musjleman

6 ms·

1.
by musjleman 11mo ago
Why is this AI slop here? The "author" deleted his twitter account and added the disclaimer at the top of this post that it's all written by AI and he's not an actual "programmer or reverse engineer". The fact
2.
by musjleman 11mo ago
An interpreter for a machine language is usually just called an emulator.
3.
by musjleman 1y ago
I'm pretty sure it's just a small mistake in the article on the exact syscall used to query the token information. Checked a kernel from November 2024 vs a current one and from I can tell, this used to be the actual mechanism the
4.
by musjleman 1y ago
SRW lock uses the WaitOnAddress primitives nowadays, not keyed events.
5.
by musjleman 1y ago
Yes and no. The GTA SA bug was reading of an uninitialized variable. The value it contained was correct simply by chance as it was placed there by the previous invocation of the function and never overwritten by something else intermittentl
6.
by musjleman 1y ago
> The anti-tamper codes, if any tampering is detected will crash on undefined/unallocated regions. That's basically the whole point of any anti-tamper product. I just think you picked a terrible example of a feature that could
7.
by musjleman 1y ago
> As Windows matures, behaviour can change, breaking certain stuff. How do you expect the aforementioned tech to break the games it's on? If anything it "breaking" will just make the anti-tamper feature ineffective.
8.
by musjleman 1y ago
> If people have enabled that setting, or left that default on, then that's their problem; it's not Windows Defender's fault. There is no such setting for Defender. The file scanning is either on or defender is completely
9.
by musjleman 1y ago
> Let’s cut the bullshit, Defender is basically unchanged as a concept since Windows Vista or maybe even Windows XP. It runs completely fine on 15 year old hardware. Exactly. It's the same legacy scan every fucking thing you open
10.
by musjleman 1y ago
By "actual code" I meant the assembly that the application logic compiles down to, not the entire executable. But as far as the entire package goes, compiling it using clang with some flags I can get down to 19.5k without any effo
11.
by musjleman 1y ago
> those global variables... What about them? In a 500 loc app there is no practical difference and there's only ~20 of them with clear purpose. > Use std::string <...> or std::list <...> remove all the malloc, etc &gt
12.
by musjleman 1y ago
The actual code in the repo definitely compiles to less than 10k. The rest is bloat from linking CRT statically.
13.
by musjleman 1y ago
> Are they able to load a .so/dylib file during runtime and just call a method on it as long as they know the name of the method? Yes, usually that's the entire point of an .so/.dylib/.dll - to load it and call it&#x2
14.
by musjleman 1y ago
Showing a 5000$ bounty example of "enumerating all apps" sounds a bit disingenuous when this is more of a "check if this exact app by bundle name was installed not through store. I also don't think that this deserves to
15.
by musjleman 2y ago
> Also, it would be silly to bottleneck your protocol implementation benchmark on encryption that would be shared amongst implementations because that does not highlight your overhead advantages It would be great if benchmarks with no en
16.
by musjleman 2y ago
> what is presumably a single core I would guess that it's not a single core benchmark and that's the speed of the overall multi-threaded system. > Is that considered fast? You can squeeze out around 5GB/s/core wit
17.
by musjleman 2y ago
You're missing the fact that there is basically no bug here. All this does is: * Store data in a database. * Kill AV software provided you have admin privileges. The latter might be remediated by MS down the line, but they don't g
18.
by musjleman 2y ago
Because this has no actual value for anyone and MS would (did?) ignore him.
19.
by musjleman 2y ago
There is nothing inherently wrong with throwing an exception from an APC. Windows supports it and will unwind the stack correctly. If you wrote all the code absolutely nothing will go wrong. The issue is more about the actual code that call
20.
by musjleman 2y ago
> WDYM? The root cause is "you passed ownership to stack-based memory to the kernel and didn't ensure it's valid when it called you back", why would "consent of lower frames" matter here? There is no "c
21.
by musjleman 2y ago
> The problem boils down to usage of stack memory after the memory is given to somebody else. While this isn't incorrect in this case the problem seems to be caused by stack unwinding without the consent of lower frames rather than
22.
by musjleman 2y ago
> You can do DMA cheating if that’s a non-negotiable for you but it is far more expensive. Cheap DMA cards go for couple hundred dollars which isn't all that much. Although unlike what most people tend to believe, the DMA cards do e
23.
by musjleman 2y ago
> That seems like something that would be solvable with location-style differential privacy. Report a number of plausible locations to the client small enough that it can efficiently anticipate them all, but large enough to prevent being
24.
by musjleman 2y ago
> I said it because I think other kernel level anticheat don't do it. It is done by FACEIT and ESEA. > If I remember correctly I can just enable/disable the easy anticheat service, sane with the EA thing, I don't need t
25.
by musjleman 2y ago
> With the way that computer vision and AI continue to improve, I imagine that we will soon have completely external and undetectable cheating peripherals, simply capture the screen direct from the display output, and pass inputs via mim
26.
by musjleman 2y ago
If you dig a little more about what this is talking about, Microsoft did not actually make any kernel related changes. This was just Symantec and McAffee ranting about PatchGuard and MS did not remove it.
27.
by musjleman 2y ago
> Maybe because everyone else in "security" and DRM does it, so they figured this is how it's done and they should do it too? What DRM uses kernel drivers? And how do you plan to prevent malware from usermode?
28.
by musjleman 2y ago
it was the game itself that got exploited, not the anti-cheat that is a "rootkit".
29.
by musjleman 3y ago
> In x64 compilers The default is omission. If you have a Windows machine, in all likelihood almost no 64 bit code running on it has frame pointers. > OR is there some magic in the pdata section that makes it work even if you omit the
30.
by musjleman 3y ago
If you're talking about the blog, it's an open source Zola theme https://github.com/not-matthias/apollo (the original site https://secret.club which it's based on/inspired by is closed s

More ›