Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[CynicalRyan]

FINE.  I play on XP-64 bit and don't have any problems.

Awww, don't feel left out becasue of that. ;P

[Draco18s]

FINE.  I play on XP-64 bit and don't have any problems.

Awww, don't feel left out becasue of that. ;P

I don't feel left out.

Except that I have twice the processing power I'm even capable of using.

And the fact that I can't run anti-virus (Norton has this thing where it won't install because "I need a 64 bit version" or some stupid thing like that--honestly, just install anyway and scan what you can scan; I doubt people are writing 64 bit viruses anyway).

[Volatar]

I don't feel left out.

Except that I have twice the processing power I'm even capable of using.

And the fact that I can't run anti-virus (Norton has this thing where it won't install because "I need a 64 bit version" or some stupid thing like that--honestly, just install anyway and scan what you can scan; I doubt people are writing 64 bit viruses anyway).

Sadly, 64 bit only protects you from rootkits, not viruses.

Grab yourself Avast for free here, it runs on x64. You still need antiviris.

http://www.avast.com/

[CynicalRyan]

Sadly, 64 bit only protects you from rootkits, not viruses.

News to me. You can still hook into system processes (with the user's acknowledgement, but social engineering is laughably easy), and get root. You just need Rootkit 2009 64bit, instead of Rootkit 2009 32bit.

64bit is "just" a way to address more memory, and to process larger batches of numbers (more or less). That doesn't make it inherently safer.

Yes, I'm paranoid. But am I paranoid enough?

[Draco18s]

I don't feel left out.

Except that I have twice the processing power I'm even capable of using.

And the fact that I can't run anti-virus (Norton has this thing where it won't install because "I need a 64 bit version" or some stupid thing like that--honestly, just install anyway and scan what you can scan; I doubt people are writing 64 bit viruses anyway).

Sadly, 64 bit only protects you from rootkits, not viruses.

Gasp!  Norton would be able to scan everything! :O

Stupid Norton <..<

But yes, I have a free tool already, I was just bitching about Norton.  The reason I said "64 bit viruses" is that a) no one would write a virus that would require 64 bit architecture, and b) a 32 bit virus would work just fine.

[Volatar]

Sadly, 64 bit only protects you from rootkits, not viruses.

News to me. You just need Rootkit 2009 64bit, instead of Rootkit 2009 32bit.

x64 is rootkit-safe in the same way Macs and Linux PC's are viris safe: No one has them, why code to attack them?

[CynicalRyan]

x64 is rootkit-safe in the same way Macs and Linux PC's are viris safe: No one has them, why code to attack them?

IOW: Not at all. Not being attacked is vastly different from being secure.

[Draco18s]

x64 is rootkit-safe in the same way Macs and Linux PC's are viris safe: No one has them, why code to attack them?

IOW: Not at all. Not being attacked is vastly different from being secure.

Secure and safe aren't the same thing.  Safe from being attacked is quite different than Safe from attack penetration.  A lonely mountain cabin is safe from attack, but not against attack.

[Volatar]

Your missing my point.

Yes, they are totally vulnerable.

Yet no one bothers right now.

*sigh*

We are not arguing over the same point here. We both are right.

[macdonellba]

x64 is rootkit-safe in the same way Macs and Linux PC's are viris safe: No one has them, why code to attack them?

Alright, I'm getting tired of this piece of constantly-repeated misinformation. On the server front (which is both much more exposed, and more more valuable to compromise), 64-bit architectures and *nix operating systems are prevalent. They are not 'totally vulnerable', and plenty of people bother. That is all for today.

[Draco18s]

Your missing my point.

No, I'm not actually.  A man alone on an island doesn't fear being stabbed because he is alone.  A man wearing lots of armor fears being stabbed, but is unworried about being wounded when it happens.
It's all in the definition of "safe."  You'd say that the man on the island isn't safe from being stabbed, which is correct, if stabbed he'd be done for.  However, there's no one to do the stabbing.
It's that difference between failing and never trying.

Alright, I'm getting tired of this piece of constantly-repeated misinformation. On the server front (which is both much more exposed, and more more valuable to compromise), 64-bit architectures and *nix operating systems are prevalent. They are not 'totally vulnerable', and plenty of people bother. That is all for today.

A good point, though I think that it depends on what your virus is to be doing.  If you want to fuck over the home user you don't bother with *nix (etc) as very few home users use *nix (and those that do can remove your virus in less time than it took you to get it to them).

[jaked122]

ints are always signed unless preceded by the unsigned designator.
and therefore I see no point in this.

[Tilla]

Sadly, 64 bit only protects you from rootkits, not viruses.

News to me. You just need Rootkit 2009 64bit, instead of Rootkit 2009 32bit.

x64 is rootkit-safe in the same way Macs and Linux PC's are viris safe: No one has them, why code to attack them?

I uhm...I don't think your tech knowledge is up to date. No one has really made mass-market 32-bit CPUs in like 3-4 years

[jaked122]

but for some reason the mass of OS out there is for 32bit, 64bit is completely compatable with 32bit, although native 64bit apps will always run faster

[Draco18s]

64bit is completely compatable with 32bit, although native 64bit apps will always run faster

Not...quite.

Registers in the CPU are divided in half, thus:

[16bits [ [8bits][8bits] ] ] = total 32bits

Each chunk can be referenced individually.
AH is that first 8bit section.  AL is the other.  AX is both AH and AL.  EAX is all 32 bits (of a 32 bit register).  The entire 64 bit register likely has a new identifier, which I don't know.  I'll call it "EEA." (Then you have the B register, EBX, BX, BH, and BL, along with the C and D registers too).

However, I do know that 64 bit windows cannot run a 32 bit application that still has 16bit code in it (from way way back when registers were only 16bits), so I assume that the registers of a 64 bit machine have lost AH and AL, and all that's left is AX, EAX, and "EEA."

Something like this:

[32bits [ [16bits][16bits] ] ] = total 64bits