Posts by Tal Tamir

1) Message boards : BOINC client : Are you planning BOINC with GPU support? (Message 21028)
Posted 28 Oct 2008 by Tal Tamir
Post:
My take on this that the GPU's inherent math inaccuracy would tend to limit it to only a few projects.

I know that Dr. Anderson has approached Microsoft a couple of times about porting Boinc to the XBox. When he first approached them a year ago they were not interested. When last contacted in the last couple of months they said they would think about it.


That is just ignorant BS.
VIDEO GAMES might have some inaccuracies to improve performance. the Shader Units which perform said calculations for the video games are as "accurate" as a CPU. (near perfect accuracy unless over clocked irresponsibly).

Besides which, there are already GPU clients, just not a boinc one.

EDIT: oops, did not see the date there... got here from google and resurrected a 2 year old thread, sorry.
2) Message boards : BOINC client : Problem with cpu use on HyperThreading & multicore app (Message 16889)
Posted 26 Apr 2008 by Tal Tamir
Post:
at first glance this might seem unimportant due to HT "fake" dual cores being a thing of the past.
But nehalem is set to bring HT back, with 4 real cores + HT for 8 virtual, and 8 real cores + HT for 16 virtual.

This would make this issue quite problematic, and it places us in an interesting position where a bug can be identified and fixed with a future technology before it even arises.

Is there any way to determine HT existance automatically and then automatically divide the number of "cores" by 2 for that machine?
3) Message boards : BOINC Manager : 5.10.12 (both vista64bit and xp32bit) have defective manager on service install (Message 11724)
Posted 20 Jul 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
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.
4) Message boards : BOINC Manager : 5.10.12 (both vista64bit and xp32bit) have defective manager on service install (Message 11713)
Posted 19 Jul 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
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!
5) Message boards : BOINC Manager : 5.10.12 (both vista64bit and xp32bit) have defective manager on service install (Message 11629)
Posted 15 Jul 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
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.
6) Message boards : BOINC Manager : 5.10.12 (both vista64bit and xp32bit) have defective manager on service install (Message 11611)
Posted 14 Jul 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
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.
7) Message boards : BOINC Manager : 5.10.12 (both vista64bit and xp32bit) have defective manager on service install (Message 11537)
Posted 6 Jul 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
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.
8) Message boards : BOINC Manager : 5.10.12 (both vista64bit and xp32bit) have defective manager on service install (Message 11527)
Posted 5 Jul 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
whoa! you mean BOINC is the culprit for the disappearing desktop problem? and here I was blaming MS!
9) Message boards : BOINC Manager : 5.10.12 (both vista64bit and xp32bit) have defective manager on service install (Message 11523)
Posted 5 Jul 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
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
10) Message boards : BOINC client : Service install without a password (Message 11304)
Posted 26 Jun 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
I was under the impression that this board was a place where like minded people can come together and discuss boinc. This thread specifically is for people to discuss methods of installing boinc as a SERVICE for its various benefits without using a password. If you do not want to engage in such actions, simply don't read this thread. There is no reason to come in here and insult people for desiring a more productive system in a manner that is different then your own.



You don't have a password. That is the beginning and end of your problems.

I guessed that perhaps you had installed Vista as an upgrade because your account and password setup were so daft. If that was your choice, then, obviously, I'm wrong - and you will have to deal with the limitations, or set your computer up more securely.

My password setup is neither daft, nor accidental. I have originally set it up WITH a password, and have opted to remove it later on due to vista's own limitations on password protected accounts (specifically, network file sharing). Their so called security offered no tangeable improvements to security, while completely preventing me from using my computer as I want.

Sorry, we aren't going to sacrifice security for your convenience.


By boinc allowing me to run it as a service without a password; or by me finding a WORKAROUND to run it as a service without a password, YOU are in no way shape or form forced to suffer weakened security. You could still opt to use the password, which is not even needed by boinc to begin with, when you install it. And when v6 comes along as finally FIXES the installer so it correctly sets up the service without user intervention this would be a moot point.

You can learn about how UAC is supposed to work on TechNet. Don't judge the feature by how it behaves with your insecure setup. If you insist on blaming BOINC for your problems, then forgive me if we ignore you.


I read this, it tells me nothing new. It works the same with and without password. It never asks for a password, it merely asks you to press ok or cancel. And it never actually tells you WHAT it is that you ok or cancel. You merely get a an alphanumeric value and a picture and the name of the file. Which is useless for determining what exactly is being done and making and informed decision on weather you should enable it or not!
I am judging this feature and deeming it as useless based solely on it's inability to INFORM a user of what exactly it is that he allows or denys.
11) Message boards : BOINC client : Service install without a password (Message 11181)
Posted 24 Jun 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
Well, it appears I was wrong, you actually CAN use userpasswords2 on vista (i was typing it wrong)...

So there IS a configuration where it works:

1. Make a new user with a password called boinc.
2. set windows to autologin with your desired user.
3. install boinc in service mode using the boinc user.
12) Message boards : BOINC client : Service install without a password (Message 11153)
Posted 22 Jun 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:

By default, the installer will install as a service without requiring you to mess around with passwords or accounts. It will be entirely automated. If you want to do it manually, you will still need a password for the account you use (that's a Windows limitation - and a sensible one) but I will try to improve the error handling for that case.


How exactly is it a windows limitation to require a password during install with a PASSWORDLESS account? I have PLENTY of programs that install services without every requiring a password, and thats even when my account IS passworded.


UAC is the feature that allows Windows to require passwords for installs and so on, just like the way you describe Macs as working. It's called Admin approval mode. It's not going to be much use if you don't *have* an Admin password, though!


I am actually USING vista and that is NOT how it works. UAC does NOT request a password, EVER. It requires you to press OK every time you want to open a "sensitive" configuration item. For example, if you try to open the network settings page a popup comes up with a an alphanumeric number, the name "network settings" and the icon it uses... with the options of ok or cancel.. no info is given on what is actually gonna HAPPEN... completely stupid and a waste of time.

Ideally, you should set up an Administrator password, and a separate (user) account for day to day use (without a password). You can then hide the Admin account from the Welcome screen, and it should log in the user account automatically. UAC will also work correctly, asking for your Admin password when you want to perform Admin functions such as installing software.


Except a LOT of programs don't even WORK in user mode... not to mention I can't install things, I can't update things. I have to log in as an administrator 5 times an hour on a regular session... completely impractical.
Oh but wait... here is the most precious thing... I don't know of a single virus that will FAIL to install in user mode!

I think a clean Vista install is set up something like that, but upgrades are a bit more messy, hence your problems.


Why are you assuming I actually UPGRADED to vista? when I say upgrade i meant formatted the PARTITION containing XP64 and installed a clean install of vista... I NEVER do an upgrade installation.. not even for a service pack. If I Want a service pack I slipstream it into the CD and do a clean install WITH the service pack... clean installs are the ONLY way to go.
None of my "problems" occur because of anything I did. They occur because the boinc installer is being STUPID and DEMANDS that I input a password for a passwordless account when trying to install as a service, when every other program that installs services simply installs them... even on computers that ARE password protected, without asking for a password! (example, serv-u FTP, most drivers, etc... I install them perfectly fine on my password protected computers, and I even tried them with password protected vista!)
The "issues" discussed within are problems with circumventing the stpid boinc insaller issue and trying to force it to work as a service without a password.
13) Message boards : BOINC client : Service install without a password (Message 11066)
Posted 19 Jun 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
in xp if you navigate here:

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESOFTWAREMicrosoftWindows NTCurrentVersionWinlogonSpecialAccountsUserList]

and create a dword (value=0) with the same name as the username you want to hide, then it will be hidden.

I use this batch file to create a hidden user account called 'Sandbox':

net user Sandbox Password /add && net localgroup administrators Sandbox /add
echo Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00> c:hide.reg
echo [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINESOFTWAREMicrosoftWindows NTCurrentVersionWinlogonSpecialAccountsUserList]>> c:hide.reg
echo "Sandbox"=dword:00000000>> c:hide.reg
REGEDIT /S c:hide.REG
DEL /Q c:hide.REG

Also, in XP, to make a user automatically log-in in you use Run > 'control userpasswords2'. Don't know whether it's changed in Vista tho...

HTH
Danny


Unfortunately, userpasswords2 does not seem to work in vista. It was a very useful tool in XP.

I will try the hiding technique you mentioned, maybe I can use it to create a sandbox account in vista.

Didactylos:

Thanks for the info about the 6.0 installer. Does that mean that service installations without a password will work? or just that the installer is not gonna ask you anymore (ie, it will automatically choose between the 3 options)

I don't WANT to have a passwordless admin, but vista is forcing my hand, their "security" is such that they tie certain things in with the admin password, and the ONLY way to bypass them is to have a passwordless admin. Really stupid if you ask me. I always make fun of macs, but at least thats something apple got right, you put in your password to install or uninstall stuff, thats it. Security without bother.

As for UAC, its not a problem since I disable it, since its the most useless peice of crap MS came up with to date. I thought it is gonna be incredible... suddenly people would get warning messages like "Porno is trying to install "autodialer" on your computer, this is probably a virus, do you want to allow it"... Instead it just shows a picture of the application with a bunch of alphanumeric digits that say nothing to noone. Useless junk!
14) Message boards : BOINC client : Service install without a password (Message 10946)
Posted 16 Jun 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
Any ideas on how to make it a service (rather then just hidden) would also be appreciated.

Create a separate admin account (with a password) to do the installation from? Once BOINC has been installed as a service it shouldn’t care which account is logged in.


Awesome idea, I tried it and I could log it in as a different user without it ruining simple file sharing. (if your vista user is password protected you MUST log in as a valid user to get access to network files).

However, this requires me to choose which user to log in as when I start the computer. Interestingly enough, if I delete the other user and restart it acts as if I installed it in "shared install" mode.

So, thanks, this is the best idea so far. But is there a way to make vista automatically log in a user (who has no password) when there are two active users? If I could do that then this would be a perfect solution with absolutely no drawbacks.
15) Message boards : BOINC client : Service install without a password (Message 10834)
Posted 10 Jun 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
thanks for the suggestions, I will see about doing that in vista... Any ideas on how to make it a service (rather then just hidden) would also be appreciated.
Basically I dont want boincmgr.exe running all the time in the background, (yea I know, its only 2MB big, but still...)

I am getting the feeling that if I want that I will have to recompile it myself...

I really wish someone could come up with an answer as to WHY boinc refuses to allow passwordless service installs? Any developers on board who can answer that one?
16) Message boards : BOINC client : Service install without a password (Message 10811)
Posted 9 Jun 2007 by Tal Tamir
Post:
During the days of XP, I had many computers with a single administrator user that had no password. Now with vista I find having no password for the administrator a MUST, since its much harder to make it autologin into a passworded user, AND because simple file sharing has been done away with, and thus you must have a passwordless admin if you wish to allow people to access your shared files (outside of public) without a password.

This raises a problem for boinc. The server install option absolutely insists that a password cannot be null .

Ideally this would be fixed so that boinc would work with passwordless admin accounts, but until it is, is there some way I can force it to install with a null password? I would really like it as a service install so that the manager is not constantly running unnecessarily.




Copyright © 2024 University of California.
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.