Slashdot Mirror
Windows DLL Vulnerability Exploit In the Wild
WrongSizeGlass writes "Exploit code for the DLL loading issue that reportedly affects hundreds of Windows applications made its appearance on Monday. HD Moore, the creator of the Metasploit open-source hacking toolkit, released the exploit code along with an auditing tool that records which applications are vulnerable. 'Once it makes it into Metasploit, it doesn't take much more to execute an attack,' said Andrew Storms, director of security operations for nCircle Security. 'The hard part has already been done for [hackers].'"
This is actually faulty programming in applications, not Windows. Kind of like buffer overflows. It's what happens when you don't know what you're doing nor are you following secure coding standards.
Because application developers, not Windows, are to blame, Microsoft can't patch the operating system without crippling an unknown number of programs that run on the platform.
There are no reports of any Microsoft or default Windows applications containing the bug, so unless you have a specific third party app you're not vulnerable. Also, there is already a tool available from Microsoft you can use to block it from all applications, but some of the apps might obviously break.
To protect from stupid developers you would probably need something like selinux for Windows, but considering how much pain in the ass it is on Linux too, it wouldn't really work for all the casual people. However, moving applications from languages like C/C++ to languages like C# can help just like with buffer overflows. At least it provides extra layer of security against clueless programmers.
>'The hard part has already been done for [script kiddies].'
Here, I fixed it for ya. No self-respecting coder would use a library like that.
There are no reports of any Microsoft or default Windows applications containing the bug
Really? That's odd, from the original blog posting:
At least four of Microsoft’s own applications have been confirmed as exploitable through this vector, two of which were already being addressed by the time I contacted them.
My work here is dung.
Releasing these exploits mostly helps who is best equipped to use them. Malware-biz and Microsoft. Should just write some stuff to share all data files in p2p networks and let it run.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
The exploit requires user action. So the exploit isnt going to be as bad as it could have been.
"but considering how much pain in the ass it is on Linux too, it wouldn't really work for all the casual people."
I have Fedora 12 on my desktop with SELinux enabled. I didn't have to do ANYTHING AT ALL. I haven't seen an un-intentional alert in months. I was worried so I set one off myself just to make sure SELinux is still working, and yes it caught it.
From the Microsoft FAQ:
How could an attacker exploit this vulnerability?
This vulnerability requires that the attacker convince the user to open a file using a vulnerable program, from a remote network location. When the application loads one of its required or optional libraries, the vulnerable application may attempt to load the library from the remote network location. If the attacker provides a specially crafted library at this location, the attacker may succeed at executing arbitrary code on the user's machine.
I don't know about you, but I never open files from an untrusted SMB...
Here's what Microsoft recommends:
"Wherever possible, specify a fully qualified path when using the LoadLibrary, LoadLibraryEx, CreateProcess, or ShellExecute functions. "
"Consider removing the current directory from the DLL search path by calling"
In other words, they want programmers to use LoadLibrary("C:\program Files\my software\somedll.dll") instead of LoadLibrary("somedll.dll"). This is very counter-intuitive, as if you were app developer, you would want all of your DLLs be distributed with binary, and reside in same directory. Take a look in your program files directory, and almost every app does it that way...
in an "open" LAN environment: an exploited machine sets up a share, emails links to others in the contact list, remote exploit ensues. But who's allowing egress (outbound) SMB, WebDAV (at least not to a whitelist of remote hosts) on their network? Putting Windows Firewall up on all the workstations to drop ingress SMB traffic (with a few host exceptions for those pushing out updates via SMB) would be a smart thing to do as there's really no reason for workstations to be sharing files in a network with file servers.
body massage!
I think the post above was intended for this article...
In other words, they want programmers to use LoadLibrary("C:\program Files\my software\somedll.dll") instead of LoadLibrary("somedll.dll"). This is very counter-intuitive, as if you were app developer, you would want all of your DLLs be distributed with binary, and reside in same directory. Take a look in your program files directory, and almost every app does it that way...
Um, that’s why they have the %programfiles% environment variable, and it’s why you install applications there, and it’s why the current directory when you launch a file (%userprofile%\Default\Documents\) should never be where you’re getting executable content (such as a .dll file).
When you launch a file via its shell extension, the “current” directory and the directory where the executable is located which opens that file type are not the same... and you shouldn’t be looking in the current directory for your .dll files. Period.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
MOD PARENT UP !! Fact is, on any unix out there, no competent admin would leave '.' neither in executable path, nor in dynamic library search path. It's another of case of a security hole known at least theoretically since the 60's, and observed in real life in the 80's, that microsoft overlooked in the design stage when it was time to follow proper security assessments, and are now stuck with.
They should be put on trial for dumb blunders like this one. When you hire top professionals who can't ignore the 'state of art' when doing an error like this, it should be considered a cause for limitless civil liability.
DEP
Well, fully qualified doesn't mean static. You could compute the fully qualified name at runtime to pass to the LoadLibrary call. Or you could just stick a SetDllDirectory call somewhere in your app startup and keep the rest of the code the same.
If the user's machine is compromised to the point where unauthorized dlls are replacing valid dlls that's not my problem as a software developer. The only validity to this bug is that windows allows dlls to be loaded from remote network locations (isn't this sort of stupid in the first place?).
I think the severity of this bug is blown out of proportion. The only idiots to blame is the idiot who did not secure his computer.
did you forget to take your meds?
The problem is that in attempting to load a remote media file, the application is tricked into loading a malicious DLL located in the same directory as the media file.
`2. If the application tries to load a DLL whose name consists of a NULL, it will search for a file named ".DLL". This is exploitable in most cases and affects at least one Microsoft product.'
But if it's true that the folder of the data file is included in the search path for DLLs (as opposed to the folder of the application), isn't that something that Microsoft should fix?
How would an application developer fix it to avoid this problem, whilst still allowing the possibility of loading DLLs from the application folder (honest question, I'm not saying it isn't possible, just curious of the solution)?
Do you know how things work with linking the usual way with a lib file (as opposed to manually calling LoadLibrary)?
Apparently anything can be passed as a serious exploit today. This is the way LoadLibrary() has been worked ever since it's implementation, the OS will first query the target path (this doesn't need to be the path the application resides in, this can be set in the shortcut) and go all the way to the system folders --- in fact M$ mentions that this can be used to make applications load arbitary libraries on the very page where LoadLibrary() is documented on MSDN. Beside all this however, this is a rather moot exploit, if someone can place files in arbitary directories on your system, you're already compromized, and they don't need to do this to execute whatever code they wish to execute on the system, the exploit placing the files would usually involve RCE anyway (social engineering excluded, but if you can get people to put random files in locations for you, why not ask them to "run this harmless installer" right away?).
The WebDAV issue is a much more severe problem, but it has been known and circulating for many month now and isn't a new problem, the hidden service (it doesn't show up in services.msc) can be disabled by setting a value in the registry.
I took me a while to figure out how this exploit works, but I think it goes like this:
I have an application, foo.exe, that can make use of an optional system component (or 3rd-party DLL), bar.dll. I don't ship that DLL, and I can't guarantee that it will be present on every user's system. So to ensure that my program degrades gracefully, I open it with LoadLibrary("bar.dll"), and if it's not found I disable the features that depend on it. Since it's not my DLL, I can't speculate on where it's installed, so I use an unqualified path and let the loader do the searching (this is, after all, the job of the loader). The ensures that, as long as bar.dll is correctly installed on the system, my application will find and use it.
From an application developer's point of view, this the right way to do things. If I did this on Linux or MacOS, it wouldn't be a problem. Unfortunately, Microsoft decided that the current directory (".") should be in the default search path (see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms682586(VS.85).aspx ). It's even searched before $PATH!
Now the exploit goes like this: .\bar.dll and load it into the unsuspecting foo.exe.
1. On \\evilserver\evilsmbshare, I place a file foofile.foo, an extension which is associated with foo.exe. Right next to it, I create an evil version of bar.dll.
2. I convince the user to double-click on foofile.foo, causing windows to open foo.exe, with a current directory of \\evilserver\evilsmbshare.
3. If the user's system doesn't have bar.dll installed, Windows will eventually find my evil version of it at
4. My evil code runs and does whatever evil deeds I want it to.
If this is correct, then the decision my Microsoft to put the current directory in the library search path seems pretty braindead, and it's hard to blame application developers for assuming that LoadLibrary() will load a library in a sane and secure way. But I'm having a hard time imagining an application that would break if the current directory were just removed from the search path. Shipping DLLs in the application directory is common practice, but expecting them in the current directory? Why would you do that?
It seems that this exploit requires you to trick the user into opening a file from a filesystem you have access to, at which point you could probably just as easily get them to open a trojan directly. I think local privilege-escalation attacks are more probable (e.g. tricking a system service into opening your evil DLL).
The ComputerWorld link reads 40 Microsoft apps contain the flaw. The only exposed Microsoft app is the shell, explorer.exe.
. Is there still a reason why we should keep adjusting our concept of time according to what the earth does?
Like, duh... otherwise, in 260 million years, Christmas will be in the middle of the summer. That will fuck up Santa's ride!
Have you updated your kernel lately?
If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.
Has anybody written a test to verify that Microsoft's fix has been properly applied? It would be a simple DLL with that pops up a message, and simple EXE that loads the DLL (which has new unique name). Or even two versions of the DLL, one with a good message and one with a bad message. One goes in the system path, one goes in the same path as the EXE, a temp folder.
The MS kb patch has one typo, you add a new DWORD value to the registry, not a new key.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2264107
MS fixed the other typo mentioned here:
http://isc.sans.edu/diary.html?storyid=9445
Like duh! Christmas IS in the middle of summer in some parts of the world.
Ha, like those heathens celebrate Christmas...
Signed binaries.
The app can verify the signer is the original author and not load it. You make some sort of general localized signer that will pass the 'trust' test for every binary so the user can override it as needed, like to replace a DLL with their own hacked version.
Give some sort of way to disable the signing check on a per app basis, that has to be done by the user, probably via UAC. Don't give any way to disable it globally or any way that it can be automated.
People will still be able to do all they need to do, but apps will have to be signed or they'll be too much of a pain in the ass for users to waste their time on them, and in a pinch you CAN still get around it.
Of course, all of this is just to protect users from themselves essentially since by the time you've got someone loading EXEs from untrusted sources, there are probably easier ways to have you're way with them.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
"Um, that's why they have the %programfiles% environment variable, and it's why you install applications there, and it's why the current directory when you launch a file (%userprofile%\Default\Documents\) should never be where you're getting executable content (such as a .dll file)." - by clone53421 (1310749) on Tuesday August 24, @09:34AM (#33354120)
See subject, because your WEAK 'explanation' is rather incomplete:
First of all, using environmental variables alone won't work in a programming IDE such as Visual Studio or others like it. Not without parsing the environment first via API calls (GetEnvironmentStrings or better still, GetEnvironmentVariable for a specific one, etc./et al)...
Now, also as to libraries to BOTH yourself and the person you replied: Did he even mention current directory vs. the %program files% or %path% location? I don't even SEE it in the quote of his words you utilized, so that also makes you non-sequitur here
Clone53421, seriously here:
I mean, hey - Based on your reply above? Either you're just another dumbass network techie type that is limited to writing batch files, and now you're trying to play programmer around here because of the stupidity due to incompleteness of your post. IF that's the case, and I tend to think it is due to the incompleteness of your post and its seeming non-sequitur statements vs. that which you quoted from the person you replied to??
Don't try to play "expert" in areas you have NO REAL CLUE in, ok? Your lack of complete information shows us all this in fact, quite easily. Your type online???
Your type's the MOST dangerous type!
I state that, mainly because you only post partial information, instead of complete accurate info.
The type of reply you made tells me you are just a noob due to your incomplete data. It also shows your inexperience hands on in coding in languages that can utilize the Win16/32/64 API calls like C/C++, Delphi, VB, and many others.
(Again - I say this because you only posted a minor part/partial part of what actually needs to be done, in full, in order to be able to use such environmental "%vars%" from inside a 'real programming language' (& not just a .bat 16 bit or .cmd 32/64 bit files and their commandline interpreter like DOS tty terminals/consoles/command prompts use and what you do in batch files)).
APK
P.S.=> The rest of your post's "ok" but you ought to have posted a referential link to Microsoft in order to show the user the search rules for libraries, like this one -> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms682586(VS.85).aspx
PERTINENT EXCERPT/QUOTE MATERIAL ON DLL SEARCH ORDER CONVENTIONS, and CAVEATS/EXCEPTIONS DUE TO SETUP TYPES:
---
If SafeDllSearchMode is enabled, the search order is as follows:
The directory from which the application loaded.
The system directory. Use the GetSystemDirectory function to get the path of this directory.
The 16-bit system directory. There is no function that obtains the path of this directory, but it is searched.
The Windows directory. Use the GetWindowsDirectory function to get the path of this directory.
The current directory.
The directories that are listed in the PATH environment variable. Note that this does not include the per-application path specified by the App Paths registry key. The App Paths key is not used when computing the DLL search path.
If SafeDllSearchMode is disabled, the search order is as follows:
The directory from which the application loaded.
The current directory.
The system directory. Use the GetSystemDirectory function to get the path of this directory.
The 16-bit system directory. There is no function that obtains the path of this directory, but it is searched.
The Windows directory. Use the GetWindowsDirectory function to get the path of this directory.
The
"You just disqualified yourself from "real" programming." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 25, @12:20PM (#33370176)
LOL, you did a fine job of that in your usage of %ProgramFiles% alone because it's NOT a "singleword" as you wrote it, it's actually %Program Files% first of all, & lmao, secondly? See below next, as it puts the "icing on your cake":
See subject-line, because it says all I had to say, & I said it with PROGRAMMATIC SPECIFICS, unlike yourself in what API's are needed to use Environment vars in languages I noted and others also whereas by way of comparison?
You did not, that was my point.
(I.E.-> You only did what a network admin type might or some techie writing a batch file or .cmd file is all, rather than to indicate what a full blown programmer would, which is who folks are "blaming" as well as Microsoft themselves).
Your further name tossing's your REAL "tell" here though that tells me I hit you RIGHT "on the head", as to your true skillset (limited in scope to batch file writing at best in terms of "programming").
See below as to a quote of your ad hominem attack on myself via profanities:
"Yes, that's how you "use environment variables", dipshit. " - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 25, @12:20PM (#33370176)
Yea, IF you're only writing batch files, as to how YOU said it's used... "real programmers" with REAL languages (not batch or scripting) use API calls, unlike yourself, obviously.
---
"I posted enough that any non-technical user would adequately understand what should have been done, and enough that any technical user would adequately understand how to do it (because, hell, any "real" programmer should already know how to use an environment variable)" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 25, @12:20PM (#33370176)
LOL, see above - YOU? You've shown us all you're not, based on all of the above AND you're original post as well.
APK
"LOL, you did a fine job of that in your usage of %ProgramFiles% alone because it's NOT a "singleword" as you wrote it, it's actually %Program Files% first of all" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 25, @01:45PM (#33371532)
I even made a mistake, on purpose, to see if you'd verify and catch it... LOL, and you STILL ran, clone53421?
(See above, because it's as you wrote it initially (%ProgramFiles%) & a simple 'set' command issued @ a command prompt verifies it... and my init. reply "shook you up" so bad, you didn't even have the sack to verify that, and you still ran? Please... I sat for 6 hours and waited for you to catch that and STILL you did not! Between thate and your rant and verbose attempts at covering your behind, it told me worlds and that I am correct that you're no coder. You're, at best, a techie that writes batchfiles ONLY!)
----
"You just disqualified yourself from "real" programming." -by clone53421 (1310749) on Tuesday August 24, @09:34AM (#33354120) Journal
Ahem/again: I said it with PROGRAMMATIC SPECIFICS, unlike yourself in what API's are needed to use Environment vars in languages I noted and others also whereas by way of comparison? You did not, that was my point.
(A "real programmer" would have. You did not. I.E.-> You only did what a network admin type might or some techie writing a batch file or .cmd file is all, rather than to indicate what a full blown programmer would, which is who folks are "blaming" as well as Microsoft themselves).
Additionally, the day you can show you've done all this as I have (inclusive of commercially sold software for more than a decade & 1/2 to my credit)? Is the day you can speak to me in that manner and get away with it as a peer, which you obviously are not:
"My Name is Ozymandias: King of Kings - Look upon my works, ye mighty, & DESPAIR..."
----
Windows NT Magazine (now Windows IT Pro) April 1997 "BACK OFFICE PERFORMANCE" issue, page 61
(&, for work done for EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com on PAID CONTRACT (writing portions of their SuperCache program increasing its performance by up to 40% via my work) albeit, for their SuperDisk & HOW TO APPLY IT, took them to a finalist position @ MS Tech Ed, two years in a row 2000-2002, in its HARDEST CATEGORY: SQLServer Performance Enhancement).
WINDOWS MAGAZINE, 1997, "Top Freeware & Shareware of the Year" issue page 210, #1/first entry in fact (my work is there)
PC-WELT FEB 1998 - page 84, again, my work is featured there
WINDOWS MAGAZINE, WINTER 1998 - page 92, insert section, MUST HAVE WARES, my work is again, there
PC-WELT FEB 1999 - page 83, again, my work is featured there
CHIP Magazine 7/99 - page 100, my work is there
GERMAN PC BOOK, Data Becker publisher "PC Aufrusten und Repairen" 2000, where my work is contained in it
HOT SHAREWARE Numero 46 issue, pg. 54 (PC ware mag from Spain), 2001 my work is there, first one featured, yet again!
Also, a British PC Mag in 2002 for many utilities I wrote, saw it @ BORDERS BOOKS but didn't buy it... by that point, I had moved onto other areas in this field besides coding only...
Lastly, being paid for an article that made me money over @ PCPitstop in 2008 for writing up a guide that has people showing NO VIRUSES/SPYWARES & other screwups, via following its point, such as THRONKA sees here -> http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ee926d913b81bf6d63c3c7372fd2a24c&t=28430&page=3
----
What do I have to say about that much above? I can't say it any better, than this was stated already (from the greatest book of all time, the "tech manual for life" imo):
"But by the grace of God I am wha
"You just disqualified yourself from "real" programming." -by clone53421 (1310749) on Tuesday August 24, @09:34AM (#33354120) Journal
Ahem/again: I said it with PROGRAMMATIC SPECIFICS, unlike yourself in what API's are needed to use Environment vars in languages I noted and others also whereas by way of comparison? You did not, that was my point.
(A "real programmer" would have. You did not. I.E.-> You only did what a network admin type might or some techie writing a batch file or .cmd file is all, rather than to indicate what a full blown programmer would, which is who folks are "blaming" as well as Microsoft themselves).
Additionally, the day you can show you've done all this below, as I have (inclusive of commercially sold software for more than a decade & 1/2 to my credit)? Is the day you can speak to me in that manner and get away with it as a peer, which you obviously are not:
"My Name is Ozymandias: King of Kings - Look upon my works, ye mighty, & DESPAIR..."
----
Windows NT Magazine (now Windows IT Pro) April 1997 "BACK OFFICE PERFORMANCE" issue, page 61
(&, for work done for EEC Systems/SuperSpeed.com on PAID CONTRACT (writing portions of their SuperCache program increasing its performance by up to 40% via my work) albeit, for their SuperDisk & HOW TO APPLY IT, took them to a finalist position @ MS Tech Ed, two years in a row 2000-2002, in its HARDEST CATEGORY: SQLServer Performance Enhancement).
WINDOWS MAGAZINE, 1997, "Top Freeware & Shareware of the Year" issue page 210, #1/first entry in fact (my work is there)
PC-WELT FEB 1998 - page 84, again, my work is featured there
WINDOWS MAGAZINE, WINTER 1998 - page 92, insert section, MUST HAVE WARES, my work is again, there
PC-WELT FEB 1999 - page 83, again, my work is featured there
CHIP Magazine 7/99 - page 100, my work is there
GERMAN PC BOOK, Data Becker publisher "PC Aufrusten und Repairen" 2000, where my work is contained in it
HOT SHAREWARE Numero 46 issue, pg. 54 (PC ware mag from Spain), 2001 my work is there, first one featured, yet again!
Also, a British PC Mag in 2002 for many utilities I wrote, saw it @ BORDERS BOOKS but didn't buy it... by that point, I had moved onto other areas in this field besides coding only...
Lastly, being paid for an article that made me money over @ PCPitstop in 2008 for writing up a guide that has people showing NO VIRUSES/SPYWARES & other screwups, via following its point, such as THRONKA sees here -> http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=ee926d913b81bf6d63c3c7372fd2a24c&t=28430&page=3
----
What do I have to say about that much above? I can't say it any better, than this was stated already (from the greatest book of all time, the "tech manual for life" imo):
"But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me." - Corinthians Chapter 10, Verse 10
(And, because I got LUCKY to have been exposed to some really GREAT classmates, professors, & colleagues on the job over time as well)
----
"Delphi, VB You just disqualified yourself from "real" programming." -by clone53421 (1310749) on Tuesday August 24, @09:34AM (#33354120) Journal
First of all, I code in well over 12 computer languages, and I also mentioned C/C++ which I do code in and have for over 15 yrs. now professionally (funny you conveniently omit that eh in your PARTIAL QUOTE of myself)... and, also?
As far as Delphi??
The designer of .NET and C# is Mr. Anders Heijelsberg at MS, and he is o
"You’re a moron. " - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 26, @03:03PM (#33384252)
LOL, name calling the "best you got", there, 'batchfile boy'? Apparently so: Well, hate to clue you into this, but "new NEWS":
Your ad hominem attacks and foaming at the mouth profane name tossing reactions only shows your "tell" and that you are upset at yourself mainly, not I, because you exposed yourself as a complete noob in coding because you didn't post that you have to use API calls to get to environment variables in languages like C/C++, VB, and Delphi.
Funny how you also only used a partial quote of my words also when you only noted Delphi and VB, when I also posted C/C++ (I code fluently in over 12 languages since 1982).
By the way/again: On Delphi? It knocked the crap out of MSVC++ in both math and strings speed as far back as 1997 and in VBPJ magazine no less, and still can today (D7 & below).
So much for your "know-how" because you're only showing us it's non-existent or noob/rookie level.
Posting as AC now too? LOL, who are you trying to fool here, noob?? It's not working.
See subject-line above, and clone53421's last fail post prooving my point.
In addition to that? From another thread, you can see below where it is quoted, on how and where clone is also losing badly on C programming portability problems, where clone53421 is "on the ropes" as is his usual in failing badly, and it is where clone53421 has been asked to show he has done more noted accomplishments in the field of the computer sciences than apk has (apk has a dozen I know of, probably more, and clone53421? LOL, not a SINGLE ONE, all he has are his "ad hominem attacks" (jealous ones, lol, obviously)):
"Reputable? LOL. More like a bunch of bullshit tech rags. A bunch of third-world publications and a "PCPitstop" magaznie that I'd put several large steps below even the "GeekSquad" in terms of technical expertise or source of quality computing advice... LOL." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 01, @04:10PM (#33440540)
Windows IT Pro, Microsoft Tech Ed 2000-2002 as a finalist in its hardest category, and commercial software code to apk's credit, and NOTHING TO CLONE53421's CREDIT AS TO THE SAME, NOT EVEN A SINGLE ONE? LMAO... we all know the score here, and it's 12 to 0 in favor of apk (12) and clone53421 (0). Not even CLOSE.
----
"Maybe a tiny step above "AntiVirus Pro 2010", BUT ONLY MAYBE. " - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 01, @04:10PM (#33440540)
Again: apk's just done far more than you have clone53421 and industry people liked his work where you? Nobody has, because you're a nobody... face it, facts are facts and you have none to your credit vs. apk with over a dozen by now, probably more too,
Again, Windows IT Pro, Microsoft Tech Ed 2 yrs. in a row, and commercial software code to apk's credit seems to look good for apk. Clone53421 with nothing of the same to his name? LMAO, not so good for clone53421, especially after all of his (your) name tossing and ad hominem attacks.
(I'd say you're just another jealous ne'er do well, clone53421, simply based on your reactions, lol, like a frustrated child with your profanities and name calling...)
----
"I'm surprised you aren't embarrassed quoting them as sources. in fact, it's to clone53421's credit that shit like that hasn't been attributed to him." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 01, @04:10PM (#33440540)
LOL, clone53421, who is you (as is your usual defending yourself with AC replies after you get shot down by others) doesn't have a damned thing to his credit, because he is a dime a dozen NE'ER DO WELL, period. Show us otherwise... lol, we KNOW you can't!
----
"You're a joke and an embarrassment." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 01, @04:10PM (#33440540)
If apk with a list of a dozen accomplishments in the eyes of reputable others is a joke and an embarrassement, then what are YOU, with NOTHING TO YOUR NAME WHATSOEVER, Clone53421?? LMAO... face it: You're a "ne'er do well" clone53421.
---
"And we all know that THRONKA was YOU." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 01, @04:10PM (#33440540)
Got proof of that, first of all? Otherwise, we know it's your typical ad hominem attack attempt and more libelous crap from you. Proof, from Clone53421?? LOL, of course not. Certainly not of better and more accomplishments than APK has in respected and reputable publications like Windows IT Pro, or MS' own TechEd!
Clone53421, all you have is your desperate b.s., and you are free to write THRONKA, as he frequents the bbs where his comments are cited.
Many others also have had the same results and querying "HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003" online can show that many others liked APK's security guide so much, it is no small wonder he was paid to write it and won a tech contest for it in fact (unexpectedly in fact he said). Ha
See subject-line above, as well as the earlier posts here where clone53421 posts what a mere batchfile writer might do vs. what he ought to have indicated in the API calls needed to use environment strings in code like C, C++, Delphi, VB, or others, as well as clone53421's last fail post I have replied to now. It's all helping in my easily proving my point that clone53421 has been utterly smoked 3-4x now in technical topics in coding and in networking here, and is resorting to name calling and worse. Hilarious.
In addition to that?
From another thread with quotes below??
Well, below you can see below where it is quoted, on how and where clone is also losing badly on C programming portability problems, where clone53421 is "on the ropes" as is his usual in failing badly, and it is where clone53421 has been asked to show he has done more noted accomplishments in the field of the computer sciences than apk has and clone53421 has ZERO, by way of comparison, lol!
(apk has a dozen I know of, probably more, and clone53421? LOL, not a SINGLE ONE, all he has are his "ad hominem attacks" (jealous ones, lol, obviously)):
"Reputable? LOL. More like a bunch of bullshit tech rags. A bunch of third-world publications and a "PCPitstop" magaznie that I'd put several large steps below even the "GeekSquad" in terms of technical expertise or source of quality computing advice... LOL." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 01, @04:10PM (#33440540)
Windows IT Pro, Microsoft Tech Ed 2000-2002 as a finalist in its hardest category, and commercial software code to apk's credit, and NOTHING TO CLONE53421's CREDIT AS TO THE SAME, NOT EVEN A SINGLE ONE? LMAO... we all know the score here, and it's 12 to 0 in favor of apk (12) and clone53421 (0). Not even CLOSE.
----
"Maybe a tiny step above "AntiVirus Pro 2010", BUT ONLY MAYBE. " - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 01, @04:10PM (#33440540)
Again: apk's just done far more than you have clone53421 and industry people liked his work where you? Nobody has, because you're a nobody... face it, facts are facts and you have none to your credit vs. apk with over a dozen by now, probably more too,
Again, Windows IT Pro, Microsoft Tech Ed 2 yrs. in a row, and commercial software code to apk's credit seems to look good for apk. Clone53421 with nothing of the same to his name? LMAO, not so good for clone53421, especially after all of his (your) name tossing and ad hominem attacks.
(I'd say you're just another jealous ne'er do well, clone53421, simply based on your reactions, lol, like a frustrated child with your profanities and name calling...)
----
"I'm surprised you aren't embarrassed quoting them as sources. in fact, it's to clone53421's credit that shit like that hasn't been attributed to him." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 01, @04:10PM (#33440540)
LOL, clone53421, who is you (as is your usual defending yourself with AC replies after you get shot down by others) doesn't have a damned thing to his credit, because he is a dime a dozen NE'ER DO WELL, period. Show us otherwise... lol, we KNOW you can't!
----
"You're a joke and an embarrassment." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 01, @04:10PM (#33440540)
If apk with a list of a dozen accomplishments in the eyes of reputable others is a joke and an embarrassement, then what are YOU, with NOTHING TO YOUR NAME WHATSOEVER, Clone53421?? LMAO... face it: You're a "ne'er do well" clone53421.
---
"And we all know that THRONKA was YOU." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 01, @04:10PM (#33440540)
Got proof of that, first of all? Otherwise, we know it's your typical ad hominem attack attempt and more libelous crap from you. Proof, from Clone53421?? LOL, of course not. Certainly not of better and m