boinc_5.10.12_windows_intelx86.exe
boinc_5.10.12_windows_x86_64.exe

I tried installing those two version on my vista 64bit and on my XP 32bit machines (two different computers not duel boot).

In both cases I was installing it as a service. And in both cases trying to run the boinc manager results in an error "This application has failed to start because the application configuration is incorrect. Reinstalling the application may fix the problem".

However, the boinc service IS running and IS processing work. using the previously attached projects. It also continues to successfully communicate with BAM

---

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman!

boinc_5.10.12_windows_intelx86.exe
boinc_5.10.12_windows_x86_64.exe

I tried installing those two version on my vista 64bit and on my XP 32bit machines (two different computers not duel boot).

In both cases I was installing it as a service. And in both cases trying to run the boinc manager results in an error "This application has failed to start because the application configuration is incorrect. Reinstalling the application may fix the problem".

However, the boinc service IS running and IS processing work. using the previously attached projects. It also continues to successfully communicate with BAM

Known problem with installer on some system. V5.10.13 now on the master DL page (not the public DL page yet) worked for me. Hopefully the disappearing desktop problem is also resolved.

---

Boinc V 7.4.36
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB NVidia 470

whoa! you mean BOINC is the culprit for the disappearing desktop problem? and here I was blaming MS!

---

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman!

Yes, so try http://boinc.berkeley.edu/dl/boinc_5.10.13_windows_intelx86.exe
and/or
http://boinc.berkeley.edu/dl/boinc_5.10.13_windows_x86_64.exe

---

well... i deployed those two on my machines and they work... I have yet to get a disappearing desktop and the manager worked. Hopefully thats the end of boinc's troubles...

I downgraded to 5.10.8 while waiting for this problem to go away... Glad to see it fixed.

---

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman!

whoa! you mean BOINC is the culprit for the disappearing desktop problem? and here I was blaming MS!

That's a fair guess, normally it is Microsoft that screw up! Who wrote the language the BOINC Manager is written in?

---

Join the #1 Aussie Alliance on all BOINC projects.
Mike Mitchell.

Who wrote the language the BOINC Manager is written in?

Technically, it was Bjarne Stroustrup. It's bog standard C++ that it's written in and only debugged and compiled with Visual C++ ;-)

---

G'day Ageless,
Yeah, I thought about that about 12 hours after I posted! What I should have said is, "who could write an Operating System (any version of Windows) that would allow an application to bring itself down? Only Microsoft!"

But then I remembered Primos, man that really sucked. Then I struggled to recall any others. :)

Pity Bill and his mates didn't steal stability and robustness from DEC's VAX/VMS PDP 11 (or 8?) they ripped off most the DOS commands from.

I miss VMS sooooo much! :-(

---

Join the #1 Aussie Alliance on all BOINC projects.
Mike Mitchell.

G'day Ageless,
Yeah, I thought about that about 12 hours after I posted! What I should have said is, "who could write an Operating System (any version of Windows) that would allow an application to bring itself down? Only Microsoft!"

But then I remembered Primos, man that really sucked. Then I struggled to recall any others. :)

Pity Bill and his mates didn't steal stability and robustness from DEC's VAX/VMS PDP 11 (or 8?) they ripped off most the DOS commands from.

I miss VMS sooooo much! :-(

I am actually impressed at how well MS handles crappy applications... Windows is just the most popular, so any half assed attempt at writing crappy software always ends up on it.

But often times it is a bug in windows thats to blame...
Here though, it is clearly a boinc bug. You can't blame MS for EVERYTHING.

---

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman!

I am actually impressed at how well MS handles crappy applications... Windows is just the most popular, so any half assed attempt at writing crappy software always ends up on it.

But often times it is a bug in windows thats to blame...
Here though, it is clearly a boinc bug. You can't blame MS for EVERYTHING.

How can a bug in BOINC affect an Operating System (OS) so badly it falls over?

While I understand the answer to my own question in many cases, such as a program incorrectly using memory set aside for the OS, the OS should protect itself from "illegal" calls from applications. I would expect that as fairly basic error or exception handling.

The OS (any OS) should force the application to fall over, not fall over itself. MS Windows seems to suffer from panic attacks. ;-)

---

Join the #1 Aussie Alliance on all BOINC projects.
Mike Mitchell.

I am actually impressed at how well MS handles crappy applications... Windows is just the most popular, so any half assed attempt at writing crappy software always ends up on it.

But often times it is a bug in windows thats to blame...
Here though, it is clearly a boinc bug. You can't blame MS for EVERYTHING.

How can a bug in BOINC affect an Operating System (OS) so badly it falls over?

While I understand the answer to my own question in many cases, such as a program incorrectly using memory set aside for the OS, the OS should protect itself from "illegal" calls from applications. I would expect that as fairly basic error or exception handling.

The OS (any OS) should force the application to fall over, not fall over itself. MS Windows seems to suffer from panic attacks. ;-)

Not apologizing for Mr. Gates, but third parties have to be able to make calls for the displays and other active processes or Microsoft would be the sole supplier of software on its OS. I haven't done programming for many years, but as I understand it, in this case Boinc improperly implemented a call to kill the child processes. So, what happened, is that all running programs including explorer.exe which handles the displayed screen where exited.

The OS never actually crashed, it just wasn't running anything. Restarting explorer.exe from the Task Manager brought the desktop interface back and other programs could be restarted. In this case Windows showed itself to be rather robust.

---

Boinc V 7.4.36
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB NVidia 470

.. as I understand it, in this case Boinc improperly implemented a call to kill the child processes. So, what happened, is that all running programs including explorer.exe which handles the displayed screen where exited.

That's what I'd call a very serious bug, the OS should not accept an illegal call from an application. Not sure if by mentioning you were a programmer is indication of qualification. If so, I've also been a programmer. I'm a Senior Technical Business Analyst now and in the past did alpha, beta and benchmark testing of VAX OSes and boxes.

If an application bringing down OpenVMS wasn't reported as a major OS bug, jobs would have been axed.

Think back to when you were in Uni, if someone could have issued a call to shut-down the main box during an exam, it would have been done. The only box other than a DOS/Windows box, that I could "bring down" was a Micro VAX II but that was because I had too much systems access and new how to trigger the OS into letting all the running applications go. Even then the OS kept going. It just went a bit faster after all the other developers garbage had been kicked off. The admin was from a Unix background and thought computers did strange things like that as a matter of course. :-)

---

Join the #1 Aussie Alliance on all BOINC projects.
Mike Mitchell.

I once installed flash on linux... After recompiling the kernel, adjusting various files and system settings, and manually inserting every bit where it was supposed to go (50 minutes of effort) I was done.

There is security, and there is PRACTICALITY. Windows is NOT secure, it is NOT safe, it is NOT resilient to bad code by the programs it runs... and yet it WORKS.

I have seen several games who caused blue screens on windows XP, and even Vista. Some companies claimed that it is impossible for a game to cause that (and I must have defective hardware). Other companies actually released patches fixing those exact same "impossibilities" (ie, fix list includes "Fix: windows will blue screen occasionally while running the game").

With windows though, you just run an exe file. And hope it is not harmful.
Both crative AND ATI for example have atrocious driver teams... Both of those drivers have a ~1/20 chance of corrupting windows upon installation. Various anti virus programs may ALSO ruin your windows installation. (especially if you uninstall one and install a different one instead).

If you want stability run a highly limiting open source OS. Just don't expect any software for it.

What I am trying to get at is, the reason things work on windows is because it does NOT limit programs to only non harmful behavior, if it did the majority of programs would be IMPOSSIBLE to make. Besides, people would laud it as anti competitive practices (Can't program your own anti virus, firewall, defragmenter, etc. Only buy it from MS). As it stands, MS trys to let programs do whatever they want as long as it is not deemed intentionally malicious. (IE, a program may mishandle things freely, but they TRY to stop virus' without limiting regular software, not very effective, but it is something.

---

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman!

I would agree with everything you've written, except this bit:

If you want stability run a highly limiting open source OS. Just don't expect any software for it.

Mac's don't seem to have the problems Windows have, and Linux applications are written by all sorts. Good programming doesn't limit software to MS (I would have thought quite the opposite actually). Good programming should be the aim of all designers, testers and developers. Unfortunately somewhere of the last 15 to 20 years everyone seems to have stopped designing before coding. I think IBM worked it all out in th 1950's.

Then MS came along, viruses appeared, hackers were created, systems vulnerabilities started appearing and most of all, "users expectations dropped dramatically, which is MS's biggest success".

I wish that last quote were mine, but it was written by a Tech Jurno for the Herald/Sun.

Just looking around my room, I wonder how many Linux applications you are running. I have two router and a multifunction printer, they all run on Linux, how about you?

---

Join the #1 Aussie Alliance on all BOINC projects.
Mike Mitchell.

Sorry, but I can't agree. M$ didn't create hacking, it just popularized and concentrated it. There have always been hackers. All systems have vulnerabilities.

Before the home computers became a main stay, people were phreaking the telephone systems. In the 70's, I ran a bulletin board on a Commodore Pet that someone managed to hack. I hear that there's even a Mac virus out there.

I agree that the M$ OS is an open invitation to hackers but the main reason it is getting all the attention is one of numbers. Why bother with the others when M$ system are so easy to find and target. Should another OS ever gain the same popularity, hackers would turn their attention to it and find a way around whatever security measures are put in place.

---

Boinc V 7.4.36
Win7 i5 3.33G 4GB NVidia 470

I never got into phone phreaking, probably because the whole tone over wire thing never worked here. If we're going back that far, perhaps we should say "crackers" instead of "hackers"? ;-)

Getting into systems pre-MS was very difficult but not impossible. More recently I've seen an unattended modem on its own line hooked up to a SCO box with no root password that was networked to four mainframes. Some people are just born dumb and get worse! Root privilege on the SCO box gave high privilege to the whole system.

In that same environment, all PC's (about 10,000 globally) were seen as vulnerable and protected from each other (every node on the network was protected if it could be).

If it weren't for that SCO box, I would have said that business was uncrackable and IT security included terrorist contingencies pre 11 September 2001. It was also hardened against stupidity. :-) Chasing up audited idiots was one of my jobs (big brother). I also managed to bring a mainframe to a standstill for 90 minutes while it finished a job for me! ;-) I only used 200 virtual computers, I didn't see the problem. We got more complaints from France @ 3:00AM than Australia @ 3:00PM - the broadcast message was in English.

Cracking a good site is going to be hard. It wont use Windows or Unix. It may not even use TCP/IP. They will use intruder software (fun to watch), firewalls, gateway boxes just to present a different OS to crackers. Proper IT staff, with proper jobs including people who just monitor security. Getting into the system may not be impossible but it would be extremely difficult.

But when all is said and done internal security is more of a problem than someone cracking the system. The Central Army Records Office had a breach and they used 32 character user id's and 32 character passwords. One of their staff borrowed a workmates ID to print out a friends details. Best laid plans...

---

Join the #1 Aussie Alliance on all BOINC projects.
Mike Mitchell.

If an application bringing down OpenVMS wasn't reported as a major OS bug, jobs would have been axed. ... The admin was from a Unix background and thought computers did strange things like that as a matter of course. :-)

Since we are so off topic ... this brings back some old memories ...

A rather secure VMS cluster that was under utilized, while the Un*x folks needed more resources. So they ran Un*x as a privileged process on top of VMS. Kind of a neat feat : you could work in either the VMS environment or the Un*x environment on the same data, and even at the same time. If you were in the VMS environment then security was still pretty well locked down and normal VMS reliable. If you were in the Un*x environment then security and reliablity were normal for a Un*x environment. However, there were so many security holes BETWEEN the environments that one could mess with VMS processes and resources with impunity from the Un*x environment & vice versa Un*x resources from VMS environment.

Sure paid to be multi-lingual!! My work always finished before anybody elses got anywhere. And even my excessive play time, which they repeatedly tried to curtail and even eliminate, continued to cause single-lingual users to miss their deadlines and have both the VMS and Un*x folks share in experiencing that ... "thought computers did strange things like that as a matter of course. :-)"

Ahhh...good times! when work, play, and learning were all the same thing!!!

Lesson Learned: If you can't do what needs to be done, change the rules...but don't tell anybody!

Cracking a good site is going to be hard. It wont use Windows or Unix. It may not even use TCP/IP. They will use intruder software (fun to watch), firewalls, gateway boxes just to present a different OS to crackers. Proper IT staff, with proper jobs including people who just monitor security. Getting into the system may not be impossible but it would be extremely difficult.

I don't think even the DOA would be able to do something like that... this is the stuff of MOVIES.
No windows or unix? no TCP/IP? Custom OS'? Special custom intruder software? A staff of IT's constantly monitoring the system?

I mean come on, this is ludicrous.
I am certain it will be extremely secure, it also would not be practical. and by the way, I never saw the point of the whole "staff looking over the system".
I know several universities that do not have database (for student data, registrations, drops, etc) connection between 6pm and 8am because they require their IT department to be present while the database is running... (its ironic, you can only do those things online, during the hours you could do them in person)
How is that exactly extra security? Oh, I just noticed that we were cracked with my ITelepathy. Never mind that we are talking about billions of packets going through computers that runs billions of cycles per second, I can FEEL it. And I am gonna encrypt the genetic dimeticulous proactive firewall to stop it... OH NO, they are cracking the FIREWALL. I must sit here at the screen and type furiously to stop it, because I am THAT GOOD!

---

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman!

I don't think even the DOA would be able to do something like that... this is the stuff of MOVIES.
No windows or unix? no TCP/IP? Custom OS'? Special custom intruder software? A staff of IT's constantly monitoring the system?

I mean come on, this is ludicrous.
I am certain it will be extremely secure, it also would not be practical. and by the way, I never saw the point of the whole "staff looking over the system".

... [school stuff removed] ...

Oh, I just noticed that we were cracked with my ITelepathy. Never mind that we are talking about billions of packets going through computers that runs billions of cycles per second, I can FEEL it. And I am gonna encrypt the genetic dimeticulous proactive firewall to stop it... OH NO, they are cracking the FIREWALL. I must sit here at the screen and type furiously to stop it, because I am THAT GOOD!

What?! Have you not worked for a bank, a federal monetary organisation or an airline????? Intruder software has been running on production (and school) systems since the early 1980's that I know of and I made no mention of custom made OS'es. I just explained several real world environments I've worked in. E-mail Northwest Airlines and ask them a few questions about IT security, including what their WAN uses for a protocol (particularly the one they share with other airlines around the world). Try a one of your national banks or the central bank.

If you like, e-mail dsd.gov.au and ask for a copy of their brief summary of guidelines for Internet security for commercial suppliers.

What custom OS'es, that still has me stumped. You don't mean VMS do you? That has been around for years, nearly as many as me.

---

Join the #1 Aussie Alliance on all BOINC projects.
Mike Mitchell.

I don't think even the DOA would be able to do something like that... this is the stuff of MOVIES.
No windows or unix? no TCP/IP? Custom OS'? Special custom intruder software? A staff of IT's constantly monitoring the system?

I mean come on, this is ludicrous.
I am certain it will be extremely secure, it also would not be practical. and by the way, I never saw the point of the whole "staff looking over the system".

... [school stuff removed] ...

Oh, I just noticed that we were cracked with my ITelepathy. Never mind that we are talking about billions of packets going through computers that runs billions of cycles per second, I can FEEL it. And I am gonna encrypt the genetic dimeticulous proactive firewall to stop it... OH NO, they are cracking the FIREWALL. I must sit here at the screen and type furiously to stop it, because I am THAT GOOD!

What?! Have you not worked for a bank, a federal monetary organisation or an airline????? Intruder software has been running on production (and school) systems since the early 1980's that I know of and I made no mention of custom made OS'es. I just explained several real world environments I've worked in. E-mail Northwest Airlines and ask them a few questions about IT security, including what their WAN uses for a protocol (particularly the one they share with other airlines around the world). Try a one of your national banks or the central bank.

If you like, e-mail dsd.gov.au and ask for a copy of their brief summary of guidelines for Internet security for commercial suppliers.

What custom OS'es, that still has me stumped. You don't mean VMS do you? That has been around for years, nearly as many as me.

Of course they would have intruder software, just not the kind you were describing.

Cracking a good site is going to be hard. It wont use Windows or Unix. It may not even use TCP/IP. They will use intruder software (fun to watch), firewalls, gateway boxes just to present a different OS to crackers. Proper IT staff, with proper jobs including people who just monitor security. Getting into the system may not be impossible but it would be extremely difficult.

---

I do not have a superman complex; for I am God, not Superman!