Slashdot Mirror


WinAmp Security Hole Discovered, Patched

Sbarbero writes "According to Techworld.com, a significant security hole has been discovered in NullSoft's WinAmp, meaning everyone should upgrade to the 5.03 version the makers have just put out right now. Security company NGS has found that the exploit 'can be activated remotely simply by rendering a specially crafted html document' and will run arbitrary code - they have a full advisory on their site." Oddly enough, the vulnerability is in the playback for the classic .XM 'tracker' music format.

393 comments

  1. Aha! by dupper · · Score: 1, Redundant

    See, it pays to be a cyber-luddite. I'm still using version 2.91

    1. Re:Aha! by the_skywise · · Score: 2, Informative

      But the press release says it affects ALL versions of WinAmp.

    2. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
      Umm, no. From the advisory:

      Systems Affected: Nullsoft Winamp versions 2.91 to 5.02 (possibly older versions, although this is not confirmed)

    3. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use version 2.5c.

    4. Re:Aha! by JofCoRe · · Score: 1

      Aha! Then I'm safe! Just checked, and looks like I'm still using winamp 2.81 ...

      Can anyone tell me why I would want to upgrade? It seems to me that every newer version of winamp just gets bigger and slower. All I want it to do is play mp3's, and this version seems to do that just fine... :)

      --

      Place sig here.
    5. Re:Aha! by JofCoRe · · Score: 4, Informative

      Holy shit! Here's a reason not to upgrade:

      in requirements:
      500MHz Pentium III or comparable

      One of the systems that I use winamp on is a Pentium-133 laptop that sits on my entertainment center and plays mp3's thru my stereo.

      Why does it take a PIII-500 to play mp3's? It seems to be working fine on the p133 right now. Seems to me like too much extra bloat...

      --

      Place sig here.
    6. Re:Aha! by cb8100 · · Score: 1

      My guess is that the bug was introduced when Justin Frankel gave everything up and AOL took over.

      Regarding the "bigger and slower" of all the newer versions, I agree. Fortunately, the latest 5.03a version does seem to be almost as slim and trim as the old 2.8x versions.

      Like a fool, I didn't read the entire article and grabbed the latest patched version before finding the link on how to fix the exploit in previous versions. I still have my old 2.81 installer, but so far so good with 5.03a.

      --
      My lack of God, it's Trotsky!
    7. Re:Aha! by neko9 · · Score: 1

      still using 2.91. feel no reason to upgrade. and i don't play modules with it. i play with ModPlug Player. why? because IT and other mod formats playback in Winamp sucks hard.

    8. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Other than id3v2 tags, you wouldn't want to upgrade.

    9. Re:Aha! by JofCoRe · · Score: 1

      Ok, so no reason to upgrade then. I'm pretty sure 2.81 does id3v2 tags, since when I click on "File Info", I see two tags, one ID3v1, and one for ID3v2.

      hmmm... looks like Winamp2 isn't available on their site anymore (or at least I didn't dig far enough). Guess I'll have to make sure I keep my installer around :)

      --

      Place sig here.
    10. Re:Aha! by rcamera · · Score: 1

      another reason not to upgrade - maximum rip speed of 2x. i'm perfectly happy with 2.91, but i seem to have lost the installer.

      --
      Wave upon wave of demented avengers March cheerfully out of obscurity into the dream
    11. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    12. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhh... I'm running 5.03a and getting rip speeds of about 6x.

    13. Re:Aha! by FreeForm+Response · · Score: 3, Interesting

      All I want it to do is play mp3's...

      foobar2000 will serve your needs well. It does everything you could possibly want to do within the realm of playing music, and virtually nothing else. Low memory footprint/CPU requirements, simple and functional GUI (without fancy skins), and very powerful. Check it out.

    14. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      have you tried mpg123 or xmms? I bet they would fit the bill nicely.

    15. Re:Aha! by raisinbran · · Score: 0

      have you tried mpg123 or xmms? I bet they would fit the bill nicely.

      I've tried mpg123, but I've found that madplay gives "steadier" (less skippage) playback on my Pentium 100 laptop. Only problem with madplay is that it has no playlist support...

      Anyone know of any good Linux mp3 players that do not require X and have playlist support?

    16. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      madplay + perl

      sorry to sound like a troll, but honestly, it's not hard to do :-D

    17. Re:Aha! by mnewton32 · · Score: 1

      That was actually my first response, but they do have a 'light' version that doesn't support all the extra doo-dads (video, 'new' skins, CD ripping) and is only a 650k download.
      It presumably requires much less of your system, and the minimal install is only 1.2 MB. How many modern software packages offer you that small a download and such a tiny footprint?
      I'm giving it a try now, upgrading from 2.81 on my 450 MHz PIII.

    18. Re:Aha! by DeeKayWon · · Score: 1

      That applies only if you're using the modern skin support. I use Winamp 5 with a Classic skin, and it's just as fast as 2.8x in my experience.

    19. Re:Aha! by pantycrickets · · Score: 1

      My guess is that the bug was introduced when Justin Frankel gave everything up and AOL took over.

      Well, since it's a security vulnerability.. my guess is that Microsoft has something to do with it. /sarcasm

    20. Re:Aha! by MattCohn.com · · Score: 1

      And look who's sporting v2.90! Finally I have something to say to that moron friend of mine who keeps telling me to upgrade every time he's online. I say "why?" he says "because it's better."

      I seriously hate people who upgrade for the sake of upgrading. It will be a LONG, LONG while before I upgrade my favorate media player. Nothing wrong with it as far as I can see.

      Oh, and Slashdot needs to learn the difference between "Patched", and "Fixed in a new version". If I had v2.91 I'd be hella pissed right now.

    21. Re:Aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Hmm, how indemnably queer, I'm running 2.75 (which came with my computer when I bought it)

  2. Er... by James+A.+M.+Joyce · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "activated remotely simply by rendering a specially crafted html document" Wouldn't that only make it a problem for those people who actually use the Winamp minibrowser? (I.E., very few people?)

    1. Re:Er... by Doesn't_Comment_Code · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I haven't used WinAmp in quite a while, so I can't remember. Does WinAmp allow dynamic loading of embedded content, as in: you play a song, which has an embedded script that opens an html document for you? I seem to remember one of the players doing this. I'm pretty sure Windows Media Player does this. If WinAmp does, it would make the problem much more dangerous.

      --

      Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
    2. Re:Er... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can .XM files into a HTML document and if WinAmp is set as the handler for that MIME type, it will probably automatically launch it (or something).

    3. Re:Er... by TheFlyingGoat · · Score: 5, Informative

      It doesn't just affect people who use the minibrowser. If you have Winamp set up as the default program for xm files, you're vulnerable. All someone would have to do is redirect the web page to a malformed page that sends a Content-Type: audio/xm (or whatever) header. This would execute Winamp, attempt to load the location, and cause problems.

      --
      You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
    4. Re:Er... by mpcarlos · · Score: 1

      Its based on that .xm files are automatically associated to winamp, not that you are using some kind of winamp browser or something like that.

    5. Re:Er... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no it does not...

      la la la la lameness filter... gotta kill time...
      War And Peace. Chapter 1:
      It was the best of tim....

    6. Re:Er... by los+furtive · · Score: 2, Funny

      I doesn't matter if its the browser being used. But to answer your question , I never used the browser until they started adding streaming video to their library...now 'certain' channels bring up the browser every 60 seconds or so. But I can usually put up with it for the 5-6 minutes that I need.

      --

      I'm a writer, a poet, a genius, I know it. I don't buy software, I grow it.

    7. Re:Er... by ooby · · Score: 1

      Well, it looks like i'll just dissassociate *.xm with winamp.

    8. Re:Er... by selfabuse · · Score: 1

      Totally off topic, but "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times" Is from A Tale of Two Cities. The first line of War and Peace is 'Well, Prince, so Genoa and Lucca are now just family estates of the Buonapartes.[...]'

    9. Re:Er... by wo1verin3 · · Score: 1

      Or just update WinAmp? :)

    10. Re:Er... by srstoneb · · Score: 1
      If you have Winamp set up as the default program for xm files, you're vulnerable. All someone would have to do is redirect the web page to a malformed page that sends a Content-Type: audio/xm (or whatever) header. This would execute Winamp, attempt to load the location, and cause problems.
      But... that's only if WinAmp actually executes, right? Like, I'd have to have it associated with XM files in my browser, not just in the operating system. Otherwise I just get a "save or open with [program x]?" dialog, wonder "why the hell is there an XM in this page?", and hit cancel. Or am I missing something?
    11. Re:Er... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is an option in preferences to turn that off.

    12. Re:Er... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Homer: Boooorrrrrinnng.

    13. Re:Er... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See the above comment for a definition of a true anal retentive person. Nitpicking filler? Classic!

    14. Re:Er... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Or am I missing something?

      IE probably.

    15. Re:Er... by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that only make it a problem for those people who actually use the Winamp minibrowser? (I.E., very few people?)

      I agree. I hate the fact that every program has to have a browser, and every cardgame has to have some internet link. It's stupid. I use winamp, but not that shitty version 3. And not the gay-ass 'mini-browser'. An mp3-player with a browser? Yeah, right after I get a toaster with GPS.

  3. Where's my patched 2.9x? by CaptainBaz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I see nullsoft have also used this opportunity to force all us old Winamp 2.9 users to upgrade to the bloated POS Winamp 5 player.

    Some of us just want an MP3 player - we don't need cpu-hogging visualisations, 100s of "cool" skins, or any of the rest of it.

    Time to give some of the other players a try, methinks...

    </rant>

    1. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by The+Human+Cow · · Score: 5, Informative

      Last time I checked, Winamp 5 used much the same amount of system resources as Winamp 2.
      Winamp 3, on the other hand, is a whole different ball game.

      --
      The Human Cow - bringing you scrumtrelescence since 1995
    2. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Eponymous+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just do what I did, on 2.80:

      Delete in_mod.dll from the "Plugins" directory.

      Hole: Patched.

      Who uses MOD/XM files anymore anyways?

      --
      It's hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
    3. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by OglinTatas · · Score: 3, Informative

      I use Irfanview with the "all pluggins" patch to play MP3 files and streams. Great light footprint media player and image viewer.

    4. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by satterth · · Score: 3, Redundant
      --
      Being called a dork on Slashdot must be like being called the retard in special ed.
    5. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by CaptainBaz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not for me. The "Load file" dialogue that pops up when you click the "eject" button takes about 10 times longer to appear under Winamp 5. And since that's one of the only two buttons I ever click (the other being play/pause), I've always preferred 2.9x.

      I'm prepared to accept that Winamp 3 was even worse though :-)

    6. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Doesn't_Comment_Code · · Score: 4, Funny

      bloated POS Winamp 5 player

      You know your media player is too big when all the eye candy slows your older computers to the point they can't play mp3's without choking.

      --

      Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
    7. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      look no further than foobar2000

    8. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Elfan · · Score: 1

      You mean like foobar2000? A no frills music player started by people who left Nullsoft when Winamp became bloated and dropped any focus on music playing infavor of skins?

    9. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You are probably not using the Classic skin then. I had the new modern skin turned on and it's a real pig. Go back to the Classic skin though and Winamp5 becomes the same as Winamp2

    10. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by c1pher · · Score: 1

      "I see nullsoft have also used this opportunity to force all us old Winamp 2.9 users to upgrade to the bloated POS Winamp 5 player."

      being that it is a free product, and there are plenty of other mp3 players out there - I wouldn't say you were forced to upgrade

      --
      The Adult Happy Meal - "I'm lovin' it!"
    11. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by shish · · Score: 1

      Winamp 5 *is* winamp 2, it just has a load of extra plugins, to give it all the cool features of 3. Disable all the extra things like modern skinning and such, and all you have left is winamp 2 + bugfixes + misc non-bloat improvements.

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    12. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > I've always preferred 2.9x.

      I've preferred 2.0x to the 2.9x versions. I are teh uber luddite :)

      IIRC, somewhere between 2.09 and 2.91, WinAmp stopped including track lengths when you used "Generate HTML playlist", presumably because track length estimation was nontrivial on certain MP3s with borked VBR headers, etc.

      Fun project for tonight - try this exploit on the really old stuff. .MOD is certainly old enough that in_mod.dll might still be in the plugin directory of the old versions.

      Shameless plug for oldversion.com - makes it easy enough to test the 'sploit against any version you like.

    13. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by hawkbug · · Score: 1

      Seriously - can you verify that that dll doesn't do anything but play XM files? That would be cool, because I have no intention of moving to Winamp3 or 5, or whatever the latest is. The new ones are just too damn cpu intensive.

    14. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by CaptainBaz · · Score: 1

      Thanks, just installed it and it looks like just what I need.

      Bye bye Winamp.

    15. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by typhoonius · · Score: 1

      If you don't want the bloat, don't install it. Everything's a plug-in in Winamp, and the installer lets you easily leave out stuff like video support, visualizations, modern skin support, etc. You can customize it down to the plug-in, so if all you want is a program that plays your oggs, just install that.

    16. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by F452 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Or you can follow the instructions at http://www.nextgenss.com/advisories/winampheap.txt to disable xm at a lower layer. (This is from a link from the techworld article.)

    17. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what happens when vulnerabilities in the MP3 and Ogg plugins are announced? Are you going to write your own?

    18. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by BetterThanCaesar · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Hey! Even though new songs don't pop up as often as they used to, there still are a lot of old ones that are worth listening to.

      Who uses... pff :)

      --
      "Stop failing the Turing test!" -- Dilbert
    19. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      I do!! There are some very talented artists out there. Some songs you might try to find (at the Mod archive perhaps):

      Knulla Kuk by Moby (the original Moby!)

      Space Debris by Captain

      Variations by Jogeir Liljedahl

      Capslock by Mick Rippon

      Jaunt by Wolfsong


      These are just a few of many high-quality tracks that are out there. It's worth giving some a listen sometime!

    20. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously enough people to have the makers put it in the default install.

    21. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by kavin · · Score: 1

      Time to give some of the other players a try, methinks...

      try xmplay (win32, 297kb). it's under active development (ian is really responsive to user requests/bug reports) and supports:

      - ogg, mp3, mp2, mp1, wma, wav, mo3 (ogg or mp3 compressed module music), it, xm, s3m, mtm, mod, umx, and sid (via an input plugin)
      - skinnable
      - html url scanning

      for the linux crew, try it's alpha xmms plugin. :)

      - p

    22. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by ooby · · Score: 1

      Even is you get it to act like 2, it still slows down older machines more so than the original 2.

    23. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by edwdig · · Score: 2, Informative

      Who uses MOD/XM files anymore anyways?

      For starters, most GameBoy Advance music is composed in those formats.

    24. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Valiss · · Score: 1

      I just renamed it (in case I need it to run plugins). That should work too, right?

      --

      -Valiss
    25. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      as other people have pointed out, you are a fucking moron

      winamp 5 = winamp 2 with the option to use winamp 3 skins

      kthxgofuckyourselfintheeye

    26. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who uses MOD/XM files anymore anyways?

      Well, I do, and so does anybody else who uses The Mod Archive, a great place for free music.

      No, I don't have any relationship to the Mod Archive, I just use it.

    27. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by jherm · · Score: 1

      try foobar2k. unlike mcdonald's, 'i'm lovin it' as we speak.

    28. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh come on now, you KNOW the k3\|/135t media players are the fucking ones that have inscrutably tiny controls that slide out and do lotsa other cute things that the fucking kiddies so enjoy, and have windows the size of a postage stamp cut in half. Don't you know that? And what the hell is wrong with visualizations that use disk space and CPU and GPU time unnecessarily? You don't REALLY want a media player to play media, do you? Don't you want it to be wowed into a faggoty slumber by neato-keen graphics?

    29. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by bigberk · · Score: 1

      What if you want to listen to classics like this? No, that's not meant to be funny, this 500K file demonstrates what you can do with MOD for sampling, loops, etc ;)

    30. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Don't ever worry about individual Winamp plugins. They are self-contained and can be moved around at will. With the "in_***.dll" plugins, all that happens when you move them out is that you can't play the file types that they support. Move them back in, and you can play them again. Easy.

      Just pull it out of your plugins folder and store it where you can find it, rather than renaming it. Just make a Winamp\Disabled directory, for instance.

    31. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beats me. Aren't these deprecated by .MED anyway?

    32. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Foolhardy · · Score: 1

      Where's the MIDI support? Sure, I don't play them all that often, but my primary music player needs to support EVERYTHING I want to play.
      Can't play .GDM mod files here either, but neither could Winamp...
      OH it crashed when I tried to load my .MOD collection.
      The MODs that I could play seem fine.
      No video playback?
      The MOD file playback options are pitiful, like lack of panning seperation control.
      More sort options: Good.
      More playback order options: Good.
      No buffer size control.
      No .AUD file support
      It takes forever to load long playlists because it has to go through each file.
      I have to use SidPlay instead of ReSid (for commodore 64 music) and SidPlay does not have enough quality. Also, the timer rate is off (PAL instead of NTSC) and the property page doesn't let me change it.
      SPC (SNES music) works fine.

      I just started looking at it, and I can't seem to find a nice way to make it a small windowshade, like you can with Winamp. Having it in the tray is an extra step I don't want.

      I know it's easy to complain without doing anything, but Winamp already does what I want it to and Foobar2000 isn't ready yet. It sucks that Nullsoft doesn't seem to want to fix 2.x but...

    33. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Knulla kuk means "Fuck dick" in Swedish. What a wonderful title.

    34. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by zecg · · Score: 1

      Unless you listen to a lot of tracker format music, you can just delete the in_mod.dll and you can probably just use a newer version of that extension anyway, even if you are a big fan of repetitive 8-bit samples.

      --
      .i lu doi ringos.star. xu do puku'aroroi dunli dopecaku leni virnu li'u
    35. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still use XM! I'm a long time MOD Tracker (since Amiga500), XM was the format used by Fast Tracker 2.

      While I'm at it here, there's a new generation of tracker out there called Skale:

      http://www.skale.org

      and of special interest to the /. crowd (and me) they have a version that runs under linux (yah!). Trackers are a really cool way to create music with software that doesn't require a mega powerful machine or tons of RAM.

      Another interesting thing about this new tracker is that it has some VST support. The new tracker's native format is SKM and they also have a plugin for winamp on their page.

      Did I mention it's free?! Yah. Though not open source atm.

      Happy tracking. weeeeee!!!

    36. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by toddestan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I just tried that with the classic skin, and he's right. The first time took several seconds, but after that it's fast (once Winamp has cached the directory contents I assume). I've never noticed because I always use the 'Insert' key. (load entire directory at once)

    37. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Elfan · · Score: 2, Informative

      Supported input formats:

      * MPEG-4 AAC
      * MP3
      * MP2
      * Musepack
      * Ogg Vorbis
      * WAV
      * AIFF
      * VOC
      * AU
      * SND
      * CDDA
      * FLAC
      * Monkey's Audio
      * WavPack
      * Speex
      * Mod
      * SPC
      * TFMX
      * Shorten
      * OptimFROG
      * LPAC
      * WMA
      * AC3
      * PSF
      * NSF
      * SID
      * XA
      * Matroska

      picky picky... ;-)

      I don't expect one program to do everything (well unless its EMACS). But you are right that there are some audio formats that still need work. However, for most users (most of their audio is in mp3 or some ogg) I think foobar2000 is already better than winamp.

    38. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by baudbarf · · Score: 1

      I agree entirely - I'm a total 2.91 user and I REFUSE to upgrade to BloatAMP!!

      But I didn't realize the newer versions did Point Of Sale... But I'm not SURPISED... AOL had everything but the digital kitchen sink put in version 5.

      --
      You can run but you can't hide, except, apparently, along the Afghan-Pakistani border.
    39. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a winamp visuaization bridge that works with milkdrop called vis_bacon.

      Binary

      official forum entry

    40. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      right on brother, I use XMplay and recomend it. If tiny size is what you like this is most definitly it.

    41. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by krumms · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's WinAmp 2 with a few slow bits and with AOL advertising tacked on.

    42. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Cloud+9 · · Score: 1
      That's all it does. The nicest feature of Winamp is the fact that you can add or remove whatever plugins you want.

      Of course, de-selecting .xm from the file types menu would have the same effect, but everybody just loves getting their panties in a twist over exploits.

      --
      Karma: Dyn-o-mite!(mostly affected by Jimmy Walker reading your comments)
    43. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nope, removing it from the file types menu won't work. The IN_MOD.DLL plugin will recognize .XM files automatically even if they have a different extension. So anyone who wants to exploit this hole just creates a .XM file and renames it .MP3. That's the best way for them to do it, too, since it's more likely your web browser is automatically configured to launch WinAMP for .MP3 files than it is for .XM files.

    44. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Pykmi · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link! I've kinda always secretly wanted to get MOD support to xmms :) . Now I won't need to use Winamp with wine, thanks.

    45. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Hmm, does this player give anything that Winamp don't? I couldn't see many differences in the feature list. Does it consume much less memory than Winamp 5 in Winamp 2 mode? However, on a standard system of today, I can't really say Winamp 5 makes the system noticeably more sluggish.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    46. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by lemody · · Score: 1

      you really should! if you haven't listened to many mods/xms, then now it's the time to do it... so many cool songs are made by individuals all over the world and the best thing is that these ones are free...

      --


      class he-man extends man!
    47. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by satterth · · Score: 1
      Memory usage i found was better when i compared Foobar2000 with Winamp 5 Lite with about 6 hours in the play list.

      Foobar = 6.0mb

      Winamp = 8.6mb

      I'm also a fan of the look of Fubar verses winamp. I find it looks much cleaner/simpler. If you want it to look a special way, then obviously winamp is the better choice because of skinning. If you are running a LOW CPU and MEMORY environment then Foobar might be worth while looking at. I also like replaygain (normalisation) that comes with foobar.

      --
      Being called a dork on Slashdot must be like being called the retard in special ed.
    48. Re:Where's my patched 2.9x? by oDDmON+oUT · · Score: 1

      From the advisory:

      "If for some reason it is impossible to download the updated version of
      Winamp, the vendor has informed NGSS that it is possible to disable the
      handling of Fasttracker 2 module files by taking the following steps:

      1. Right click the Winamp player, go to 'Options' and then to
      'Preferences...'.

      2. In the new window which loads, go to 'Plug-ins' and 'Input'.

      3. Look for the input plug-in items 'Nullsoft Module Decoder' and double
      click it to bring up the 'Nullsoft Module Decoder Preferences' window.

      4. Select the 'Fasttracker 2' loader and deselect the 'Enabled' checkbox to
      the right of the loaders list.

      5. Close all of the option windows and return to the main player."

      Happy now?

      --
      Some days it's just not worth
      chewing through my restraints.
  4. Thank goodness by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Funny
    Thank goodness I don't listen to music/radio on my computer. You never know where such a thing could lead to.

    Hi from Napster! We've been tracking your listening habits and suggest the following music...Barry Manilow, Air Supply, Leo Sayer. If you act now and buy, we won't tell your friends or neighbors.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:Thank goodness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wtf u doing listening to Monkey Jerk Radio?

  5. What I think everyone wants to know is... by Bytal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    whether this affects the old 2.x series?

    1. Re:What I think everyone wants to know is... by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, According to the notice:


      Systems Affected: Nullsoft Winamp versions 2.91 to 5.02 (possibly older versions, although this is not confirmed)

      --
      "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    2. Re:What I think everyone wants to know is... by guacamolefoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, it affects it. Yes you can fix it by following the instructions in the linked story:

      If for some reason it is impossible to download the updated version of Winamp, the vendor has informed NGSS that it is possible to disable the handling of Fasttracker 2 module files by taking the following steps:

      1. Right click the Winamp player, go to 'Options' and then to 'Preferences...'.

      2. In the new window which loads, go to 'Plug-ins' and 'Input'.

      3. Look for the input plug-in items 'Nullsoft Module Decoder' and double click it to bring up the 'Nullsoft Module Decoder Preferences' window.

      4. Select the 'Fasttracker 2' loader and deselect the 'Enabled' checkbox to the right of the loaders list.

      5. Close all of the option windows and return to the main player.

  6. Damnit! by teamhasnoi · · Score: 5, Funny
    When is the Mac version of this exploit coming out?

    I am so tired of waiting.

    1. Re:Damnit! by blixel · · Score: 4, Funny

      When is the Mac version of this exploit coming out?

      Doesn't matter. No one will be able to afford it.

    2. Re:Damnit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      looks like you already have the 'wasted my money on a mac' exploit i've heard about.

    3. Re:Damnit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You are so funny!

      Well, only if they changed the definition of "funny" to "fucking stupid".

    4. Re:Damnit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In that case, you are very funny.

    5. Re:Damnit! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      You are so funny!

      Well, only if they changed the definition of "funny" to "fucking stupid".

      What does sex with you have to do with this?

  7. Upgrade to version 1.45 by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'm still using version 1.45. Free of the spyware and bloat which has come to plague Winamp, and I'm pretty sure it is free of the trojan-type "features" that this story is about.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
    1. Re:Upgrade to version 1.45 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bloat is right. Winamp "browser?" Come on.

    2. Re:Upgrade to version 1.45 by gid · · Score: 1

      The browser is just MSIE embedded. Winamp 5 with the classic skin is actually pretty fast. Winamp 3 with the new skins was horribly slow, I stuck to 2.x until 5.x came out.

    3. Re:Upgrade to version 1.45 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's called Winamp minibrowser.

      Simple HTML is all. Go freak out if it starts to read mail.

    4. Re:Upgrade to version 1.45 by pilkul · · Score: 1

      This doesn't have a lot to do with bloat, AFAIK. It's a simple buffer overflow, affecting the Fasttracker 2 input module, which has been there for a long time. I wouldn't be so sure I'm safe if I were you. Make sure to check if you have it and disable the module (... if your old version of winamp supports disabling modules, that is ...).

    5. Re:Upgrade to version 1.45 by Valiss · · Score: 1

      Is that version able to be downloaded on the web still?

      --

      -Valiss
    6. Re:Upgrade to version 1.45 by moosesocks · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Spyware and bloat???

      Winamp certianly does not have spyware included in it! Real, MusicMatch and others may, but winamp has a very clean reputation. Since they're owned by AOL, an AOL icon is placed on your desktop (although the last time I used it, the installer actually PROMPTED you if you wanted it there!).

      Winamp had bloat problems with version 3. It sucked. Everyone who's involved with winamp, even the developers, acknowledge this. Winamp 5 is MUCH better. With 'new' skins enabled, it takes up slightly more than winamp 2 (which didn't support 'new skins). Disabling the skins results in winamp 5 occupying LESS ram than winamp 2. This is quite an accomplishment, as winamp 2 has been around for many years. Any modern windows PC should be able to run it without a problem. Very few programs can make this claim any more.

      If your computer can't spare the 5mb or so that winamp5 takes up, you need to consider an upgrade!

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    7. Re:Upgrade to version 1.45 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Since they're owned by AOL, an AOL icon is placed on your desktop (although the last time I used it, the installer actually PROMPTED you if you wanted it there!).

      The latest version has completely removed AOL on desktop. From the changelog:

      * removed AOD from installer
    8. Re:Upgrade to version 1.45 by Annirak · · Score: 1
      Winamp certianly does not have spyware included in it!
      Really? Then why do I trap outgoing connections from Winamp5.03 to both Microsoft and AOL?
    9. Re:Upgrade to version 1.45 by semifamous · · Score: 1

      Um... Do you have the box checked (which is checked by default) to "Check for new versions of Winamp at startup"?

      Because those would probably have to connect to the AOL server that Winamp is hosted on in order to check for updates.

      So it's doing it because the option is set.

      And don't be using that tin foil for wrapping leftovers after it's been on your head.

    10. Re:Upgrade to version 1.45 by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      Not sure about AOL. There is an option in the setup to send anonymous usage data to AOL. Maybe you've got that enabled.

      As for Microsoft, I'd wager that it's simply because Winamp links against the windows media DLLs so that it can play WMA content.

      Either way, it's a hell of a lot better than real, musicmatch and the likes. As for me, I use iTunes. It just can't be beat.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  8. Update only ... by vivek7006 · · Score: 1

    if you see a version and date matching 'v5.02 (x86) - Feb 4 2004' or older, it is highly recommended that you update as soon as possible.

  9. The un-informed masses/File checking built in(?) by adamgreenfield · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Guess this means I need to mass e-mail friends and family still using Kazaa and Kazaa-like tools for filesharing. I know that newer versions of Kazaa come with some sort of file scanning tool, anyone know if that picks this sort of stuff up? (or will after the definitions are updated)

    --
    -Adam C. Greenfield
  10. Upgrade to foobar instead. by eddy · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can always upgrade to http://www.foobar2000.org/ instead. No more nonstandard interface, a decent mass-tagger, excellent replay-gain support, etc. What's not to like?

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
    1. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      .. and tabbed playlists!

    2. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > What's not to like?

      Their webpage?

      OT: Mozilla needs a "delayed submit" feature, so I don't have to worry about slowing down, cowboy. Does such a thing exist?

    3. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > What's not to like?

      Everything. The non-flexible interface, the mass-tagger that's partially broken, and support for something no one cares about -- ReplayGain!

      Ask your average MP3 listener (they can't be a geek) if they notice the "volume" change between songs. They'll look dumbfounded and ask "wha-a?" They're the same people who can't tell the difference between the MAD decoder and WinAmp's native decoder. It's sad, really.

      Give me WinAmp (when I'm using Windows that is), or give me silence!

    4. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      foobar2000 is definitely _the_ music player for audiophiles.
      try enabling 'kernel streaming' and hear the difference.

    5. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Elfan · · Score: 1

      Ya a clutter free web page without any flash or an obnoxious green color scheme... oh the horror!

    6. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the same people who can't tell the difference between the MAD decoder and WinAmp's native decoder.

      As far as I know no-one has been able to hear the difference in a blind test, but I could certainly be wrong.

    7. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by kaisyain · · Score: 1

      No media library.

    8. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      comments like that are the *reason* for a delay on posting.

    9. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Peter has worked on various Winamp input plugins for years. Chances are that this bug can be found in foobar2000 as well.

    10. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Vaevictis666 · · Score: 2, Informative
      No media library.

      Sure there is - From the Foobar2000-> Preferences menu, select Database, and ensure that your mp3 dir is listed in the "Restrict Directories to" box. If you only want specific file types rather than anything foobar can play, restrict file types to *.mp3;*.ogg for example.

      Now hit the Scan button and wait a few.

      Next up is Components->Album List. Boom boom there ya go. As you add new mp3s to your playlist, if they are in your previously mentioned directories, they will be auto-added to the album list.

      If you want to do different kinds of filters, it's fully configurable in the preferences screen, Components\Album List - you'll probably want to pop up the help file to figure out all the %variables% and $functions. Easiest method is Display\Title Formatting, click the help button. Once you get the hang of the variable replacement, it's actually really really easy to add new filters. (Disclaimer: I Am A Coder, so that does come fairly naturally to me)

      And yes, just about everything in foobar2000 is as configurable as that, from track list formatting, to right-click menu, to window menu entries... and I hear that stock it runs pretty well under Wine (a few incompatabilities with some plugins)

    11. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Fweeky · · Score: 1

      Source to the various foobar input plugins are available. Feel free to check :)

    12. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Fweeky · · Score: 2, Informative

      The interface is endlessly customizable, from fonts, colours, format scripts etc, all the way up to entirely different column-based and skinnable replacements. The mass-tagger's never failed me, and frankly blows the likes of Tag & Rename out of the water with it's format-agnostic approach.

      WinAmp has plenty not to like about it.. it's just those things tend to be more oriented around it's awful skins and lack of support for all sorts of things I use daily, like playing cuesheets without broken and hacked together plugins and bundled support for any format I'm ever likely to encounter with a footprint that puts WinAmp to shame.

    13. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Peter's midi plugins for Winamp have always been configuration nightmares. I stopped using Winamp when his midi plugin replaced the original Winamp plugin as the default.

      I went back to Winamp after downloading VanBasco and setting it to be the default for midi files, but damn, PP had his PP up his own ass when he was making those config dialogs.

    14. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by tangent3 · · Score: 1

      Complete rubbish. While early versions of foobar2000 did use mikmod which was is used in winamp, fb2k has switched to the superior libmodplug for over a year already. libmodplug, of course, doesn't have this bug.

    15. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by julesh · · Score: 1

      Ask your average MP3 listener (they can't be a geek) if they notice the "volume" change between songs. They'll look dumbfounded and ask "wha-a?"

      Huh? I don't know about your MP3 collection, maybe you encoded them all yourself so they're at a standard volume level, but mine has a selection of tracks that are encoded at anything from 40% to 125% of what I think of as 'standard' volume. While I'll grant you need to pay attention to notice a change of 25%, the 60% change down to the very quitest file in my library would leave just about anyone who isn't deaf reaching for the volume control, if I didn't use some form of automatic correction for it.

    16. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by N1KO · · Score: 1

      The webpage is nice but there aren't any screenshots.

    17. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by N1KO · · Score: 1

      What is the purpose of a media library? I tried one once and it seemed kind of useless, maybe it was a bad implementation.

      Or is it just for people who put all their mp3s in one directory?

    18. Re:Upgrade to foobar instead. by BlueShad0w · · Score: 1

      But if Winamp doesn't work just as you want it, there's probably a plugin to help. If you don't have a problem, there's no need for you to find a fix

      In the case of variable volume, this plugin is amazing (set it to Compressor/Limiter)

  11. xm? by JaxWeb · · Score: 2

    I've never used a Fastrack XM file in my life. Is this a widely used format?

    --
    - Jax
    1. Re:xm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      check out the "modarchive". it's widely used, but mostly in game software or by Amiga fetishists.

    2. Re:xm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      " it's widely used, but mostly in game software or by Amiga fetishists."

      THANK GOD that winamp is still compatable with the amiga!

    3. Re:xm? by understyled · · Score: 5, Informative

      back before mp3 was an option MODs were the shit. XM in particular had numerous things going for the format, including a nicely designed tracker (Fasttracker 2). I was into modding and tracking myself, but i stuck to Impulse Tracker. both programs are quite similar.. but to answer your question, is this a widely used format? it was. the digital music archive has numerous xm songs, if you're an unbeliever. i'm sure google has something to say about XM too.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
    4. Re:xm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to be "an Amiga fetishist" to like the music that talented people have created with the various trackers.

    5. Re:xm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Similar? FT2 requires(*) a friggin mouse for heavenssake!
      *) Yes, it actually kicks you to dos with an insult message if it doesn't find one.

    6. Re:xm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I had tracker friends, ImpulseTracker was the format of choice, having supplanted ScreamTracker 3.

      I remember playing with PlayerPRO on the Mac back in the day. Kind of fun, but I never did anything useful with it.

    7. Re:xm? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trackers are not dead (yet!) :P Just in a case anyone cares, I've moved on to Skale tracker (www.skale.org). It's like the sequel to Fast Tracker 2, it's free and runs under linux and windows xp. It has tons of new features including some VST plugin support. I've been writing trackers for over 10 years and I'm not about to stop now.

    8. Re:xm? by TrancePhreak · · Score: 1

      The digital music archive is dwarfed by The Mod Archive

      I used to listen to mods all the time. They were more dial-up friendly than raw music at the time.

      --

      -]Phreak Out[-
    9. Re:xm? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link! I've got piles of files from modarchive and other random sites, which I still enjoy in my everyday playlist, but hadn't heard of s3m.com. Coolness!

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  12. WinAmp Use by Eberlin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is WinAmp the free multimedia player of choice for Windows users? I know we've always talked about how Windows Media Player is eeeevil and RealPlayer is spyware. Where does WinAmp kick in? Does it do video or is it just a music thing? (like a free alternative to MusicMatch Jukebox or whatnot) It has been ages since I've follwed up (as a Linuxer I go between noatun and xmms)

    Basically, I guess the question is how to make a strong case for WinAmp use. I already sing the praises of Firefox and recommend OpenOffice to folks who don't want/can't shell out $$ for MS Office. I recommend AVG as a free virus-scanner. Same with ZoneAlarm, Spybot S&D, and Ad-Aware. What winning argument do I use to say "use WinAmp instead of..." to Windows users who ask?

    1. Re:WinAmp Use by DarkkOne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Most people who use winamp use it primarily for MP3s. I honestly can't suggest it for video playback. It's never worked well for me.

      What I will suggest for media playback in general is "Media Player Classic" available at sourceforge. I don't know what the general consensus is here, but for me, it has done what I've asked it to do, and that's good enough for me.

    2. Re:WinAmp Use by JaxWeb · · Score: 1

      "Is WinAmp the free multimedia player of choice for Windows users?" For many people, it used to be. However, now, WMP is much better. Newer versions can tuck into the Taskbar and so on, which makes up for Winamps superior (In many peoples opinion) UI. "I know we've always talked about how Windows Media Player is eeeevil" Yes, but it is quite nice. "RealPlayer is spyware" I've seen quite a few of my friends use this. I've no idea if they *choose* to use it, or if it cruelly tricked them, but they use it. They seem to think it is quite pretty. "Does it do video or is it just a music thing?" It does do Video, but I find not very well (Sometimes my videos get tinted blue. Don't know why. Maybe they aren't very well encoded). It has great support for a load of formats, too (Most of which I never use). "MusicMatch Jukebox" I know one of my friends has this, but doesn't like the interface (WMP is the tool of choice for many). "as a Linuxer I go between noatun and xmms" Yes, Noatun is brilliant :) The simpler, to the point Playlist thing that I've always wanted. I've got to install XMMS some day! "What winning argument do I use to say "use WinAmp instead of..." to Windows users who ask?" To be honest, I don't think there is a good reason anymore. When I use Windows (Which I confess, I am right now because I had to do some Windows programming) I use WMP, because it tucks into the Task Bar, which is nicer than the System Tray. The User Interface is better in WMP, so I wouldn't bother recommending it. WMP is just plain easier to use. However, how Winamp sticks to the sides (Like everything does in KDE) and how the bits stick to each other is a great feature. Maybe you could tell them about that?

      --
      - Jax
    3. Re:WinAmp Use by TerryAtWork · · Score: 1

      I recomend Jet Audio at http://www.jetaudio.com/ for video. Best I've run into yet.

      --
      It's Christmas everyday with BitTorrent.
    4. Re:WinAmp Use by prewashedironman · · Score: 1

      It's a good bit of software, even version 5, bloated as it is. However, for more powerful computers (read 192mb Ram+) I prefer iTunes, simply because it seems a bit more usable, with smart playlists, everything in one version (no ripping and burning only in pay versions as winamp has adopted). My only complaint is that the music store isn't available in the UK yet.

    5. Re:WinAmp Use by JaxWeb · · Score: 1

      "Is WinAmp the free multimedia player of choice for Windows users?"

      For many people, it used to be. However, now, WMP is much better. Newer versions can tuck into the Taskbar and so on, which makes up for Winamps superior (In many peoples opinion) UI.

      "I know we've always talked about how Windows Media Player is eeeevil"

      Yes, but it is quite nice.

      "RealPlayer is spyware"

      I've seen quite a few of my friends use this. I've no idea if they *choose* to use it, or if it cruelly tricked them, but they use it. They seem to think it is quite pretty.

      "Does it do video or is it just a music thing?" It does do Video, but I find not very well (Sometimes my videos get tinted blue. Don't know why. Maybe they aren't very well encoded). It has great support for a load of formats, too (Most of which I never use). "MusicMatch Jukebox" I know one of my friends has this, but doesn't like the interface (WMP is the tool of choice for many).

      "as a Linuxer I go between noatun and xmms"

      Yes, Noatun is brilliant :) The simpler, to the point Playlist thing that I've always wanted. I've got to install XMMS some day!

      "What winning argument do I use to say "use WinAmp instead of..." to Windows users who ask?"

      To be honest, I don't think there is a good reason anymore. When I use Windows (Which I confess, I am right now because I had to do some Windows programming) I use WMP, because it tucks into the Task Bar, which is nicer than the System Tray. The User Interface is better in WMP, so I wouldn't bother recommending it. WMP is just plain easier to use.

      However, how Winamp sticks to the sides (Like everything does in KDE) and how the bits stick to each other is a great feature. Maybe you could tell them about that?

      (Reposted with Line Breaks ;) )

      --
      - Jax
    6. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's evil, but it's nice"

      Yeah, you're done. Please cancel your account here and return to your X-Box(tm). Really, it's for the best. Also, the CR/LF is your friend.

    7. Re:WinAmp Use by BW_Nuprin · · Score: 1
      What about Winamp5 doesn't work well for video? I personally have a plethora of cartoons in various playlists, and I watch them in random order all day long while I work. I've found that its an excellent alternative to TV, which I don't have in my office at work (anymore). That, and it helps to keep the suicidal tendancies of work down, you know.

      The only time I use another media player for anything is mplayer2 for porn, and thats only so I can watch lots at once.

    8. Re:WinAmp Use by BFaucet · · Score: 2, Informative

      Winamp is pretty much XMMS... It does video to.

      I recommend it as an audio player, but I like Media Player Classic for video.

      history of Winamp:
      http://www.time.com/time/digital/reports/ mp3/frank el1.html

      Actually I think the fellows who made XMMS wanted a Linux version of Winamp... in fact XMMS skins are the same format as the old winamp skins.

      Anyway... I like it well enough... I think it's suffered from bloat since Frankel sold NullSoft to AOL, but it's all good.

      Get Winamp 2.X if you want just a good audio player.

      Don't get Winamp 3 as it sucks memory like mad and has no real benefits.

      Winamp 4 doesn't exist.

      Winamp 5 is kinda like what Winamp 3 was supposed to be. It supports the pretty (and useless IMHO) new skins and is also very stable. It also has very nice internet TV video streaming. I run Winamp 5 because I have a Gig of memory and am not bothered by its 10-20 meg footprint.

      There are also a whole heck of a lot of plugins for winamp to do various things like controlling it via remote control, ripping audio streams off the web and even have a little character dance on the screen.

      --
      -Derick
    9. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no point in recommending WinAmp for anything. WinAmp does have video support, but no one takes that seriously. We're talking Audio here. I personally prefer Foobar2000 after getting annoyed by all the other audio players. Its fast, has complete format support,and is the most stable. The only other player's i'd reccomend are iTunes and maybe JetAudio. And i've probably tried them all.

    10. Re:WinAmp Use by crabpeople · · Score: 2, Interesting
      the one great use that IMHO beats hands down any other media player, is the use of Hotkeys in winamp 5. with this turned on (not on by default) you have a whole range of keyboard shortcuts that can be used to control winamp.

      some ones i use every day are CTRL + ALT + PG DOWN to forward the track, CTRL + ALT + Down Arrow , to lower volume for when phone rings and CTRL + ALT + Insert to restart a track. there are many others to do basically any function. you can change them to whatever you want as well. Primarily i would use these when im in a fullscreen game as before i would have to alt + tab out to change the track (very annoying)

      better off using media player classic (my favourite distro is something called the ACE mega codec pack{large DL like 40-50megs}, i have yet to find something it cant play).

      basically, its free, its light (680k download 1.5mb install) highly configurable, plays every audio file imagineable, built in crossfader and hotkeys, and is the most popular user driven project in the windows world (IMHO). I say that because most plugins are made by users, and although i havent actually made one, i could imagine it being easy as there are over 30k of them.

      --
      I'll just use my special getting high powers one more time...
    11. Re:WinAmp Use by athakur999 · · Score: 1

      WA5 always crashes on me when I try to play a video from Section-E. I believe their videos use MPEG-4 video and AC3 audio and something about that doesn't jibe with WA5. They play back fine in WiMP and PowerDVD.

      WiMP is my player of choice usually since it has easily an easily accessible controls for adjusting brightness, contrast etc. of a video. My monitor is pretty dark for some reason and I always have to boost the brightness in order to see anything. WA5 doesn't have any controls for this as far as I could find.

      --
      "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
    12. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AFAIK, the general consensus among anime fans (the crowd that uses video players most heavily) is that indeed, Media Player Classic is the best. Though oddly enough, in my case the winamp integrated player actually works better than MPC for some codecs. My CPU speed is very borderline for high-res video (~1Ghz), and MPC often skips or lags where Winamp doesn't. Not to say MPC doesn't kick arse, but I prefer to keep several different players on hand.

    13. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is WinAmp the free multimedia player of choice for Windows users? I know we've always talked about how Windows Media Player is eeeevil and RealPlayer is spyware. Where does WinAmp kick in? Does it do video or is it just a music thing?

      I vote for foobar2000 for audio and BSPlayer or Media Player Classic for video. MPC can even play real and quicktime files if you have the *alternative codecs. (I can't seem to get it to do subtitles right though, which is why I mainly use BSPlayer.)

    14. Re:WinAmp Use by ashot · · Score: 1

      thats kind of creepy; I use the exact same keys for forward track and lower volume..

      --
      -ashot
    15. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can put winamp in the taskbar as well

    16. Re:WinAmp Use by zakezuke · · Score: 1

      Most people who use winamp use it primarily for MP3s. I honestly can't suggest it for video playback. It's never worked well for me.

      I use winamp 5.x primarly for video playback, I find it to work quite well. I can see where you are comming from though... I have another PC and dispite the fact it has a faster CPU... I find that winamp's video play back on it is a touch slugish... I think it's running an ATI rage 128 or some such, where the PC it runs well on is a G-force lame edition.

      I also used winamp 2.9x for video playback, my only complaint was it didn't seem to do SVCD, or I didn't have any luck with it.

      A common feature I use in winamp is output to .wav. While most of the CD recording software I use supports mp3->cd directly, I find I create fewer coasters if I convert to wav first.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    17. Re:WinAmp Use by cwernli · · Score: 1

      It has been ages since I've follwed up [since I'am a] Linuxer (...)

      Basically, I guess the question is how to make a strong case for WinAmp use. I already sing the praises of Firefox and recommend OpenOffice to folks who don't want/can't shell out $$ for MS Office. I recommend AVG as a free virus-scanner. Same with ZoneAlarm, Spybot S&D, and Ad-Aware. What winning argument do I use to say "use WinAmp instead of..." to Windows users who ask?

      Why would you care ? It's not that there are no Windows users who would ask, or Windows users that "have to be taught"; it's rather about the basic curiosity that seems to be lacking: how can one not be interested in the hot operating systems from a hands-on point of view ?

      Now before the flaming starts: yes, Windows is hot - have you had your crash today ? YMMV, but I've found my desktop.

    18. Re:WinAmp Use by Simonetta · · Score: 1

      I followed your link to JetAudio (I'm always looking for a WinAmp alternative simply because I've used the same program for almost seven years now).

      This is the ugliest web site that I've ever seen! If I didn't know that this was some kind of audio file player software, I never would have known.

      I love the part where they say to download the freeware program and then list all of the features of the U-Pay version. From the description, I couldn't determine one difference between the U-Pay and the 'freeware' version.

      What a mess.

      I don't expect these people to be around in three years.

      You say they do something with audio files?

    19. Re:WinAmp Use by brand+bendy · · Score: 0

      I use winamp 5 for all audio and video on my computer. With the proper codecs installed it plays everything pretty much flawlessley for me. I also use it with the Litestep shell which it integrates with quite nicely. I'm running XP Home with 512RAM, P4-2.7Ghz.

      --
      I use phrases like "darn good" and "rootin' tootin'", but only when there's a darn good, rootin tootin' reason!
    20. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      use WMP, because it tucks into the Task Bar, which is nicer than the System Tray.

      Wtf? WinAmp goes to the task bar by default. Putting it in the system tray instead is an option. At least that's how it is with my copy of version 2.8.

      Also, you forgot to mention keyboard shortcuts to all major playback functions. I wouldn't know if WMP has that because I can't stand its interface enough to use it, but I love that feature in WinAmp. I only wish WinAmp didn't require focus for it to work. It would be great if I could skip a song while I'm typing by hitting Ctrl-Alt-B, instead of clicking on the player icon, then typing B.

    21. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess I'm a little slow -- I didn't quite get that comment you made.

      I'm personally in a position where people (your average Joe-Sixpack) asks me questions regarding their computers. Since I don't work at a "computer place," I don't have any personal/company agenda that involves selling them hardware, software, or whatever. That allows me to give decent advice without any salespitch whatsoever.

      Windows may be hot to some, but it's not for me. I've lived through Microsoft OSes from DOS up to XP. I've since uninstalled XP on my laptop and have gone through a couple of Linux distros. They're pretty cool and have enough functionality for me to work with.

      In the end, that's what it comes down to -- even for Joe Sixpack, I would imagine. If it works, and it's free (as in beer) or even just cheaper, it'll be a hit. Free as in freedom is a secondary point.

      Basic curiosity about a "hot" (MS) OS? I'll leave that to the script kiddies and the virii du jour. I've still got a lot to learn with Linux to satisfy even "basic" curiosity.

    22. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slightly offtopic:

      You consider 192 megs of ram "powerful"?

      You must be brainwashed by OEMs which offer 128-256 megs in all but their high-end models. (Lesson: OEMs suck)

      I absolutely refuse to put anything less than 512 in a machine these days, and I consider that barely middle-end. Even if I have to skimp on the proc to do it, I'll put in 512, and a gig is not out of the question.

      Nothing makes me sicker than seeing someone with a 3.06 HT system with a 250 gig harddrive... and 256 megs memory. balance, it's all about balance.

    23. Re:WinAmp Use by bigberk · · Score: 1

      Where does Winamp kick in? Are you kidding? To give you an idea of how useful this free software is, I have used it since the 1990s to play all audio (WAV, WMV, MP3, OGG, etc.) and these days I also use it to play all video. I prefer it to Windows Media, there is no reason to not use Winamp.

    24. Re:WinAmp Use by BinLadenMyHero · · Score: 1

      Winamp 2 (aka Winamp Classic) is great!

      The AVS visualization plugin is really nice.
      I would like very much to see it ported to Linux.
      Or some Linux viz (XMMS or whatever) that is compatible with AVS presets.

      Oh, and it plays video well.
      Works almost as well as Windows Media Player, and the interface is waaaaaay better.

    25. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Global hotkeys were introduced in Winamp5 - that's probably what you're looking for.

    26. Re:WinAmp Use by kayen_telva · · Score: 1

      I've had winamp running for 3 days, streaming from an mp3 server on and off for hours.
      The memory footprint is 8,464KB right now. I installed Winamp lite so maybe that helped.

    27. Re:WinAmp Use by FreeForm+Response · · Score: 1

      Man, was this hard to read. =(

      I use WMP, because it tucks into the Task Bar, which is nicer than the System Tray.

      Winamp can be configured to minimize as a taskbar button, a tray icon, both, or neither.

      However, how Winamp sticks to the sides and how the bits stick to each other is a great feature.

      allSnap is an awesome little program that makes all of your Windows programs snap to each other, snap to the screen borders, snap while resizing, etc. Very useful app.

      Is there a truly compelling reason to download and install Winamp, instead of using the Windows Media Player that's installed? I imagine that anybody who's asking that question would be served equally well by either program, as they'd just be playing MP3s and short video clips and such. However, if you're looking for more advanced features, extensibility (via plugins), cool skins, and basically anything else, then you'll want to go with Winamp over WMP/RealPlayer/QuickTime and the like.

    28. Re:WinAmp Use by Patik · · Score: 0
      Winamp 2.91 is the best version. You can get it at this great site:

      http://www.oldversion.com/

    29. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't need the *alternative codecs to play QuickTime or Real files in MPC, that's just a common misconception.

      If you have the legitimate QuickTime codec (doesn't have to be registered), or the legitimate Real codec (pfft....legitimate Real....) installed, you can play these formats in MPC. You only want to install the *alternative codecs if you want to play these formats in mplayer2 or any of the full-bloated WMP versions.

    30. Re:WinAmp Use by omicronish · · Score: 1

      AFAIK, you can't start two copies of Windows Media Player, one for music and one for movies. WinAmp fills in a nice gap by functioning as my one and only music player. WMP also has performance problems managing a play list; it feels slow and clunky.

    31. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use a combo of Winamp 5 in the default modern skin for audio, MPC for some video (open formats, Windows formats, Real), and QuickTime Player for streaming QuickTime video.

      Nothing I know of does streaming Real other than the legitimate Real player, so I just don't listen to streaming Real. QuickTime is always available as an alternative anyways, and when it isn't, WMA is.

      But I don't use Winamp for video unless it's NSV video. Nothing else deals with it.

      BTW, MPC is buggy when it comes to DVD playback, since maybe 6.4.7.9 or whatever version the author started incorporating all the internal splitters. It worked for a while after disabling the new splitters, but after two versions or so, MPC has been crashing very very often on me when I try to play DVDs or watch hi-res video files. I haven't changed any of my codecs around except for Real Alternative, but still I get trash with other formats that have previously worked fine. Changing settings back to their defaults and resetting them to my preferences doesn't work.

      And be careful! The latest version of Real Alternative will kill your MPC prefs - it killed mine, since my prefs were saved to the Registry instead of an INI file. The INI file the Real Alternative set up in my MPC directory overrode and destroyedmy prefs in the Registry as soon as I opened MPC and closed it for the first time. Dumbasses.

    32. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      BTW, MPC is buggy when it comes to DVD playback, since maybe 6.4.7.9 or whatever version the author started incorporating all the internal splitters. It worked for a while after disabling the new splitters, but after two versions or so, MPC has been crashing very very often on me when I try to play DVDs or watch hi-res video files.

      VideoLAN Player is good for DVDs.

    33. Re:WinAmp Use by Kris_J · · Score: 1

      I use it for converting classic file formats to MP3, but I use MusicMatch to play MP3s, or xmms on my PS2.

    34. Re:WinAmp Use by 0siris · · Score: 1

      Me too, but aren't they the default keys anyway?

    35. Re:WinAmp Use by Roofus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually I think the fellows who made XMMS wanted a Linux version of Winamp... in fact XMMS skins are the same format as the old winamp skins.

      Yes. Winamp was out before XMMS. Actually, XMMS used to be called X11Amp, which was when I first tried it.

      Let me tell you, when X11Amp first came out, it wasn't even close to the quality and features that Winamp had. It was the best thing around for Unix MP3 playback though, and it's improved and matured greatly since then.

    36. Re:WinAmp Use by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      I found a kind of classic media player available on C:\Archivos de programa\Windows Media Player\mplayer2.exe. Will that work? Looks like 6.4

      --
      What?
    37. Re:WinAmp Use by ashot · · Score: 1

      I thought I had set them myself, but perhaps I made that up in my head.

      --
      -ashot
    38. Re:WinAmp Use by MrBlue+VT · · Score: 1

      I agree...I've got 512 MB in my P3-560 Mhz system and would add more if the motherboard would accept it.

      Definately need as much of that RAM as possible.

    39. Re:WinAmp Use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has been ages since I've follwed up (as a Linuxer I go between noatun and xmms) [...] What winning argument do I use to say "use WinAmp instead of..." to Windows users who ask?

      The one that you actually know what you're talking about, since you use the software you are recommending? Oh, wait...

    40. Re:WinAmp Use by Jester99 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What winning argument do I use to say "use WinAmp instead of..." to Windows users who ask?

      It really whips the llama's ass! :)

    41. Re:WinAmp Use by mikael_j · · Score: 1
      Yes, but it is quite nice.

      That is a matter of opinion, I can't stand the bloated WMP UI, but maybe you don't mind putting in an effort to not have half of your screen being covered by ugly window decorations.

      It does do Video, but I find not very well (Sometimes my videos get tinted blue. Don't know why. Maybe they aren't very well encoded)...

      I've had no problems with video playback in WinAmp, and I use it to watch cartoons and the like all the time (all the time = several hours per day).

      ...I use WMP, because it tucks into the Task Bar, which is nicer than the System Tray. The User Interface is better in WMP, so I wouldn't bother recommending it. WMP is just plain easier to use.

      Uh huh.. In WinAmp you can choose if you want it to be in the task bar, the system tray or both, it's up to you.

      And about the WMP UI being "plain easier", what sort of crack are you smoking?! It makes almost no sense, especially in non-English Windows versions, but the english version has a retarded UI as well..

      /Mikael

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    42. Re:WinAmp Use by jsoderba · · Score: 1

      That's the old 6.4 interface, yes, but it lacks a lot of features that mplayerc.exe has that lets you watch DVDs and tweak oddly formatted video files. Particularly subtitled and multi-track audio.

      Also, mplayerc.exe can play Quicktime and Real Video files in a non-bloated interface if you have those players installed.

    43. Re:WinAmp Use by babbage · · Score: 1
      Is WinAmp the free multimedia player of choice for Windows users?

      Generally, yes. WinAmp has a good reputation and deservedly so. Everything else, aside from Windows Media Player, is basically a niche product, and if WMP wasn't embedded in the operating system I'm not sure how many people would use it either.

      That said, I'm surprised that more people in this thread haven't brought up iTunes. Nevermind the iTunes Music Store -- the software itself is fantastic. It's very easy to use, it handles things like ripping & burning CDs nicely, and everything just works.

      Plus -- and this is a feature that I'm not aware of with any other media software -- the ability to share your library with other users on your local network is wonderful. I've seen software for getting a Linux server to serve the DAAP protocol that iTunes uses, but I don't know of any software that can act as a client other than iTunes. It would be great if WinAmp or XMMS could pick up this ability so that everyone in a mixed Windows / Mac / *nix office or home could share their libraries amongst each other. But until & unless other audio software picks up this ability, iTunes has a clear advantage going for it.

    44. Re:WinAmp Use by prewashedironman · · Score: 1

      No, i don't particularly. The point i was trying to make was that in a system which is 3/4years old, where around 128mb would be the norm, Winamp tends to run far better than itunes, however if you have the power for iTunes, then go for it, perhaps i should have made that more clearer. and as for 512 being "barely middle end" i strongly disagree. My system is currently running firefox (with around 10 tabs open), iTunes and a vast array of software in the taskbar (Win XP). My memory usage: 260mb out of 512mb. And it runs perfectly for pretty much everything, the only time it slows is with heavy image/video work, where yes, more memory (up to around 1gb) would certainly be used on a lesss general purpose machine. At risk orf sounding like Bill Gates, 512mb should be enough for any current average desktop user, who is likely to be running far less software than me

    45. Re:WinAmp Use by N1KO · · Score: 1

      I don't know if it comes with 2K/XP but when I had Win98 I used something called ActiveX DirectShow Plugin or DirectShow ActiveX Plugin or something like that to play videos. It came with the OS, was extremely simple and had the lowest resource usage compared to everything else I tried.

      Everyone I know uses winamp for music, maybe it's because the other popular players have such bizarre interfaces. They took the skinning idea from winamp and forgot all about the simplicity.

  13. Wow by GarfBond · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I can't believe people are actually complaining about winamp bloat. Winamp has been one of the better examples of not-bloat. Sure, 5 is worse than 2, but it's better than 3, and much of the CPU-hogging goes away when you go back to classic skins. For me, the enqueue function makes it well worth it.

    I think the only way you can get less bloated is if you used something like mpg123. XMMS is a winamp-clone on linux anyway.

    1. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've noticed at some point, whatever version i've had, that winamp seemed to become very slow and sluggish. I dropped WinAmp ultimately due to some unforgivable installation popup dialog (no cancel, no close button) which ran everytime i stated winamp. I ended up eventually using FooBar2000 which is clearly less bloated than WinAmp.

    2. Re:Wow by antdude · · Score: 1

      From what I read, the sound engine is still pretty much the same in 2.x, 3.x., and 5.x. This is excluding the sound plugins for enhancements. I still use v2.91 since it still works well and I don't see anything in 5.x that I need.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    3. Re:Wow by Chester+K · · Score: 1

      For me, the enqueue function makes it well worth it.

      You could enqueue with Winamp 2.x.

      --

      NO CARRIER
    4. Re:Wow by LoganEkz · · Score: 1

      there's also's also a DOS based port of mpg123.

  14. wrong. by honold · · Score: 5, Informative

    winamp3 was the bloated piece of crap. winamp5 is not a bloated piece of crap. they dropped wasabi. please check your facts before making posts.

    1. Re:wrong. by CaptainBaz · · Score: 1

      double wrong.

      Yes, winamp3 was even more bloated and even more crap.

      That doesn't stop winamp5 from being a bloated piece of crap in its own right though. It's much more sluggish than winamp2 - do a head-to-head on an older system and you'll see what I mean.

    2. Re:wrong. by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't winamp get sluggish because someone sued them to take out their handwritten mp3 decoding code? What was it, nitrane, octane, something like that..

      They were sued (by fraunhaufer?) for infringement, and took it out, and had it decode through the default MS codecs, which was much slower.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    3. Re:wrong. by hawkbug · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure - but that would explain a lot. Can somebody find a url discussing this very thing?

    4. Re:wrong. by phoenix.bam! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wish people bothered to actually learn what Wasabi is. Winamp3 used Wasabi to showcase the technology. It is a scripting language that can do anything (IE: be an mp3 player.) Winamp5 incorporates Wasabi, but it does not run on it. (Winamp5 is ACTUALLY the next version of Winamp2, with parts from Winamp3, hence 2+3=5)

    5. Re:wrong. by default+luser · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, the sound quality went to hell after version 2.22 because they dropped the Fraunhofer codec. I believe it was because Fraunhofer was raising ( or enforcing?) licenses on their suddenly valuable IP.

      They ended up making a replacement codec in-house. A lot of people initially complained about the sound quality, but they improved it with every release, and supposedly since 2.666 the rendering bugs have been removed. It sounds great, and performs well.

      --

      Man is the animal that laughs.
      And occasionally whores for Karma.

    6. Re:wrong. by ishamael69 · · Score: 2, Informative
    7. Re:wrong. by LucidityZero · · Score: 2, Informative
      Recommended system requirements

      * 1.5 GHz Pentium IV or comparable
      * 128MB RAM
      * 30MB Hard Disk Space
      * 32bit Sound Card
      * Windows 2000, Windows XP
      * 8x speed or greater CD Burner (Required for Burning)
      * 16x speed or greater CDROM (Required for Ripping)


      And it's not bloated?
      --
      Sig.i>
    8. Re:wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Be sure to buy a computer that wasn't manufactured in fucking 1956 Soviet Russia, asshole.

    9. Re:wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really wish I could mod this parent up.

    10. Re:wrong. by DeeKayWon · · Score: 1

      The in-house codec They used from 2.50 -> 2.65 was called 'Nitrane'. And it wasn't fixed in 2.666, it was replaced. I remember hearing that it was replaced by Fraunhofer code, but I can't find any reference to Fraunhofer in the credits.

    11. Re:wrong. by mikael_j · · Score: 0, Troll
      * 1.5 GHz Pentium IV or comparable

      This one is probably just to cover their backs in case some dumbass decides to sue them for WinAmp not running properly on his 286SX..

      * 128MB RAM

      A bit steep, but once again I'm guessing it will run on less but that they think it's better to cover their backs.

      * 30MB Hard Disk Space

      This isn't much to complain about in the age of several hundred meg word processors.

      * 32bit Sound Card

      I suppose that in theory you could use drivers for your 16bit sound card that make it seem like a 32bit card to WinAmp.. But who doesn't have a 32bit sound card?

      * Windows 2000, Windows XP

      Ok, what are you running? Windows 95?

      * 8x speed or greater CD Burner (Required for Burning) * 16x speed or greater CDROM (Required for Ripping)

      Well obviously it's possible to do burning and ripping with slower drives, but for Joe Q Sixpack this would be too slow and probably make him go online and bitch about how the software sucks, so let's cover our backs again..

      /Mikael

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    12. Re:wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Likewise.

    13. Re:wrong. by squall14716 · · Score: 1

      For the record, Winamp3 was not bloated. It was unfinished, rushed, and then crushed. In fact, if it had been given time, Winamp3 could have become better than Winamp 2.x. Wasabi.player (the *new* name for the Winamp3), in my opinion, will someday overtake Winamp as the most popular audio player and, given time, will have Linux (and probably Mac) ports, whereas Winamp will never be ported to Linux. Never. Winamp 5 loads Wasabi as a plugin when using modern skins. And people say it's faster than Winamp3? True, it is faster than build #488d, which was the official release, but has anyone used #499 (or Wasabi.player #499c)? It is significantly better than the "bloated" official release. Another thing that pisses me off is when people call Winamp3 bloated. Winamp3 was not bloated. You could remove anything, even the music playing core. And you call that bloated? Just don't expect anything exciting to happen when you press 'Play'. That's pretty much the opposite of bloated. Stop confusing bloated and slow, and the official release was slow. By no means was it fast, but that has changed in recent builds and the speed will continue to improve with new builds of Wasabi.player. Keeping the Winamp 2.x core is Nullsoft's biggest mistake.

  15. This is major by Tobias+Luetke · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm sure the millions of people who use Winamp as their main browser will not like this at all.

    And since winamp uses IE for web page rendering people are used to so high standards for security.

    bummer.

    1. Re:This is major by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot, RTFA.

  16. I was wondering when it would happen. by Phybersyk0 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I used to track mods on the Amiga (protracker) and PC (Fast Tracker2). It was a fairly common occurence for people to load text/image files into songs as a playable instrument within a music module. You could then transfer the module (which contains both the instrument samples & the pointers to the coded music (it's all addressed through HEX!)) and then extract the datafile (save instrument as...) then view it in your favorite image viewer or text editor....

    FYI:
    Data files as instruments do not really sound as cool as you'd think though. If the file has header info, that's where you'd find the most variety and interesting sounds...

    1. Re:I was wondering when it would happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell does "it's all addressed through HEX!" mean?! Rubbish.

      Modules, as they are called, are made up of patterns (which contain 1 or more tracks), the order list (which is the sequence in which the patterns are played), samples (ie. sampled sound data, such as a WAVE), and in newer trackers, instruments (which can contain many individual samples).

      What "Phybersky0" is trying to say is that back in the day people would sometimes load a non-sample file into a sample slot, which could later be extracted from the module. This was a somewhat effective method of ensuring that additional information was always available with the module.

      But for all you know, the coder of the tracker may have preferred working with file offsets in OCTAL, or maybe even BINARY. Some of them, believe it or not, even like that crazy system we call DECIMAL, although caps are optional.

    2. Re:I was wondering when it would happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahaha, yeah. I wrote a song in FT2 once where all the samples were windows system files. Sounded like hell, but there were a few interesting noises in there.

  17. winamp5 is still bloated compared to winamp2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's not the huge bloated mess that winamp3, was it's still not lightweight. on slower machines there's still a noticeable difference between 2 and 5.

  18. Mikamp module by execom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If I remember, Winamp uses a modified version of Mikmod, a well known module player, which is also available in some Linux distro.

    Will this bug be updated in mikmod as well ?

    I hope that one day, Winamp will drop Mikamp and use Modplug instead, which sources has been released and it the best player on Win32 (mikmod sounds horrible on Windows, and is buggy).

    Also modplug plays more formats and is better, although is win32 only;

    --
    I need a Sino-Logic 16. Sogo-7 data-gloves, a GPL stealth module...
    1. Re:Mikamp module by Neon+Spiral+Injector · · Score: 1

      I don't know if there will be an update. The mikmod site disappeared a few months ago, it has now been replaced with Girls In Underwear Pics.

    2. Re:Mikamp module by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Mikamp module by Stephen+Williams · · Score: 2, Informative

      Also modplug plays more formats and is better, although is win32 only

      There's a port to XMMS. Works for me.

      -Stephen

    4. Re:Mikamp module by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > The mikmod site disappeared a few months ago, it has now been replaced with Girls In Underwear Pics.

      Great site. They offer "Undies filled with hot fresh cum." I hate sites with undies filled with the cold, stale stuff.

      Somebody actually gets paid to write that stuff...

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    5. Re:Mikamp module by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last I knew, there was actually a Modplug plug-in for Winamp, but unfortunately it didn't offer nearly the range of configuration options as the full Modplug application.

    6. Re:Mikamp module by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I've noticed that WinAmp clips bass and intensity pretty badly on MODs (any format) -- is this why?

      Never used mikmod so no idea what it sounds like by itself. Haven't been happy with any Win32 dedicated MOD player I've tried, because of the uniformly stupid interfaces, and that most don't handle more than a few formats. (In DOS, I always used XTC-Play.)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    7. Re:Mikamp module by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the domain was gone. The old developer didn't have time to work on the project so it just sort of disappeared.

      They have a new developer and a new site nowadays, though.

  19. TELL EM GIRL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you go with your badself

  20. Why are you using Winamp to play XM's anyway? by spyrochaete · · Score: 5, Informative

    Since version 2, Winamp has been notorious for playing MOD, XM, S3M, and related files inaccurately. It fudges up a lot of the effects, particularly portamento (note slide) and key-off commands. You all should be using ModPlug Player to play these formats! It ain't perfect but it's the best Windows player there is.

    Why get this player? So that you can drink deeply from the cup of BBS\Internet history! Check out some MOD sites and dig some chippy goodness!

    SHAMELESS PLUG -- Be sure to scope out my MODs as well!

    1. Re:Why are you using Winamp to play XM's anyway? by rebelcool · · Score: 1

      heh the other day i found my old floppy of full-version Mod4Win. I think it cost $20, one of the few softwares my 13 year old self saved up to buy..

      --

      -

    2. Re:Why are you using Winamp to play XM's anyway? by pilkul · · Score: 1
      Sure Modplug has better quality. But realistically, I constantly hop from mp3s to mods to videoclips while working, and it's too much of a pain to open up more than one window. Especially since, last I checked, modplug isn't nearly as compact and convenient as winamp in terms of screen real estate. I usually prefer to suffer the quality loss.

      What I don't get is why the modplug people don't make a plugin for winamp already instead of forcing people to use their poorly designed interface.

    3. Re:Why are you using Winamp to play XM's anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They probably focus on the player most people "in the know" use instead. Foobar2000

    4. Re:Why are you using Winamp to play XM's anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, Awesome. I'll check your shit out when I get home.

    5. Re:Why are you using Winamp to play XM's anyway? by spyrochaete · · Score: 1

      I hereby award you +1 from my phantom mod points! You may be interested in the WSP Module Player Plugin for Winamp 5 which improves the accuracy of music module playback.

      BTW, ModPlug Player is quite compact and can operate in "windowshade" mode just like Winamp. Plus, it can run most Winamp 2.x plugins.

    6. Re:Why are you using Winamp to play XM's anyway? by scrm · · Score: 1

      I hereby award you +1 from my phantom mod points! You may be interested in the WSP Module Player Plugin for Winamp 5 which improves the accuracy of music module playback.

      To play tracker modules I'd still opt for Modplug Player over a mysterious Winamp plugin, because from the composer's perspective, the crucial thing is that the listener hears their tune as it was intended to be heard. It's one of the problems inherent in module formats that although the size of the files are relatively small (which allowed the scene to take off in a big way over BBS's), the output depends so much on the player you use (unlike MP3 for example which uses standard decoding algorithms across players).

      In fact, if I'm gonna play the role of a total purist, the only real way to listen to a module is either:

      1) To play it in the tracker in which it was originally composed (Fast Tracker 2 for XM's, Impulse Tracker for .IT's, etc.)

      2) To play an MP3 version of the tune, which was created from a WAV file that was output in said tracker

      Many composers (well before the scene kinda died :) release their stuff in both MP3 and the original tracker format. PLUG ALERT: As do I (MP3's / modules.

      --screamager [previously of the KFMF, now just reminiscing]

      --
      ---- scrm
    7. Re:Why are you using Winamp to play XM's anyway? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check out this plugin as well:

      http://fuel.adsl.dk/index.php?view=area&project=Ol dsk00l

      It plays some really abscure formats as well :)

  21. Don't load in startup by DR+SoB · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here's an idea to keep yourself free from these type of third party software security issues.

    Don't have it automatically load at boot. Simple! Next, change your association's to only load the files you want (for example, I don't know _anyone_ that uses Winamp for more then video playing and mp3's, what's with the .XM files?) So, go to command prompt (or your favourite association editor) and type ASSOC and change the association of .XM files.. Pretty simple.. In fact, change all associations except .WAV, .MP3 and .MPEG (or whatever video/audio formats you prefer), that deal with Winamp.

    Another way to change file associations is to go into Explorer, "Tools" pull down menu, select "Folder Options", click the tab "File Types" and you can delete them from here.

    Now this solves the loading problem, if it loads only when you click on your MP3 you don't have to worry about it leaving open ports (this goes for any third party software you don't need running all the time..). Not only will this prevent this sort of attack, but you'll get some freed resources, and a faster boot time, 'to boot'!..

    --
    Mod +5 Drunk
    1. Re:Don't load in startup by gid · · Score: 1

      Now you know someone that uses winamp to play music modules (.xm, .mod, .s3m, .it, etc)... me. :)

    2. Re:Don't load in startup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You obviously are not an old-skool demo scener so I will forgive your lack of knowledge and respect for the best music out there...

    3. Re:Don't load in startup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you have a computer with a sound card & Internet anytime between 1985 and 1995?

    4. Re:Don't load in startup by DR+SoB · · Score: 1

      Yes I did, but I didn't have Winamp then, or Windows for that matter.. Since your talking about 9 years or greater, what does that have to do with today??

      --
      Mod +5 Drunk
    5. Re:Don't load in startup by Koyaanisqatsi · · Score: 1

      what's with the .XM files? .XM files are one of the common extentions for "modules", music files with sampled instruments - the music is not in audio format, but in the form of instruments and several "tracks", telling which note to play at any given time (that's a generalization)

      Modules are quite popular in the electronic scene, and if you got the right player, usually sound much better than the equivalent MP3.

      Plus, if you are into MAKING electronic music, with a module you have the actual SOURCE for it (the module file), so just open it on your favorite tracker and start playing with it (pun intended)

    6. Re:Don't load in startup by Milo+Fungus · · Score: 1

      Another way to change file associations is to go into Explorer, "Tools" pull down menu, select "Folder Options", click the tab "File Types" and you can delete them from here.

      Winamp is a bit tricky with file associations. There's a blanket file type called "Winamp Media File" (or something like that...I'm on my Mac right now so I can't check) which includes all of the file extensions that Winamp handles. If you go into The "Folder Options" it's not as simple as sending mp3 to Winamp, but ogg vorbis to WMP (just kidding). You have to delete the "Winamp Media File" type and create new ones for mp3, ogg, mid, wav, etc and then associate them individually with different applications.

      I've always found this to be a nuisance, especially when I have the same song encoded in different formats in the same folder (like when I'm encoding the music files for my website in different formats, for example). Windows Explorer (in details view) just says "Winamp Media File" instead of telling me the file type. The only ways to find out the file type are to 1) check the box to always view the file extension, 2) open up the properties and look at the MS-DOS name, 3) open it in Winamp and view the file information, or 4) guess that the smaller one is ogg vorbis (my usual method, almost never fails).

      I suppose this is a "feature" that allows users to quickly tell if something is an audio file without having to know the details of its encoding, etc. But for power users it's a pain in the neck.

    7. Re:Don't load in startup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This won't necessarily work. If you read this, the files could have other extensions other than .xm :

      It has also been discovered that the malicious file does not necessarily
      need to bear the extension '.xm'. This is due to the fact that 'in_mod.dll'
      will automatically determine which type of mod media file has been opened by
      performing certain tests on the file before attempting to load it. The
      testing is performed by passing the file through all the available loaders
      to see if one is able to handle it.

      As a result of this the malicious file can have the extension of any of the
      supported module file types associated with the loaders in 'in_mod.dll' and
      still produce the same effect.

    8. Re:Don't load in startup by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      I just used it for playing mods the other day(yeah yeah I'm aware it fudges some effects but hey, they were just old lemmings 2 .mods).

      I can't imagine why would anyone sane use it for playing videos though(it sucks at that).

      best way is just to treat the windows installation potentially broken from day 1(that is, keep it behind reasonable firewalls, for bout outbound and inbound data).. but then again an exploit like this would probably be used against the same kind of people that fall for an instant messaging worm that needs the user to execute itself..

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    9. Re:Don't load in startup by julesh · · Score: 1

      I suppose this is a "feature" that allows users to quickly tell if something is an audio file without having to know the details of its encoding, etc. But for power users it's a pain in the neck.

      Yeah. What's also a pain in the neck is that Windoze explorer 'sort files by type' sorts them alphabetically by the file type description, meaning that it can't actually sort your .oggs separetly from your .mp3s. Very annoying.

    10. Re:Don't load in startup by julesh · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Best answer: delete in_mod.dll and remove it from your input plugins list. Who the hell uses mods any more, anyway?

    11. Re:Don't load in startup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you look at it from another angle it's also a plus. Like dealing with .jpg and .jpegs (and .mpg and .mpegs)

  22. it roxx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    winamp 5 rocks! it has a built in crossfader and the download (just dl it) was 680k. install size 1.5 mb. i would LOVE to see any other program i use as much (possibly notepad) match that!

    ITS NOT WINAMP 3 which was the winME of software amps

  23. No upgrade required by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    If for some reason it is impossible to download the updated version of
    Winamp, the vendor has informed NGSS that it is possible to disable the
    handling of Fasttracker 2 module files by taking the following steps:

    1. Right click the Winamp player, go to 'Options' and then to
    'Preferences...'.

    2. In the new window which loads, go to 'Plug-ins' and 'Input'.

    3. Look for the input plug-in items 'Nullsoft Module Decoder' and double
    click it to bring up the 'Nullsoft Module Decoder Preferences' window.

    4. Select the 'Fasttracker 2' loader and deselect the 'Enabled' checkbox to
    the right of the loaders list.

    5. Close all of the option windows and return to the main player.

    1. Re:No upgrade required by Chris-the+dude · · Score: 1

      Using version 3.0: There is no plug-ins menue in preferences. hmm

    2. Re:No upgrade required by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using version 3.0:

      Why? Get the latest version of Winamp 5, it's everything 3 should have been. Honestly I don't know a good reason to be using Winamp 3.x now that 5.x is out. Now I'm understandable about those clinging to 2.x (I suggest 2.x users try 5 with classic skins) but not 3.

    3. Re:No upgrade required by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

      Winamp 3 ran fine on your computer? Dang, it's suppose to be one of the most buggy and crashy and slowest version of Winamp Nullsoft released (they actually discontinued the development).

      --
      In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
  24. Re:No kidding! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no he doesnt, mod parents down

  25. Third Party Software Sucks by Mordack · · Score: 5, Funny

    Crap like this is why you should never use third party software like Winamp. Stick with Microsofts line of quality products and you'll be safe.

    Seriously, just look at the time it took to fix this bug. I could almost read the entire headline before the fix. The bug took as long to fix as to read the comma between "Discovered" and "Patched". I expect better from Third Party software.

    Until Third Party software is able to show they care about their products I can only recommend that you stick with 100% Microsoft Approved Solutions.

    --
    I don't need no stinkin' sig!
    1. Re:Third Party Software Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't quite know why you'd make a post like this. I can only assume its supposed to be sarcasm, but it STILL isn't funny.

      I don't remeber the last time Winamp had a security hole in it.

      In contrast, Media Player seems to have a new hole discovered for it on what seems like a weekly basis.

      Please find yourself modded down as Troll.

      Have a nice dau.

    2. Re:Third Party Software Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it was a joke, moron

    3. Re:Third Party Software Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [Troll]
      > Please find yourself modded down as Troll

      Please find yourself modded down as Stupid..

      If everyone would start thier posts with the mod they're hoping for ([Troll],[Funny],...) Like I did, then there would be much less miscommunication and ./ would be a better place.

  26. Re:If you wanted to be secure by Shakrai · · Score: 1, Troll
    You'd go with Microsoft Windows Media Player 9 in the first place. Those downloading free software get every penny's worth.

    I don't know why I'm replying to your flamebait but the last time I checked WMP didn't cost anything either.

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  27. Re:No kidding! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lies! mod them all up! UP I SAY!

  28. More than a security fix by superyooser · · Score: 4, Informative
    Many small bug fixes and improvements are included in this new version (5.03) just from 5.02. Also interesting is that they removed AOD (those annoying AOL On Desktop links) from the installer.
    * fixed a crash bug when playing some AVI files in in_dshow
    * added multimedia keyboard keys in global hotkeys default configuration
    * added "Manual playlist advance" in Repeat button popup menu in Classic mode
    * improvements in MP3 encoder configuration (added --alt-preset standard, etc...)
    * made the tabs in the preferences XP correctly themed under Windows XP
    * revamped the Media Library preferences a bit
    * new experimental WMA9 input plugin
    * gen_jumpex updates from DrO
    * added "Nuke library" action in Media Library
    * more upside down videos fixes
    * fixed crash if a plugin generated a pledit wm_windowposchanged on shutdown
    * fixed crash exploit in in_mod (thanks Peter Winter-Smith)
    * fixed various crashes in in_midi when playing invalid files
    * made in_midi store its settings in winamp.ini instead of the registry
    * fixed error during installation on computers with chinese/oriental regional settings
    * removed AOD from installer
    * added Shift-R to toggle manual playlist advance
    * updated VP6 video decoder to latest VP6.2 code
    * fixed crash when launching winamp with very long filenames from explorer
    * made registration dialog to appear in Explorer's taskbar when installing pro version
    * fixed pledit/video windows showing up at startup when minimized
    * modern skins updates :
    - winamp modern skin now uses a 3 state repeat button: no repeat/repeat all/repeat track
    - added appplication desktop toolbars capabilities for layouts, add appbar="left|top|right|bottom" to
    use them
    - upped maki binary version, improved stack protection
    - current skin version number is 1.2 (this should not change for a long while now, and of course we continue
    to support 0.8 to 1.1)
    - (very) limited maki debugger (for now you can bring it up with invokeDebugger(); in a script then use 'x'
    - to continue and 'i' to trace into)
    - fixed obscure capture problem with dragging windows
    - fixed rectrgn being forced to 1 in xml xuiobject buttons that are originally imageless
    - fixed hilited state not on after clicking on buttons while the mouse stays in area
    - fixed scripted onEnterArea/onLeaveArea not being always correctly called while mouse button stays down
    - fixed getToken being passed NULL throwing guru
    - fixed clipping of painting within the background's region of a group rather than within the composed
    region (the one you can change with sysregion)
    - fixed image cache problem when using the same bitmap as a map and a button image parameter
    1. Re:More than a security fix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the security fix:
      * fixed crash exploit in in_mod (thanks Peter Winter-Smith)

  29. Fix for winamp 2.91 by C32 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just do a minimal install of 5.03 (without letting it integrate into the shell, etc) and copy the new in_mod.dll from /winamp5dir/plugins to /winamp2.91/plugins..

    While you're at it; all the new and updated input plugins (in_mp3, in_midi, etc) seem to work just fine in 2.91.

    1. Re:Fix for winamp 2.91 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or even easier:

      Install the latest Winamp 5 and during the installation, uncheck "Modern skin support", "Media Library" and the "Video" options and there you go, a fresh updated 2.91 version with the lastest plugins (Winamp 5 has the exact same codebase as Winamp 2.91).

    2. Re:Fix for winamp 2.91 by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      without the nitrane mp3 decoding engine, which IIRC they had to remove because of patent problems (and was really the whole point of winamp, in that it could playback CD quality mp3s on a 486..)

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    3. Re:Fix for winamp 2.91 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nitrane is trash. Fortunately for Winamp users, it hasn't been in use at Nullsoft for years.

      Read these, particularly the second link:

      http://mp3decoders.mp3-tech.org/decoders_winamp.ht ml
      http://mp3decoders.mp3-tech.org/decoders_winamp2_6 2.html

      And BTW, Fraunhofer's decoder ran on 486s. It just wasn't real-time on most such systems. :)

  30. No Exploit for Me, I'm still using WinPlay3! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, seriously folks.

    Under Windows 3.1.

    You can download your very own copy right here!

  31. As an aside, an easy way to control startup items by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  32. Just use Foobar2000... by Lakedemon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The core Foobar2000 is quite slim and....
    you can choose to download and install the open source components (official or third parties) that you want....
    this is customization as it should be.

  33. Windows itself costs by tepples · · Score: 2, Informative

    last time I checked WMP didn't cost anything either.

    Any program distributed only with Microsoft Windows costs 150 USD or so for a Windows XP Pro OEM license. So does any Win32 program designed to bail if it detects Wine.

    1. Re:Windows itself costs by PhoenixFlare · · Score: 1

      Sorry to break this to you, but the vast majority of home desktop PC users already have copies of Windows installed that were either free or included in the cost of something else. While they did pay for it one way or another, it's a one-time cost. As such, you're really reaching to insinuate that WMP somehow actually costs $150.

      That's like saying that you have to have a computer to run it as well, so better factor that cost into all the software you get too. Oh, and you have to pay for electricity to run the system, and rent to have somewhere to put it all...See where i'm going?

    2. Re:Windows itself costs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And any Linux program distributed only for Linux PCs costs about $500 or so for CPU, motherboard, keyboard, mouse and monitor.

    3. Re:Windows itself costs by tepples · · Score: 1

      So you hypothetically want to run a proprietary app for Linux/x86 on another platform: A working subset of any GNU/Linux distribution is free software. An emulator is free software but may not run in real time because it doesn't yet dynamically recompile. Publishers of proprietary applications that have considered Linux-based systems on x86 have likely also considered Mac OS X or any of several UNIX brand systems. Even if not, Microsoft publishes a fast but proprietary x86 PC emulator for Mac OS X.

    4. Re:Windows itself costs by Shakrai · · Score: 1
      Any program distributed only with Microsoft Windows costs 150 USD or so for a Windows XP Pro OEM license. So does any Win32 program designed to bail if it detects Wine.

      By this logic then Winamp costs $150.

      --
      I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
      We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  34. How to Fix v2.91 or Lower by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To fix your version of WinAmp that isn't in the v5.0 tree, download a copy of WinAmp v5.0.3 and install it. Rip the in_mod.dll out of the plugins directory, and transplant it into your WinAmp v2.x plugins directory.

    This method is of course untested, so if anything goes wrong, just throw your computer out :).

  35. Really? by ZxCv · · Score: 1

    they dropped wasabi.

    Really?

    Going from the link to Wasabi that you provided, I stumbled upon their license page, which specifically says that Winamp 5 uses Wasabi:

    "Wasabi is not totally open-source: the core skinning and Maki scripting framework (wasabi.dll) is still closed-source, as it is used in Nullsoft's flagship product Winamp 5."

    Obviously, I could just be missing something. But it sure seems like Wasabi is indeed used in Winamp 5.

    --

    Perl - $Just @when->$you ${thought} s/yn/tax/ &couldn\'t %get $worse;
    1. Re:Really? by bsd+troll · · Score: 0

      You are. It supports Winamp 2 & 3 skins, which is why Wasabi components are used, but only for compatibility.

  36. shame..... by dan2550 · · Score: 1

    thats a real shame. despite nullsofts claims, i still far prefer winamp 2.x, it is simplier to use and is alot smaller. even worse, xm is one of my favorite formats. it is to a midi like a shell script is to a batch file

  37. Uhhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    From the full advisory:
    Systems Affected: Nullsoft Winamp versions 2.91 to 5.02 (possibly older versions, although this is not confirmed)

    You just MIGHT want to upgrade...

    1. Re:Uhhhh by baximus · · Score: 1

      Aha! I beat all of you. On two counts. I use Xine. AND I don't play and .xm files.

  38. Is that overrated? by AtariAmarok · · Score: 0

    Is it really overrated to prefer to play MP3's with a program (Winamp 1.45) which plays MP3's very well?

    At a mere 400K, it loads and runs a lot faster than the alternatives from Winamp (and Real, Media Player, etc) and it is not ruined by being fitted with browsers, spyware, or other bloat.

    It plays MP3s and it does it perfectly. But yes, I admit, I can't check www.slashdot.org with it because there is no browser in this MP3 player. Nor can I generate Quake levels, burn AVI files to DVD, or create amazing fractal background wallpaper.

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  39. not much of a surprise by NeedleSurfer · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I don't know about you but I do not find it very surprising when I hear that Windows or a Windows software suffer from a vunerability. It is so common by now that it's like saying unions encourage lazyness, as much as we know about it people don't care they consider it normal because it too much of a fact and nobody truly does something about it. They feel powerless.

    Hearing that a similar vunerability has been found on Linux or the Mac would surprise me a lot, not because they are immune to it but more because of the rarity of such an announcement, imagine my surprise when I read a few month ago that a vunerability was found in Open BSD, many were talking about it, but Windows...

    Thats actually the evil of it, there are so much holes in that system and its related software that its even getting annoying to hear about it...

    And disinterest is the best weapon Microsoft could ever get...

    1. Re:not much of a surprise by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you but I do not find it very surprising when I hear that Windows or a Windows software suffer from a vunerability

      The funny thing is that the bug is in Mikmod code, which was originally written for DOS, has been Open Source (and LGPLed) for years, and is most heavily maintained and used on Linux and other UNIX variants.

      Furthermore, xmms is probably vulnerable due to using the same decoder library, as well as the CLI mikmod player (which runs natively on Linux). Other Linux software that uses libmikmod (just from a quick dependency check out of the list of software currently installed on my system) includes gstreamer, alsaplayer, and xscorch.

      Don't get me wrong -- I think that there are a lot of bad security practices in *Microsoft* code (different from "all software for Windows"), that some of the Windows architecture is not the greatest from a security standpoint, and that much Windows-based software doesn't have the greatest tradition of care being taken WRT security.

      However, there are holes found all the time. I'd be surprised if mplayer and timdity don't have holes (and if mikmod doesn't have more holes) just because it's damned easy to allow a malicious media file to exploit some kind of bug in your code.

    2. Re:not much of a surprise by reeb · · Score: 1

      take a look at the mplayer site, they have an upgrade advisory for a security hole too...

  40. Or just go grab iTunes instead by skrysakj · · Score: 1

    Now is a good time to do that, if you're already going through the trouble of a download and a re-install.

    1. Re:Or just go grab iTunes instead by JanusFury · · Score: 1

      Yeah, especially since iTunes can't play MOD/XM files and has about 3 times the memory/CPU footprint of Winamp5.

      --
      using namespace slashdot;
      troll::post();
  41. Re:Hypocrisy by VivianC · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The subtle irony of your post should rank at least a "Funny" mod or two. You were trying to be dryly ironic, right?

    --
    Viv

    Gmail invites for ip
  42. Suprise (Gator) by cmstremi · · Score: 1

    I just installed 5.03 and got a treat! Claria's GAIM/GMT/Gator. Mmmm. Spyware.

    1. Re:Suprise (Gator) by ron_aegis · · Score: 1

      No, you're on crack. Winamp 5.03 has NO spyware/adware/whatever. We even removed the AOD (Aol On Desktop) from this version.

      -Christophe (part of the Winamp team)

    2. Re:Suprise (Gator) by PhoenixFlare · · Score: 1

      Hopefully you believe one of the Winamp team below, but just for another check: My system was clean before installing, and afterwards, full scans with updated Ad-Aware and Spybot turned up...Not a trace of Gator anywhere.

      Methinks you better learn how to keep that spyware junk off your system first, before you go blaming programs and people that had absolutely nothing to do with it.

    3. Re:Suprise (Gator) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Thanks for the great media player. I don't know how you all were able to save the player from the Winamp 3 debacle, but it's now better than ever.

      - a Winamp fan

    4. Re:Suprise (Gator) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi, are you guys including support for SKM (www.skale.org) by default yet? I hope so. I just upgraded to Skale from Fast Tracker 2.

      Thanks && BTW, great job on winamp :)

    5. Re:Suprise (Gator) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " No, you're on crack. "

      So what are you really trying to say? ;)

    6. Re:Suprise (Gator) by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      How come Winamp doesn't suck, despite all other media players owned by large companies rapidly beginning to suck once they are widely used? Windows Media Player, RealPlayer, Quicktime Player...I thought Winamp was going to do the same thing with v3, but apparently something's different at Nullsoft...

    7. Re:Suprise (Gator) by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

      Version 3 did suk, they discontinued it. I think version 3 is just one of their overly ambitious plan that got WAY overboard. Well, now they got the nice Winamp5 out... much better then 3, and more feature then winamp2, and load just as fast as winamp2 on my comp.

      --
      In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
  43. Speaking of html and Winamp... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does Winamp use IE to render web pages, or is it their own broswer? If it is actully using IE then I definitly don't want it to load due to IE's security flaws.

    And is there any way to prevent the broswer from loading? Or is there a shoutcast like page listing TV stations? I am sick of online radio/tv stations, skins, etc loading web pages in this browser, and would like to just use a plain web broswer to find radio/tv staions.

    1. Re:Speaking of html and Winamp... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Does Winamp use IE to render web pages, or is it their own broswer?

      I recall that one of the 2.x versions had Mozilla support. I'm not sure if it still does.

  44. Fresh from the llama's ass by t0qer · · Score: 2, Informative

    This quality karma whoring brought to you by toqerTV

    Hot off #nullsoft

    i don't even think the exploit is in our code
    ron, is the exploit in the decoder?
    isn't it in mikmod
    When is the Mac version of this exploit coming out?
    I am so tired of waiting.
    hehe
    i don't think we even wrote that xm decoder
    *** Quit: statsbot (Ping timeout: 180 seconds)
    *** Join: DrunkenMaster (DM@adsl-66-159-200-78.dslextreme.com)
    `steev: the exploit was in the mikmod library that's used by in_mod for xm decoding
    so its not even our code heh
    yeah
    there you go
    it's not even our fault the exploit exists

    So this isn't even a winamp bug, it's a mikmod bug.

    1. Re:Fresh from the llama's ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mm, i already moderated in this story, but wheres #nullsoft at? or is it a secret winamp-dev only type o deal? c1ra1pn@tw1mi.r1r.c1om if you feel like telling... (remove 1's)

    2. Re:Fresh from the llama's ass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha, oh sure, blame it on the 8+ year old module decoder! Lazy Nullsoft, they should have written their own module handler!

  45. Re:Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It's not because Microsoft releases patches...

    It's because Microsoft doesn't release patches for known exploits for a very long time, (Internet explorer), and generally gives the impression of not really caring about its users.

    Also, WinAmp isn't exaclty an operating system, now is it?

  46. Fasttracker 2 by Koyaanisqatsi · · Score: 1

    Because of the type of files affected by this bug, this thread may be the most appropriate to ask it: being that FastTracker 2 is a bit outdated, what tracker software are people currently using?

    I'm no music composer, so expensive packages are but. I just want something to have some fun in the spare time, kinda like FT2, just a bit easier on newer hardware and (Gor forgive-me) that runs under Windows.

    Thanks!

    1. Re:Fasttracker 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      www.modplug.com

    2. Re:Fasttracker 2 by decepto · · Score: 1

      I think you are looking for Renoise. It is easier on newer hardware and it runs under Windows.

      To quote the developer: "FastTracker like Windows music software tracker with MIDI / VST / ASIO - Renoise"

    3. Re:Fasttracker 2 by soliptic · · Score: 1
      Give Buzz a shot, maybe.

      These days trackers arent really too visible - for the sort of niche you're talking about ("fun in the spare time") the likes of Fruityloops and Reason are more popular now, I think. Shame - I still think the tracker interface is unbeatable for drum programming.

    4. Re:Fasttracker 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ugh, is there a free version of renoise?

    5. Re:Fasttracker 2 by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      I like to play with SoundTracker, mostly just because it works nicely with Linux.

    6. Re:Fasttracker 2 by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Most of the newer MODs I've seen are built with Impulse Tracker, some citing its ability to have up to (IIRC) 32 tracks as their reason. However, as a listener (with a tested-perfect ear) I'm not completely thrilled with .IT compared to older formats -- .IT files tend to sound just a teeny bit muddy, at least in a real MOD player. And some of the most interesting MODs are still the real old 4- and 8-track stuff.

      WinAmp mangles all the MOD formats equally, so in WinAmp they ALL sound muddy. :/

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    7. Re:Fasttracker 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Skale Tracker

      Skale Tracker. It's basically FastTracker 2 for Windows. It has many many features. I haven't really experimented with it fully, the scene kinda died to me when the big names on the PC stopped producing stuff, but it looks to be quite capable.

      There's even a Winamp plugin available for it (pity I use Foobar2000).

  47. ModPlug is indeed better. by antdude · · Score: 1

    I agree that ModPlug should be used. I use its player for MOD, S3M, XM, 669, etc. weekly. In fact, I am using it right now to listen to a MOD song. It is a great Windows player for headphones and nice speaker setup!

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    1. Re:ModPlug is indeed better. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Long time no see :) Hey, couldn't someone write a plugin for WinAmp to use ModPlug instead? there certainly seem to be enough *other* (mostly useless) 3rd-party plugins available...

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    2. Re:ModPlug is indeed better. by antdude · · Score: 1

      Do I know you, Reziac?

      I don't think ModPlug is open sourced.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    3. Re:ModPlug is indeed better. by Reziac · · Score: 1

      We had a long conversation here, back when ants were the topic of the day. Been a while.

      I just checked modplug's site (http://www.modplug.com/index.php3) and it appears that at least some of it is now opensourced, tho I haven't looked further yet (connection running too bloody slow, about 14.4 speeds :(

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  48. Re:Hypocrisy by pilkul · · Score: 1, Insightful
    P.S. Normal practice is for you to now mod me down to 0 and suck my karma for daring to say something negative about the Slashdot community, or positive about Microsoft.

    No it isn't. Normal practice is to mod you up to 5 (especially if you claim you'll be modded down). I don't know if it was intentional in your case, but it's oldest karma whore tactic in the book.

    Anyway, I for one have long given up criticizing the slashdot editors. They just don't care.

  49. Actually, I do by phorm · · Score: 1

    Though I recently converted much of my mod/XM/s3m/IT collection to mp3 format, since it will play in my car/portables that way.

    I haven't *downloaded* any of those files in ages though. Anyone know where one can find good ones?

    1. Re:Actually, I do by scrm · · Score: 1

      I haven't *downloaded* any of those files in ages though. Anyone know where one can find good ones?

      The Mod Archive, Scene.org and Nectarine Radio are good places to start.

      Though I recently converted much of my mod/XM/s3m/IT collection to mp3 format, since it will play in my car/portables that way.

      I'm trying to do the same to transfer my entire module collection to my iPod. Question: What do you use to do it? I'm currently outputting the tunes to WAV with Modplug because it's a fairly accurate player (but not 100%) and the wav writer is of pretty good quality. This is a bit of a headfuck because there is no batch converter and I have to reselect the options every time. I then have to convert everything to MP3 with CdEX. There must be a more straightforward way to do this... any ideas?

      --
      ---- scrm
    2. Re:Actually, I do by cronot · · Score: 1

      Lame MP3 Writer plugin for Winamp is what you're looking for, it seems. It uses the Lame dll (lame_enc.dll) to encode anything you play through Winamp to MP3.

    3. Re:Actually, I do by phorm · · Score: 1

      Not sure if you have linux installed, but you might be able to get away with this on some of the boot-from-CD distros anyhow (boot from CD, mount drive, write files).

      I recently disabled the "mikmod" plugin in XMMS in favour of the "modplug" plugin. Very noticable improvement in sound quality! Set up a playlist, turn on disk output, then write those .WAV files to a mounted windows drive and use CDEX or your favorite converter to Mp3 them. I've been looking for an XMMS plugin on a commandline utility that will do the same and/or include straight-to-mp3 writing but no dice so far.

  50. Re:excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see.

  51. Old version of Winamp by AtariAmarok · · Score: 1

    try this:

    http://www.oldversion.com/program.php?n=winamp

    --
    Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
  52. Justin did this on purpose... by yoho_jones · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ALL PHEAR THE FRANKEL!!!

    Step 1: Create a program everyone uses with a security flaw.
    Step 2: Leave the company you made it with.
    Step 3: TAKE OVER THE WORLD!

    1. Re:Justin did this on purpose... by yoho_jones · · Score: 1

      Justin Frankel is/was the main programmer behind winamp, shoutcast, gnutella, waste... list goes on and on... Kind of a cult hero to some...

  53. winamp by weekendwarrior1980 · · Score: 0

    Does anybody use this anymore? itunes and wma player are pretty good at what they do. winamp is a relic of the past, folk need to move on to something more modern.

    1. Re:winamp by KD5YPT · · Score: 1

      Itune, don't use it, too big a footprint.
      WMA, same problem, and looks ugly.

      --
      In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
    2. Re:winamp by weekendwarrior1980 · · Score: 0

      But the ability to play from other people's computers seems pretty nice. I like itunes, it has a very sane interface.

  54. Download FreeAmp instead by Animats · · Score: 1

    FreeAmp, now called Zinf, can be downloaded here. Free, open source, runs on Linux and Windows. No advertising. Just plays.

  55. Yeah, Right by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    I use the "XM tracker format" "all the time"...

    I'm so scared...

    Some of this "vulnerability" stuff is getting out of hand.

    Reminds me of the Marty Feldman bit where he goes into an insurance broker's office and asks him if he is protected "from falling into a pit of hedge-hogs whilst playing croquet" and "from being struck by a meteorite whilst sun-bathing on the beach?"

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    1. Re:Yeah, Right by WebMasterJoe · · Score: 1
      I use the "XM tracker format" "all the time"...

      I'm so scared...
      You don't need a collection of files in this format, it is just a matter of going to a website that was written to take advantage of the vulnerability, and having winamp associated with XM tracker files.

      Regardless, if you use winamp, you should keep it up-to-date. It's not difficult, and it's a good practice for all your software (or at least the ones with free updates).
      --
      I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
    2. Re:Yeah, Right by BubbleNOP · · Score: 1

      Somebody could rename a .xm file to .mp3, add some junk to it to make it look like an mp3 in terms of size and still exploit the bug. WinAmp will auto-detect that the file is really a .xm file and will try to play it as such, triggering the bug.

    3. Re:Yeah, Right by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1


      Yes, you're correct in that, I considered that after posting my message.

      Nonetheless, it's still a bit of an obscure vulnerability. OTOH, it would be nice if software would notify one when an incorrect file extension is used and prompt for action rather than assuming all is well. Irfanview does that with incorrectly named JPG images, for example.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  56. Winamp Features by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

    I use Winamp 5 because is has global shortcuts. No matter what application I am in, I can hit the key combo and turn up the volume. That's great functionality that I haven't seen elsewhere.

    --
    A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
  57. You want 2.81? by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://download.nullsoft.com/winamp/client/winamp2 81_full.exe

    At least they still host it. (you can also s/full/lite in the URL)

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
    1. Re:You want 2.81? by JofCoRe · · Score: 1

      That's cool that they at least still have it on their site. How did you find the link though? I looked briefly on their page and didn't find any references to winamp 2... did I not look far enough (or am I blind)?

      --

      Place sig here.
    2. Re:You want 2.81? by toddestan · · Score: 2, Informative

      There is also a mostly complete list of old Winamp versions at www.oldversion.com for anyone who is interested.

      Link.

  58. XM? Classic? Bah! by Spudley · · Score: 1

    Who said XM is a classic format?

    Bah!

    If it's ain't an original .mod file then it ain't worthy of the name Tracker!

    --
    (Spudley Strikes Again!)
    1. Re:XM? Classic? Bah! by Phybersyk0 · · Score: 1

      Shows how much you know :-) Original.MOD format didn't even have file extensions! (Amigas didn't need them!)

    2. Re:XM? Classic? Bah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's ain't? lol

      Oh and by the way, you're an idiot.

    3. Re:XM? Classic? Bah! by Phybersyk0 · · Score: 1

      Besides. XM beat the hell out of protracker mods.
      1.) .XM is 16-bit, 48Khz. .mod is 8-bit.
      2.) .XM supports loop-panning, so that a loop can play forward and reverse. You could even set loop points in the sample so that you could repeat a section of a one shot loop for fade-out.
      3.) .XM supports volume-envelope & stereo panning controls in a sample.
      4.) Stereo output from a single track. (old .mods only had 4-tracks, and stereo was separated)
      5.) Programmable Stereo Panning effects -- you could make sounds do circles around your head!
      6.) Retriggering, you could retrigger a snare-drum and make it sound like a high-voltage spark-emitter.
      7.) 32 TRACKS!

    4. Re:XM? Classic? Bah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah! What's this stupid M.K. thing cluttering my files? We could use those 4 bytes for something good you know. Not to speak about the gross overkill of damn thirty fucking one instruments.

    5. Re:XM? Classic? Bah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Shows how much you know :-) Original.MOD format didn't even have file extensions! (Amigas didn't need them!)

      pff, you don't know your shit either. It was common to prefix them with mod., like: mod.songx

  59. OT: neat mods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Liked Jaunt? Check out some of his other music here. (He's changed his name since he wrote that piece.)

  60. Winamp 5 = Winamp 2 codebase by bonch · · Score: 1

    Winamp 5 is merely a continuation of the Winamp 2 codebase, but with the skinning capabilities of Winamp 3.

    3 + 2 = version 5. For me, Winamp 5 works like 2 always did. 3 was so slow.

  61. 5.03 has already been out for a while by bonch · · Score: 1

    They simple re-released this fixed version that plugs the security hole.

  62. Uh by bonch · · Score: 1

    This has to be one of the most flagrant trolls I've seen in a while.

    LinunxSecurity lists weekly security advisories for all the distros--buffer overflows, exploits, and all around security flaws that never get reported around these parts.

    Hope that doesn't "surprise" you since it's not Windows software. Yes, believe it or not, OSS software is not somehow magically perfect simply because it's compiled for Linux via gcc rather than for Windows via Visual Studio...programmers are programmers.

    1. Re:Uh by NeedleSurfer · · Score: 1

      I didn't say that Windows do suffer from more or even less problem just that people cover it more, just like you said. The fact that people focus more on Windows security and less on other platform gives the result I've stated. It is getting nearly annoying to hear that another Windows flaw have been discovered and that it indeed will lead people to be disinterested, the rest you can read by yourself.

      People get easily emotionnal about computers but please read before calling someone a troll, I never said it was true, I even took the time to specify that the other OS aren't less vunerable just that its rare to hear about their flaws, and I don't go on Linux Security to read every Linux flaw, I read newspapers and general technology website, Slashdot is one of my most sprecialized website and it is still pretty general. The only very specialized website I go to are audio ones, since it's my trade.

      Sorry if I offended you but my post was far from being a troll it was an observation, nothing more, nothing less.

    2. Re:Uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. But then, I guess it takes a troll to know one.

      Nobody says that Open Source software is perfect (except for you, it seems, nice straw man BTW). But the one thing that you (and all MS apologists, for that matter) ignore is that the turnaround time for fixing those vulnerabilities is many orders of magnitude larger for MS software than it is for Open Source software. Not to mention that most MS vulnerabilities are remotely exploitable while most OSS vulnerabilities require local access. But don't let stupid facts get in the way of your MS fanboyism!

    3. Re:Uh by bonch · · Score: 1

      What does Winamp have to do with MS?

      Next.

    4. Re:Uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, I dunno--you're the one who mentioned Windows and security breaches. Funny that.

  63. Oh no, am I vulnerable by whitmer · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does this also affect my current version of XMMS?!

    Oh wait, wrong OS. Never mind.

    1. Re:Oh no, am I vulnerable by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The WinAmp expoit is not confined to Windows, it has nothing to do with the OS, except that Windows will let expoited WinAmp run with full permissions, while a well maintained Linux host will not. But that won't protect your user space from attack. Although the attacks will likely feature code that calls Windows, rather than Linux, but there's no reason other than bang for buck that someone wouldn't target Linux with this. OTOH, the WinAmp code probably does not exist in Xmms, because Xmms is just a workalike with some common dataformats (skins, media). But I'd like to see a response from the Xmms team, just to be sure there's no common code that allows the exploit. However, getting help from the gnarly Xmms team is like getting blood from a clone.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    2. Re:Oh no, am I vulnerable by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      XMMS has two independent xm/mod/s3m/etc player plugins -- mikmod and modplug. Even if one is vulnerable *and* you have set up your web browser to hand off mp3s to xmms (not default on any distro I know of), it should be easy to switch to the other.

      FWIW, mikmod has traditionally been used more commonly by xmms users, but I find that modplug has pulled ahead in terms of features (like support for zip-/gz-compressed files).

  64. Cheap PCs have begun to ship with LindowsOS by tepples · · Score: 1

    the vast majority of home desktop PC users already have copies of Windows installed that were either free or included in the cost of something else.

    I've seen x86 PCs at a Wal-Mart brick and mortar store in Fort Wayne, Indiana, for $600 including display. Take away Wal-Mart's markup, and how much of what's left is the OS license? As the price of x86 PC hardware falls, the Windows license constitutes a growing fraction of the cost of goods sold, prompting some x86 PC manufacturers to sign deals with distributors of operating systems based on a BSD or Linux kernel.

    And no, I guess you don't have to have an x86 PC to run the backend of Windows Media Player, as many dedicated media device manufacturers have begun to include WMA and even WMV support.

  65. Re:Well, the name say's it all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    -1!!! aahhh come on, I'm really trying my best to be funny ;-)

  66. who uses winamp anymore? by minus_273 · · Score: 1

    itunes is far superior and compared to that last release of winamp, it is very light on resources. I stopped with winamp the day they stopped ver 2.x

    --
    The war with islam is a war on the beast
    The war on terror is a war for peace
  67. Re:Fasttracker 2, I use Skale Tracker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi, I'm an ex-Fast Tracker 2 guy. I haven't used Buzz or Renoise, but I just moved on to Skale:
    http://www.skale.org.

    It looks just like Fast Tracker 2, runs under linux or windows xp, it's free, and they're incorporating VST/ASIO support into it as well. I think I've settled on using this.

    But good thread, I'm going to go check out the others myself now. It's been a couple years since I wrote a new tracker song, need to get busy again, I really miss it.

  68. What I think everyone wants to know is... by sik0fewl · · Score: 1

    did you RTFA[dvisory]?

    --
    I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
  69. v5.03 the makers have just put out right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really? I have winamp503_full.exe in my downloads folder with a date of 3/25/04. Is this the same as the "new and improved" v503?????

  70. Winamp works on Wine by tepples · · Score: 1

    By this logic then Winamp costs $150.

    I'd think that Winamp would work better in Wine han Windows Media Player would. (researches) My hunch was correct. According to this page, you can run at least one version of Winamp in Wine provided that you have installed a native msvcrt.dll from sources such as Adobe Acrobat Reader 5.

  71. Re:v5.03 the makers have just put out right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Probably not. A lot of the tech websites prematurely announced Winamp 5.03. The version they were linking to was likely a beta.

    Here's the HTTP headers to the current winamp:
    C:\>curl -I -s http://download.nullsoft.com/winamp/client/winamp5 03_full.exe

    HTTP/1.1 200 OK
    Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2004 01:35:06 GMT
    Server: Apache/1.3.28 (Unix)
    Last-Modified: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 15:03:05 GMT
    ETag: "f9d85-433df0-40698c29"
    Accept-Ranges: bytes
    Content-Length: 4406768
    Connection: close
    Content-Type: application/octet-stream
    Here's the md5sum:
    ffb08081efe3c1e9c5fec20a95f9751f winamp503_full.exe
  72. Empirical evidence open-source *is* more secure. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    From the latest (sorry, summary only. The full article requires an IEEE Digital Library $ub$cription...) IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering:

    "...our analysis finds that the changing rate or the functions modified as a percentage of the total functions is higher in open-source projects than in closed-source projects. This supports the hypothesis that defects may be found and fixed more quickly in open-source projects than in closed-source projects and may be an added benefit for using the open-source development model."

    Take that, you Microsoft shills!

  73. Warning!! Win32 Version is not Stable! by Dolemite_the_Wiz · · Score: 2, Informative

    This new version crashes hard (drwatson) after adding songs from a directory and then trying to play them in WinAmp.

    Vulnerablity or not, I'm going back to the old version.

    Dolemite
    __________________________

    --
    Save the World! Use a Quote!
  74. other players by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, if size is a problem, how about XMplay?
    Its a tiny exicutable file, and it even has a winamp skin if you like that look. Plays pretty much any music media type. I use it, though I have to admit that it doesn't enhance the sound quality like Media Jukebox or anything, though I do enjoy the custom keyboard hotkeys that work even if it isn't the active application. alt-space = pause/play. woo.

    XMplay

  75. Trying foobar by mig0 · · Score: 1

    And not really caring for it much... it doesn't seem to work easy in terms of the playlist and whatnot. Doesn't auto-scroll if you're trying to move a file from the bottom to the top.

    No volume control either.

  76. File formats and vulnerabilities by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    This is actually a serious issue, even if you don't run into .XM files.

    Viruses and malware have adapted to fit the times. At one point, they spread on disk boot blocks, when floppies moved around, and via executables. Then people started using hard drives and stopped swapping things around as much, but starting tossing .DOC files around. Macro viruses picked up. With the Internet, worms are becoming more of an issue.

    Now that people swap files around via P2P and other systems, there must be consideration given to insufficiently robust file I/O code. When I'm writing a network-using application, I'm darn careful to validate that all the data coming in is correct. There's a much stronger temptation to assume that data is valid when reading in a data file, or to not check for every possible type of inconsistent data. As a result, there are probably many, many buffer overflows that can be exploited by opening documents in programs -- a program reading in a document should treat that document as if it is written by a hostile intruder.

    Besides, isn't it better to be safe than sorry? I've known some holes that *seemed* obscure, but if people ignored them, they could have become very nasty.

  77. The llama and Linux by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    XMMS is commonly distributed (for example, by Red Hat) using mikmod as the default mod playing library, so it is probably vulnerable as well.

    It's easy to disable Mikmod support in your Preferences-<Input Plugins list.

    I would, in any event, suggest using the xmms Modplug plugin rather than the mikmod plugin to play xm/s3m/it/mod/etc-- it provides more features and (optionally) better audio quality.

    1. Re:The llama and Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if the security hole is available in XMMS would the execution of arbitrary code be a problem? Any arbitrary code that's sent in the malicious .xm will probably be tailored to hit Windows infrastructure and won't have much effect on Linux other than corrupting the stack. Perhaps this would crash XMMS but I'm confident the Linux kernel would happily reallocate the memory for overwriting.

      +++ATHZ

  78. mod(ule) files have their advantages by Animaether · · Score: 1

    CD music takes up a lot of space, MP3s take up a bit of CPU but are much more space-friendly.

    However...
    mod files (with mp3s or whatever as their 'sample' source) have some advantages.

    For example, you can speed up or slow down the the playback without pitch change in virtual perfection. With an MP3 this is difficult to do on-the-fly and usually ends up sounding crappy.
    Conversely, you can change the pitch without changing the speed.

    Files are even smaller than MP3s. You could easily fit a 30-minute soundtrack in less than 250KB.
    This is less of an argument, considering an mp3 is plentifully small for a CD distribution, but when doing things for e.g. GBA SP or ringtones that don't sound like very lame AdLib midis, this does become an issue.

    There's other advantages, but those don't fare as well when compared to just using an mp3.

    1. Re:mod(ule) files have their advantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One of my favorite advantages with tracked formats is that you've essentially got the 'source' to the music, which can be modified or whatever, or simply examined for what it is.. composed music.

      And unlike MIDI, it doesn't always sound like crap.

  79. Re:Suprise (Gator) (MOD PARENT UP) by michaelhood · · Score: 1

    I'm going to get modded OT for this, but don't want to post AC. Kudos to you for posting a response to this FUD, and promptly at that. Too often people from the dev teams sit back as the idiots on here flame their products. Winamp is an excellent product, and I've been using it since 1.xx. I even tried 3 (shudder ;). Keep up the good work, guys.

    P.S. More kudos for removing AOD ;)

  80. next version is winamp 8 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ha, that's the best versioning logic. I've long waited for someone to adopt Fibonacci numbers for versioning their software.
    2+3=5
    3+5=8 - the next version ...

    I already see it now, year 2012, winamp reaches its version 610, featuring new codec system from 377 and gui3D framework from version 233 (for the mathematically challanged: 377+233=610).

  81. Offtopic.. Diff encoder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is sorta offtopic but is there a way use Lame inside Winamp 5 to encode your music instead of the bundled mp3 encoder licensed off Mp3Dev?

  82. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're really that concerned/paranoid about XMMS' MikMod features being similarly taken advantage of, you could always disable the plugin in XMMS' Preferences. Click on the plugin, uncheck 'Enable Plugin'.

  83. Zinf < Winamp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But on old Cyrix-based PCs (i.e. no MMX/SSE) it's noticeably slower than WinAmp 2.91 Which is why so many people here are still running WinAmp 2.x - it's small and fast. AC

  84. Re:v5.03 the makers have just put out right now by lotsofno · · Score: 1

    there is a v5.03a that was released last tuesday last week. the only difference should be a bug that was fixed with the repeat all/repeat track/no repeat button, with modern skins.

  85. I AM SERIOUSLY RUNNING 2.81 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry for the CAPS, but it is the best WinAmp release ever. All they add to the new versions of WA is trash. Did you know that it could play mp3s back in version 1.0 ? That is what I use my copy of WA for ... to play mp3s.

  86. Google knows all. by Ayanami+Rei · · Score: 1

    Just google for winamp 2.81 (or any other version you care to try). You'll find about quite a few links (make sure to use the google cache, and stick to winamp.com/aol.com servers)

    --
    THIS THING CAN TURN ON A DIME, MACROSSZERO STYLE ALSO FUCK BETA, ~NYORON
  87. Which is good, except by phorm · · Score: 1

    Winamp doesn't play Mp3's as well as modplug... as mentioned in other posts (under this topic) it screws up the portemento and some other effects. It would be nice if there were a modplug-based player or a batch-mp3-encode plugin for ModPlug.

  88. Boy that takes me back.... by skrysakj · · Score: 1

    MODS?!?!
    I remember those when I was in high school running great demos out of Finland, and all of that happened 10 years ago.

    It's good to see they're still around, and kudos to Winamp for supporting them, but I wouldn't hold it against iTunes.

    (though, the memory footprint, most definitely. I don't run Windows anymore so I wouldn't know firsthand)

  89. Re:Zinf Winamp by Lev_Arris · · Score: 1

    Not to mention it doesn't even play MODs (like .XM et al). OK, that would make it unaffected by this vulnerability but it also makes it "a media player I don't want"(tm). ;)

    I've found Foobar2000 to be the perfect alternative for me. Simple GUI, highly customizable and it gets the 'job' done.

  90. But it has to have some nice features by obsoletemind · · Score: 1

    >All I want it to do is play mp3's.. Yes but u gota have plug-ins to fade between songs and no gaps in between songs.

    1. Re:But it has to have some nice features by FreeForm+Response · · Score: 1

      Yes but u gota have plug-ins to fade between songs and no gaps in between songs.

      Plugins for gapless output and crossfading, among other things.

  91. Foobar screenshot by eddy · · Score: 1
    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.