IrfanView: sometimes very slow loading

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 18:54:44 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

You can most certainly move a file from one device to another in Win-10!
Select the files, and use the right mouse button. When you release
the mouse button, it allows either move or copy in addition to Create
shortcut.

Once again I was talking about W7. This time when copying files into
Dropbox. Suddenly, when selecting a file with left-click, dragging
didn't just copy a file into Dropbox: it moved it, leaving nothing in
the directory from which it had come.

dragging a file on the same drive has always been a move. it would be
very stupid for that to be a copy.

when dragging to a *different* drive, it's a copy.

Agreed. But until a few weeks ago dragging a file into Dropbox (on the
same drive as the original file) was a copy, not a move. I
particularly noticed that as it was contrary to expected conventional
behaviour. And then it just changed.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Once again I was talking about W7. This time when copying files into
Dropbox. Suddenly, when selecting a file with left-click, dragging
didn't just copy a file into Dropbox: it moved it, leaving nothing in
the directory from which it had come.

dragging a file on the same drive has always been a move. it would be
very stupid for that to be a copy.

when dragging to a *different* drive, it's a copy.

Agreed. But until a few weeks ago dragging a file into Dropbox (on the
same drive as the original file) was a copy, not a move.

no it wasn't.

i've never seen that on any version of windows.

I particularly noticed that as it was contrary to expected conventional
behaviour. And then it just changed.

you're misremembering or you did something to convert it to a copy.

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 18:54:46 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Their financial support comes from developing
products for the larger market.

the main reason is that creating compelling apps on xp is no longer
possible.

Evidently, you are not aware that "support" is a term used to mean
one's source of income as well as a term that means to supply
assistance. I tried to make it clear for you, but to no avail.

If you are an app developer, your support comes from the proceeds of
app development. If you are smart, you will expend your time and
effort in developing apps that work on a present and growing market
and not one in decline. The market for XP apps is in sharp decline.

that's a different definition of support than what the software
industry uses and i'm not surprised you get it wrong.

I had to laugh. This is a typical nospamism.

There are two ways of interpreting a word: you pick one and Tony picks
the other. By definition you are right and Tony is wrong.

Tony has a business background and what he had in mind when he wrote
that sentence was business support, or financial support. But you
assumed technical support. I knew from context what Tony meant. Nor am
I surprised that you from your own personal context drew the wrong
conclusion. I accept that the confusion might have been avoided if
Tony had written "If you are an app developer, your *financial*
support comes from the proceeds of app development.

Please don't go on arguing that you were right and Tony was wrong.
Tony knew what he mean. You didn't.

developers support operating systems and/or products. if they don't
write apps, the product fails. that's how it is.

palm webos was a decent product but very few developers supported it so
it failed.

microsoft windows phone is a nice alternative to ios/android but
developers are not supporting it. there are very few apps compared to
ios/android. microsoft has pretty much given up on it.

xp is old and developers no longer support it. nor does microsoft.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 18:54:46 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Tony Cooper
wrote:

Their financial support comes from developing
products for the larger market.

the main reason is that creating compelling apps on xp is no longer
possible.

Evidently, you are not aware that "support" is a term used to mean
one's source of income as well as a term that means to supply
assistance. I tried to make it clear for you, but to no avail.

If you are an app developer, your support comes from the proceeds of
app development. If you are smart, you will expend your time and
effort in developing apps that work on a present and growing market
and not one in decline. The market for XP apps is in sharp decline.

that's a different definition of support than what the software
industry uses and i'm not surprised you get it wrong.

I had to laugh. This is a typical nospamism.

There are two ways of interpreting a word: you pick one and Tony picks
the other. By definition you are right and Tony is wrong.

he usually picks the wrong definition, often deliberately so that he
can argue. it's what he does.

Tony has a business background and what he had in mind when he wrote
that sentence was business support, or financial support. But you
assumed technical support.

the developer has to support the platform and write the app before it
can have tech support.

I knew from context what Tony meant. Nor am
I surprised that you from your own personal context drew the wrong
conclusion. I accept that the confusion might have been avoided if
Tony had written "If you are an app developer, your *financial*
support comes from the proceeds of app development.
Please don't go on arguing that you were right and Tony was wrong.
Tony knew what he mean. You didn't.

there was no confusion. i know what tony meant. he meant that software
sales support the developer.

except that's not how the term 'support' used in the software or
hardware industry.

when someone says 'developer support' they mean that a developer is
actively developing for a given platform or product.

when someone says 'developers do not support xyz' they mean that few,
if any developers are writing for that platform and chances are that
platform will fade away.

that's how the term is used. his definition is wrong. end of story.

On Sun, 13 Sep 2015 19:50:29 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:

To be fair, you didn't exactly use the word "financial" until this response.

I know. I didn't think I needed to. I guess it's because most of my
other forum participation is in groups where words are viewed in a
broader sense. I thought the arrangement of the statement would be a
clue. My bad. I really thought the financial support usage would be
clear to everyone.


As I've just posted, it was clear to me. I can't blame nospam for
choosing a different meaning.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

To be fair, you didn't exactly use the word "financial" until this response.

I know. I didn't think I needed to. I guess it's because most of my
other forum participation is in groups where words are viewed in a
broader sense. I thought the arrangement of the statement would be a
clue. My bad. I really thought the financial support usage would be
clear to everyone.

As I've just posted, it was clear to me. I can't blame nospam for
choosing a different meaning.

i chose the meaning that the software industry uses, and the hardware
industry for that matter.

tony didn't choose that meaning because he's not a developer and
doesn't understand how the industry works. he's wrong.

plus his meaning doesn't even make sense since sales of xp do not
support developers.

nospam
Sun, 13 Sep 2015
19:58:48 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

In article
, Diesel
wrote:

I doubt very much that Dustin, Mayayana, Corliss (unless he
continues to blindly update his Firefox or Thunderbird) or I
will be "struck" with malware.

they will be pwned at some point if they foolishly ignore
security patches.

You really have no idea what you're talking about. ROFL. Sorry,
but, you don't.

sorry, but i do.

What are your credentials? I'll explain why I made the comment if
you'll answer my question honestly. What's more, I'll fork mine over
when you do so. It's really not a ****ing contest to me.

I... do understand malware beyond that of a normal user, fwiw.




--
Optimist: Someone who doesn't know all the facts yet.

nospam
Sun, 13 Sep 2015
19:58:47 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

In article
, Diesel
wrote:

you collect malware??

Sure. I've got thousands of samples myself.

what for?

Analysis.

so you can write your own?

ROFL. Would it matter to you if I could do that? How would that be
relevant to our discussion?


Okay. Please, specify the way(s) in which it's insecure.

because xp no longer has any security patches.

Xp itself, maybe not. It probably still depends on the severity.
Some POS terminals are still running XP. AND, it's still being
supported for several more years. Your favorite ATM machine might
actually be an XP driven 'dumb terminal'. It's likely still
possible to mitigate any potential harm from forthcoming
unpatched issues, though.

A properly hardened XP machine is possible and does infact exist.

atm machines don't visit random web sites and download apps or
other stuff so they are not exposed to typical malware threats.
citing that as an example of xp being secure is very disingenuous.

I wasn't citing an ATM machine as a specific example of a hardened XP
machine. I was actually thinking of one of my own, specifically when
I wrote the comment. In fact, it's the workstation I'm presently
using.

Unless *I* do something very stupid (possible...sure) it's highly
unlikely that security and/or system integrity is going to be
breached from remote. If anything, it would most likely need to be a
local attack. And, that's iffy too. I'm not a newbie concerning
Malware and exploits. I know the subjects well.

Worst case scenario, I do catch something new. No biggie. If I decide
I want it for analysis, I'll capture it live. If I decide I really
don't have the time, I have good images I can reload from. In all
honesty, they've never been required in the nearly 14 years this
machine has been in service. Data is important to me though, so,
multiple backups and images are created often. I've yet to lose
anything.

And, the only virus (an actual executable infector, not some lame
bull**** trojan that's hijacking a web browser) to have ever actually
caused an infection on this system was something that wasn't
available to others at the time.

And, it was my own fault too. It escaped the confinements I laid out
for it, like it was designed to do. I just forgot that section of
code was actually live and working in that specific sample. Other
test samples had those lines present in the binary, but disabled.
Evidently, the disabling line of code was removed at some point, so
those routines went live as a result.

Completely, my own fault though. The machine was compromised due to
something I did locally, not remotely.


however, atms are still vulnerable. here's one example:
https://securelist.com/blog/research...anipulating-at
m-mac hines-with-malware/
This new malware, detected by Kaspersky Lab as
Backdoor.MSIL.Tyupkin, affects ATMs from a major ATM
manufacturer*running Microsoft Windows 32-bit.

you must not have that one in your 'collection'.

Oh, you'd be surprised what my collection contains.

Did you read the finer details from the url?

Like these:

According to footage from security cameras at the location of the
infected ATMs, the attackers were able to manipulate the device and
install the malware via a bootable CD.

The attackers copied the following files into the ATM:
C:\Windows\system32\ulssm.exe
%ALLUSERSPROFILE%\Start Menu\Programs\Startup\AptraDebug.lnk

As you can see, they gained physical access to the machine AND, it
accepted an unknown executable from a stranger. That's due to an
improperly setup security configuration. One CAN easily lock a user
account down and restrict what the machine will let them do.

The systems weren't vulnerable to an outside attack ahead of time.
This malware didn't spread to them via a software exploit. It was
actually loaded physically, via cd. Again, ONLY because the box
wasn't told not to let users do that. That's on the IT dept.

You cannot get ANY machine in this house to load anything from an
external drive or optical drive without (a) having an authorized
account and (b) having proper file access rights under that account.
Unless it's one of my special logins, you don't have what you need.
You can't run anything that isn't known to these systems, or do
anything with ANY files on them without those credentials that ONLY
my accounts have.

You damn sure cannot drop files into start folders OR set registry
key entries for autostarts. You cannot drop ANY files into the
windows installation folder or sub folders, none whatsoever. You
cannot alter files in those folders. You can't even view all of them
in those folders without the right login.

You cannot alter root or it's contents in any fashion. No dropping a
fake explorer.exe that windows will happily run. Unless, like I said,
you have the right credentials.

The ATM machines *could* be setup in the same manner and deny users
the rights to do everything they did.

Btw, I DO have two samples (variants) of that family of malware. By
default on these machines here, I cannot do what they were able to do
unless I have the proper account login. OR, the required time at the
machine to reboot it from a special cd and override the passwords on
the right account.

If i've got several minutes to **** around, I can gain admin rights
with the cd i'm not disclosing the name of. If not, I have to risk
the account that's already in use has the rights I'll need. The ATMs
did. Mine do not. The cd is good for any flavor of NT based windows
btw. Your account password isn't the lockdown gate you might think it
to be. Although I can't get the password itself, I can get around it.

So long as I have physical or remote registry access to the machine.
Physical access is better for me. [g]

NTFS file system. You can lock it down.


--
Optimist: Someone who doesn't know all the facts yet.

"p-0''0-h the cat (UK) - The voice of the Sheeple"

Sun, 13 Sep 2015
23:51:10 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

[snip]

Under Vista + even if you logon with an account which has
administrative priviledges any applications you launch still run
in the context of a user unless you elevate. If you cannot see the
improvement then words fail me.

Normally that's what happens. Unless the program you clicked on or
were otherwise duped into running does it for you. As I said, the
security measures you mentioned that you think are some huge
improvement have already been defeated by ITW malware.

Hand holding isn't improving the malware situation. Only education
can do that.

All of those features you brag about have already been defeated,
though.

Well thanks for citing proof. It's an idiotic argument of course
because the bar was raised and remains raised and will now be even
higher providing the alledged vunerability has been patched.

Is your favorite search engine broken? Have you been living under a
rock? Are you playing stupid concerning MS failed security for a
particular reason? What bar has been raised? If you actually
understood code, you wouldn't make such assinine statements.

it's missing a load of encryption additions and improvements in
later versions of windies, the firewall is dated, and so on and
so on.

What's forcing me to use the built in firewall?

Nothing, why do you ask? Did the fact that we are discussing the
XP OS escape you?

It didn't escape me. It seems to be escaping you though. You keep
mentioning things that aren't the fault of the OS. XP doesn't force
anybody to run as Admin. If they choose to run as a limited user
account, it's almost as secure as your vista+ machines using the UAC
that only seems to get in the way, and, gets disabled by a great
many user. Kinda defeats the purpose if your 'security' is so
obnoxious that people outright kill it.

XP doesn't force you to use the built in firewall. 3rd party
software ones exist. Kerio 2.1.5 was a good example and can still be
found. Most people these days are behind a router of some sort, and,
I don't of know of many that don't have some kind of firewall too.

Most of your argument against XP concerning security risk has little
to nothing to do with the OS itself. There's no cure for user
stupidity.

It does *SOME* of the basic stuff. Woopee!! Basic stuff for a
personal firewall nowadays includes filtering outgoing by
application. Does it do that? No. Does it filter outgoing at all?
I can't remember. I don't think so.

It's still completely irrelevant to the discussion. You don't have
to use the firewall that comes with Windows XP. It's not forced on
you. It can be replaced. And, it's still doing the job of a basic
firewall. It doesn't allow unauthorized incoming connections.

You wouldn't just rely on the OS firewall would you?

Sure, I do that every time I connect to hotel WiFi. Do you take
your router with you?

I don't connect to open/public WiFis.

Those encryption additions have worked out great for ransomware,
I'm glad you brought it up. Money maker, right there. Several
PoCs have already made it wild abusing them, too.

It's pointless asking you for proof of that of course. I've asked
before and you never back it up with hard evidence.

You are trying to play stupid, then?

In this case, I'll use a search engine for you. This discussion just
went the way of the US power grid condition one for you. You *are*
talking straight out of your ass, again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransomware_%28malware%29

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CryptoLocker

Encryption is awesome. MS be praised for improving it significantly
in later editions of Windows. CryptoLocker was only too happy to
take advantage. And, it's just ONE example.

Here's more on the subject of OS built in crypto abuse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PGPCoder

http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/08/n...er-ransomware/

Talk **** more, It amuses me.


--
Optimist: Someone who doesn't know all the facts yet.

David Taylor
Sun, 13 Sep 2015 18:14:00 GMT in
alt.comp.freeware, wrote:

On 13/09/2015 18:56, Diesel wrote:
[]
Are you a technician by trade?

I am retired now, although it's semi-retired as I still update the
software I have provided for hundreds of users in the past, and
help out with a group of thousands of users, many of whom have
upgraded to Win-10.

I understand. If you don't mind my asking... How many years do you have
in the business as an active.. I'm thinking, bench? tech?




--
Optimist: Someone who doesn't know all the facts yet.