Database Users

autorun.inf

so something very strange showed up on my g1... when i was looking through my sdcard with astro this came up in a autorun.inf file...
[autorun]
;fnldyysbuqcvzpnrofhariaepd
shellexecute="resycled\boot.com h:"
;msfsrztwdzfsnkkeainjwdvdpgqnwgncfzfzivmzruxyrxpvmnnz
shell\Open\command="resycled\boot.com h:"
;sgtlhkaeymrvtiwpwnbswqrwenzajrpipwwrfrjrjyxwuvqysjjqaqxducqznobylygiiucvdzmllqw
The file appears where it is calling it from and it is a windows file but why would it show up on my android?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_virus

aww crap so now we have android viruses now? how the heck do we know if we have any and how to get rid of them?
sadly, this is where iphone is clearly not a problem (everyone hates pc stuff and always trying to sabotage)
hbguy

hbguy said:
aww crap so now we have android viruses now? how the heck do we know if we have any and how to get rid of them?
sadly, this is where iphone is clearly not a problem (everyone hates pc stuff and always trying to sabotage)
hbguy
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What? This is a Windows virus that simply propagates by copying itself to all mounted drives (note the autorun.inf file). This has nothing to do with Android.

i don't think it is a Gphone virus, it is a windows virus.

Run a fulls can on your computer. The g1 isnt affected. It is based on the linux kernel. Windows is a mainstream OS so righting virus's has max impact since they will work on most PC's
With linux however, there are so many variations and such a lower number of users its that a virus would have low impact being spread. A linux virus wouldnmt work on all distrubutions without being coded to work on all making the file much larger.
Also linux has much tighter security permissions, if a virus did infect, the damage it could cause would be limited to permissions are set for the current user. It would not be able to modify system files, or copy itself into places without permissions.
This is why i run linux. No virus checker, no firewall, no spyware checker. There are also other advantages of linux/mac systems.
I have been running linux for 9 months, and now only have 2gb freespace. I have windows aswell. Linux runs as fast and smooth as it did when i installed it, windows has prgressvvly gotten sllower.
So, your g1 should be quite safe.
Disinfect your pc and memory card, to avoid spreading it.

Run a fulls can on your computer. The g1 isnt affected. It is based on the linux kernel. Windows is a mainstream OS so righting virus's has max impact since they will work on most PC's
With linux however, there are so many variations and such a lower number of users its that a virus would have low impact being spread. A linux virus wouldnmt work on all distrubutions without being coded to work on all making the file much larger.
Also linux has much tighter security permissions, if a virus did infect, the damage it could cause would be limited to permissions are set for the current user. It would not be able to modify system files, or copy itself into places without permissions.
This is why i run linux. No virus checker, no firewall, no spyware checker. There are also other advantages of linux/mac systems.
I have been running linux for 9 months, and now only have 2gb freespace. I have windows aswell. Linux runs as fast and smooth as it did when i installed it, windows has prgressvvly gotten sllower.
So, your g1 should be quite safe.
Disinfect your pc and memory card, to avoid spreading it.

It looks like Trojan Horse SHeur.CODS also known as W32.Tideserv according to a few places I've looked. I connected my Fuze to my laptop when I got home from work tonight. First as a Disk Drive then as ActiveSync for my Outlook. I played with customizations all day long at work and didn't see this particular folder (I cleaned/organized my storage card). After connecting to my Vista Ultimate laptop I found the folder "RESYCLED" on my storage card root, and it contains only one file "boot". I was curious like the rest of you - was my first thought. My became then . I just scanned my laptop yesterday night and found nothing.
Here's the link to Symantec's analysis of the threat: http://www.symantec.com/security_response/writeup.jsp?docid=2008-121016-4048-99&tabid=2
Apparently it's a recent discovery - Dec 10th.
In case you want to know if you're possibly infected, the symptoms are:
RESYCLED\boot.com in the root of your OS drive and USB storage device
autorun.inf in the root of your OS drive and/or USB storage device that contains something similar to my example below - it is created as a protected system file so you will need to go into Folder Options and uncheck "Hide Protected Operating System Files" so that you can see it
For example, my autorun.inf file contained:
Code:
[autorun]
;hkugpkenxpvzxhsntkierhcflipocsxsrvghnqpn
shellexecute="resycled\boot.com c:"
;toptzsxuizytvxhntkskeqaayeqturkjpgueqxyuyk
shell\Open\command="resycled\boot.com c:"
;lqrpqpoblodjeuitprbtdcgswwvvmbkwrxpyskfkondjsvinrgfyrabdpuyehckfjkaucmigadz
I tried simply deleting the files but they were recreated by whatever caused it within 2-3 minutes (literally enough time to alt+tab and add to my post and alt+tab back to the C:/ window).
As soon as I find a way to get rid of it without it recreating the files I will be happy to post it to this thread. It managed to forcefully redirect me away from Malwarebytes.org which has freeware that is supposed to remove this issue.

This is an old post but i got rid of it as soon as i found it i run Outpost pro 09 and i blocked a thing that poped up to propigate it. also blocked all other access to that file as i didnt know what it was. Even still i only reboot my desktop which it was on once every 3 weeks so i cleaned it off all my devices and network disk before any reboots.

Can we use virtual storage in WM?

Forgive my stupidity, but I was wondering why the forum is not abreast with talk about using internet virtual storage in WM6, thereby giving near limitless storage for data, films, music, video, tomtom maps etc.
I realise there will be access speed limitations, but apart from media I would not have thought that would be a problem.
If this has all been achieved already, then can any of you users make any recommendations?
Thanks.

Do you mean just for storing files, or more than that, such as having files associated with programs or executables and relating *.EXEs on the device with associated files (*.dll, *.sys etc.) online?. This would sound very complicated to me. Maybe possible with full blown Windows on a Desktop or Laptop ( I don't know how realistic this idea is, or whether it's out there already somewhere).
For file storage, I can't see a problem. Access would be considerably slower than a Windows PC for example due to the system and OS. This is obvious. But it would certainly be possible to "host" your files online. Personally I would make sure I'm using a very well known web based file storage service with the best reliability and a flawless wi-fi connection or unlimited data plan for it to be completely viable.
Personally, I've never had a WM device that holds a good wi-fi connection, but that's for another thread!
Apologies if I've misunderstood what your asking and barking up the wrong tree!!!

My idea was mainly a virtual storage for files.
However, we are all wishing for SD access. SD cards can have various performance characteristics. Slow SD memory doesnt fail - the computer simply waits until the data is loaded. As a further example, remember the floppy disk drive? That was slow, but we could use it for file storage such as tomtom maps without the slow access causing system problems.
So the idea I envisage is a virtual external drive. (I.e not virtual CPU memory).
The concept seems sound to me. And if people here can achive liberation, gps access, and phone access on the Shift, I would have thought virtual storage would be within the ability of these talanted people.
I would love someone to get tomtom working on such a virtual storage drive.

Anyone else notice this strange behavior

Anyone else notice that when you update an app, you download the update (which is the complete app, not an update to the existing app) into a new folder, and the replaced app is not deleted. Many apps already have multiple instances of themselves, and I have only had my tablet for 2 weeks. (Most apps have at least 2 versions, but the worst (vclibs.110) already has 8 versions of itself!!!)
This may not seem like much yet, but I have auto update apps turned off, and still using at least twice the space I should be using. I also have 22 garbage apps that are complaining about wanting an update, which would add another 22 copies of uslessness to an SSD that is already too small (128GB)
Currently, these mostly useless apps are consuming just under 3 GB of space, at least 1/2 of that is not required, and that is after only 2 weeks. What kind of disk usage after 2 years of auto updates? (I also have not installed any new apps, the 3 GB is just junk MS and Acer put on already)
So I see from here http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2102160 that others have indeed noticed this.
Update 2:
Apps are placed in "Program Files\WindowsApps"(all apps) I have removed the older versions with no noticable issues. To delete a current App, simply flick up on the app tile, (be it on the start menu, or in all apps) and select "uninstall". Note that this will only uninstall the latest version of the app. You will still have to go to "Program Files\WindowsApps" to delete any prior versions.

>Anyone else notice that when you update an app...and the replaced app is not deleted. Many apps already have multiple instances of themselves
That's the default behavior for Windows since Vista, aka WinSxS,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side-by-side_assembly
The problem is the "DLL hell" dependencies, and MS' solution was to keep old DLLs so dependencies don't break. The downside is that Windows keeps getting ever more bloated as time goes on. This was of minimal concern when we all had big honking hard drives, but became glaring on mobiles with limited storage.
Windows has always been a pig for space, including Win8. It espouses redundancy, hence the multiple layers of backup--reserved/recovery partitions, restore points, file history, trash can, WinSxS, etc. A minimum install for Win XP was less than 2GB. A Win8 x64 bare install is 13-14GB before updates, not counting the various dedicated system partitions. Updates will eat up a few more gigs, and it continually goes up from there.
Win8 did manage to optimize for power. One hopes that MS will discard the "unlimited storage" mindset and likewise optimize it for space. I'd like to see a Tablet Edition that dispenses with the abovementioned redundancy features. Backups can go to cloud or NAS.
Win8 has a commandline tool to remove Windows packages from the install ISO, called DISM. A how-to, to remove Metro apps, is here,
http://www.edugeek.net/forums/windows-8/104332-removing-metro-apps-windows-8-image.html
Metro apps have no dependencies with the desktop side, and removing them should be safe for desktop users. I'll try out the above to slim the oinker down some. It won't save that much space, but there'll be less crapware to delete.

Dell Venue Pro 11 (Bay Trail) Can it run Win8.1 64bit?

I love this tablet except I didn't realize it is running 32-bit win8.1 which sucks. Anyone know if there is a way I can get Win 8.1 64-bit on it?

redfusion87 said:
I love this tablet except I didn't realize it is running 32-bit win8.1 which sucks. Anyone know if there is a way I can get Win 8.1 64-bit on it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why do you think 32 bit sucks?

mustbepbs said:
Why do you think 32 bit sucks?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe he needs features that are supported on 64 bit systems.
OP, technically speaking, intel atom supports 64 bit architecture, however, since you only have 2 GB of RAM, performance will be severely crippled.
There is no point in using a 64 bit system with less than 4 GB of RAM.

That's not entirely true. First of all, "severely crippled" is quite an overstatement; you'll lose a few percent CPU efficiency while executing 32-bit programs, and cache coherency will suffer a bit, but the impact is barely noticeable and has nothing to do with RAM size (that is, you'll take the same hit for running 32-bit code on a 64-bit OS whether you have 2GB or 20GB). Program binaries (64-bit ones, that is) are usually larger, which consumes both more storage and more RAM once they're loaded, but they also get to use the extra registers and instructions (including native 64-bit integer math) that are available to 64-bit-aware programs, which can actually make them more efficient than their 32-bit counterparts in some cases. In other cases, they will be very slightly slower (largely due to cache coherency loss from the large pointer values) but the difference is pretty small.
Then, there's security. 64-bit programs can use high-entropy ASLR, which makes ASLR *vastly* more effective (32-bit OSes typically use only 8 or 12 bits of entropy for ASLR, which is good but still permits brute-forcing on repeatable attacks, and the occasional lucky hit in any case; HE-ASLR uses enough entropy that you could exploit every PC on the planet and still have a fair chance of missing every time). 32-bit programs have such small heaps that a heap-spraying attack (writing a NOP-sled into the payload instructions, so that if you pivot the instruction pointer onto the heap you will "slide down" to the payload) is practical, typically taking less than a second; on a 64-bit process, even if you could commit enough virtual memory (you can't; no existing PC can) it would take *years* to spray it all.
Finally, a nitpick about setting the threshold at 4GB for where 64-bit is needed instead of 32-bit. Video memory is typically mapped into the kernel address space, as are the I/O buffers for other drivers. In the old days, this was no big deal; a PC could easily afford to give up even a gig or so of kernel address space (assuming you weren't trying to assign more than 2GB to user-mode per-process allocation) and as long as you didn't have more than 3GB of physical memory, the memory manager could still address the rest of it. These days, even cheapo GPUs sometimes have more memory than that, and even a merely decent graphics card will have so much VRAM that a 32-bit system couldn't address all of it using the default 2GB user / 2GB kernel split. This isn't really a problem for embedded graphics, but anybody using 32-bit with a modern discrete GPU is nuts.

redfusion87 said:
I love this tablet except I didn't realize it is running 32-bit win8.1 which sucks. Anyone know if there is a way I can get Win 8.1 64-bit on it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, however DELL has not released any 64-bit drivers for the touchscreen or any other component. You would need to install this with the device connected to a powered USB hub connected to a keyboard and mouse with a optical drive/flash drive with a bootable installation. Remember the touchscreen will not work during the installation process. Migrating to 64-bit on THIS particular tablet isn't worth the stress that you seek in my opinion. I went this route by turning off secure boot in the BIOS, but after doing a clean install, I found it wasn't worth it other than being able to use the "full" 32GB without the recovery partition and other junk. You will have to do a Windows update to get the generic drivers. Windows will load the integrated graphics and the WiFi natively, but it still isn't worth the hassle. Luckily, I had created a recovery flash drive and restored from that.

GoodDayToDie said:
That's not entirely true. First of all, "severely crippled" is quite an overstatement; you'll lose a few percent CPU efficiency while executing 32-bit programs, and cache coherency will suffer a bit, but the impact is barely noticeable and has nothing to do with RAM size (that is, you'll take the same hit for running 32-bit code on a 64-bit OS whether you have 2GB or 20GB). Program binaries (64-bit ones, that is) are usually larger, which consumes both more storage and more RAM once they're loaded, but they also get to use the extra registers and instructions (including native 64-bit integer math) that are available to 64-bit-aware programs, which can actually make them more efficient than their 32-bit counterparts in some cases. In other cases, they will be very slightly slower (largely due to cache coherency loss from the large pointer values) but the difference is pretty small.
Then, there's security. 64-bit programs can use high-entropy ASLR, which makes ASLR *vastly* more effective (32-bit OSes typically use only 8 or 12 bits of entropy for ASLR, which is good but still permits brute-forcing on repeatable attacks, and the occasional lucky hit in any case; HE-ASLR uses enough entropy that you could exploit every PC on the planet and still have a fair chance of missing every time). 32-bit programs have such small heaps that a heap-spraying attack (writing a NOP-sled into the payload instructions, so that if you pivot the instruction pointer onto the heap you will "slide down" to the payload) is practical, typically taking less than a second; on a 64-bit process, even if you could commit enough virtual memory (you can't; no existing PC can) it would take *years* to spray it all.
Finally, a nitpick about setting the threshold at 4GB for where 64-bit is needed instead of 32-bit. Video memory is typically mapped into the kernel address space, as are the I/O buffers for other drivers. In the old days, this was no big deal; a PC could easily afford to give up even a gig or so of kernel address space (assuming you weren't trying to assign more than 2GB to user-mode per-process allocation) and as long as you didn't have more than 3GB of physical memory, the memory manager could still address the rest of it. These days, even cheapo GPUs sometimes have more memory than that, and even a merely decent graphics card will have so much VRAM that a 32-bit system couldn't address all of it using the default 2GB user / 2GB kernel split. This isn't really a problem for embedded graphics, but anybody using 32-bit with a modern discrete GPU is nuts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Going 64 bits on less than 4 GB of RAM is like asking to get yourself the slowest possible computer.
You won't be able to do any sort of real multitasking, since the system itself will use twice the amount of RAM it uses on 32 bit systems.
A typical 64 bit windows uses around 1 GB of RAM. Witch means that out of the 2 GB the OP has, only 1 will be usable. A browser nowadays uses around 300MB, even more depending on tabs. The moment RAM consumption reaches a certain level, windows will start moving contents to the hard disk, making the entire computer much slower.
So yes, his performance will be severely crippled. I run a 64 bit OS on 2 GB ram once. It was horrible. I won't ever do it again.
And I doubt the OP needs better ecnyption keys on his tablet.
Let's not even dive into driver problems and other stuff which comes along. Dell is obviously only supporting the 32 bit OS. Otherwise they would have tossed 4 gigs of RAM and the 64 bit OS and increase the price by like 30 bucks and be done with it.

Windows (by default) has generic drivers
my Asus T100 Bay Trail with a clean Windows 8.1 x86 ISO could boot to desktop, but missing sound, wifi and other stuff
why don't you try it? Use the Windows 7 DVD ISO tool to create a bootable USB and try
http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/html/pbPage.Help_Win7_usbdvd_dwnTool

With all due respect, claiming that a 64-bit system uses 2x the RAM is absurd. The kernel uses 64-bit pointers internally on either 32-bit or 64-bit systems (to support PAE, which is enabled for NX/DEP support even though the addressable range is still capped to 4GB on client SKUs). Non-pointer data structures are not defined in terms of "int" and "long", but in terms of DWORD (which is always 32 bits, whether on the 16-bit systems that the type got its name from, or on 32-bit or 64-bit machines), LARGE_INTEGER, etc. A fresh Win8 x64 install, at the desktop, uses about 280MB of RAM.
I have personally used both 32-bit and 64-bit OSes on the same 2GB-of-RAM hardware, and I assure you: the difference in performance is not perceptible except benchmarks. This was a Vista system, to boot; Vista uses more RAM than Win7, much less Win8.

mcosmin222 said:
Going 64 bits on less than 4 GB of RAM is like asking to get yourself the slowest possible computer.
You won't be able to do any sort of real multitasking, since the system itself will use twice the amount of RAM it uses on 32 bit systems.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use a 5-year old desktop with a Intel Core2Duo processor and 2 GB of RAM, and it happily runs 64-bit Windows 8.
Yes, I do a lot of multitasking and have 10-12 tabs open in my browser at any given time, and I don't see any noticeable difference from when the same system used to run 32-bit Windows.

paperWastage said:
why don't you try it? Use the Windows 7 DVD ISO tool to create a bootable USB and try
http://www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/html/pbPage.Help_Win7_usbdvd_dwnTool
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rufus is better for creating bootable USB IMO:
Found the MS tool a bit flaky, often refuses to write to drives.

x64 does not support Connected Standby

I'm working on the "perfect" Windows PC setup with Android over Wi-Fi

I'm working on the "perfect" Windows PC setup with Android over Wi-Fi where what I have working almost perfectly is
Windows 10 mounts the entire non-rooted Android 12 phone (all partitions!) over Wi-Fi as a drive letter
Windows 10 mirrors the non-rooted Android 12 phone using the Windows mouse & keyboard (sharing clipboards)
Windows 10 adb easily accesses the entire non-rooted Android 12 phone over Wi-Fi
Everything is free (almost all of it is FOSS).
No USB cable is ever needed for this setup to work (not even to establish adb connections).
With this "almost perfect" free Android-12/Windows-10 Wi-Fi setup, anyone can:
Manipulate Android on my Windows monitor at 20 inches tall & 9 inches wide!
Run batch files on Windows to click Activities on Android (e.g., reset advertising ID)
Copy almost any file from Android (even root files!) to Windows (and vice versa)
Slide APKs from Windows to Android to install them
etc.
The only kink in my setup is that I don't yet know how to get the native file explorer on Windows 10 to view files deeper than the "data" directory on the external sdcard, as can be seen in the screenshots below.
Otherwise the setup is nearly perfect.
If you have questions as to how it was set up, just ask and I'll gladly explain.