user needs.Zacam wrote:Ahh. That. I have not decided wether or not I'll be doing one. There are many TCP options and now a lot of Hivesys options, and not everybody may want to disable SFC or use software RAID5.
In the end, it's about allowing the addon user to have the flexibility to have what they want and what they will use, without making choices for them.
A mind is like a parachute, it only functions when it is open.
--Anonymous
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way
--Anonymous
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way
-
- Posts: 239
- Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 6:01 am
- electrogen
- Moderator
- Posts: 173
- Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:27 pm
- Location: England
When do you get this error? Is it from your settuperr.log? If so that is actually normal since the file has been patched. Because the PE code in the registry for uxtheme.dll no longer matches the new uxtheme.dll.electrogen wrote:Hi i get this error when i use the uxtheme patch,
The application or DLL C:\windows\system32\UxTheme.dll is not a valid windows image. Please check this against your installation diskette.
any ideas why i get this message?
- electrogen
- Moderator
- Posts: 173
- Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 4:27 pm
- Location: England
Hi mate, no it does it when i install, bout the same time it installs the cat files at the start.Siginet wrote:When do you get this error? Is it from your settuperr.log? If so that is actually normal since the file has been patched. Because the PE code in the registry for uxtheme.dll no longer matches the new uxtheme.dll.electrogen wrote:Hi i get this error when i use the uxtheme patch,
The application or DLL C:\windows\system32\UxTheme.dll is not a valid windows image. Please check this against your installation diskette.
any ideas why i get this message?
Zacam it is from Ryans post SP3 update pack version 0.9.2 and is from this update. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/951748
- Outbreaker
- Posts: 703
- Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 8:06 am
Hi, Great work here.
there seems to be a problem with PatchAddon_HIVESYS_v13c
and windows xp sp2 home slipstremed to sp3 and rvm
it doesn't allow logon at the welcome screen
"says cannot log on because of account restriction"
for both admin (renamed account)
admin (added user account)
removing that makes it run fine
there seems to be a problem with PatchAddon_HIVESYS_v13c
and windows xp sp2 home slipstremed to sp3 and rvm
it doesn't allow logon at the welcome screen
"says cannot log on because of account restriction"
for both admin (renamed account)
admin (added user account)
removing that makes it run fine
Hi,
tcpip.sys patch needs update for RyanVM's post-SP3 UpdatePack support
personally I added this:tested and working
Cheers
tcpip.sys patch needs update for RyanVM's post-SP3 UpdatePack support

personally I added this:
Code: Select all
;KB951748 - RVM post-SP3 0.9.2 beta
I386\TCPIP.SYS|5.1.2600.5625|326470|0A|FA
Cheers
