Unofficial Windows XP Service Pack 4...by Harkaz

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Unof...ce-Pack-4-Available-for-Download-456361.shtml

 

Ooohhh, no, no more SECURITY updates from Microsoft, Thank God now we are SAVED by having an UNAUTHORIZED service pack available for download on Crappedia... It's like downloading UNAUTHORIZED, UNOFFICIAL NOD32 database updates from a non-official ESET website.

Thanks anyway for the news.

 

I expect most people have installed all available updates and imaged their basic xp setup.

Still if its a well regarded source it should be safe

 

BULL!

Who is this person to declare anything? (Same could be said about me. ) Let alone something so inaccurate.

EDIT: Sorry about poking fun at harkaz's name, didn't realize that was from RyanVM. He's fine, I'd just never use any of those community packs with that other junk in them (and I'd recommend the same for anyone). There's no reason, and I don't get why anyone would waste time. Totally different story if actual work was needed to get patches (e.g. Server 2k3 fixes adapted/ported to XP), but that's certainly not the case.

Of course the point is that this Softpedia writer is a moron.

Fixed:

I'm already sick of these ignorant fools. They're exactly the same, and they'll never be stopped, period. Mark my words.

This absolute ~ Snipped as per TOS ~ is next: http://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?p=34084#p34084

 

... And who is this "Harkaz" exactly? The username sounds like something my cat would say if she could talk.

(Not that "Gullible Jones" is any more trustworthy sounding, but... yeah.)

Edit: re the POSReady updates, wouldn't it depend on Microsoft's priorities? The question in my mind is whether MS would bother fixing client-side vulnerabilities that would probably would never be exploited on embedded systems, but which might matter hugely on desktops.

 

I've just made my contacts at Microsoft aware of this. Those that run Windows XP would be ill advised to run any of this .

 

Are you referring to what the Pale Moon guy said, or just in general? (That's only part of his ignorance.)

Who says it's not used as a desktop? And why wouldn't it be? It surely is on many of the "embedded" installs.

It just happens to be licensed as... "that," otherwise a standard Windows XP (with a couple tiny differences, which obviously don't affect updates).

Not like there's much extra work anyway, when at least 95% of the fixes are exactly the same as other Windows versions anyway (all same old code reused=same bugs), so nothing more than a recompile. (Oh yeah, I'm still waiting for someone to show me an exploit that would affect Windows XP when updated to the same level as any later OS...)

 

LOL!

Maybe you should ask them why they lie instead?

 

NOPE: A Microsoft Spokesperson issued this statement:

I wouldn't have a problem if this whole thread was locked as it promotes registry hacking of Windows Operating systems.

 

I don't care who "issued" a "statement." (And that's their idiotic lies I was referring to.) I care about the truth and that's what users deserve.

I guess you haven't seen this? https://www.wilderssecurity.com/thre...ter-end-of-support.364219/page-2#post-2398472 (My post, not the thread itself.)

Absolute, disgusting, total, pure, LIES.

Funny that there won't be a problem with these updates on XP (that wouldn't also happen with Embedded if botched, etc.), yet they can't get their own official updates right! (e.g. this month) Hilarious after that "statement."

EDIT: I believe there are MANY more differences between XP Home and Pro than "normal" and Embedded? (Anyone...?) Did you ever see separate updates for Home and Pro? Would you ever? Case closed. (Yes, there were a couple that were for components only in Pro, I think, but that's irrelevant.)

P.S. Define "hacking?" Seriously. (I thought you were smarter than that...)

 

Rofl. Some people.

 

I tried this on a XP SP3 vm and although things start out and proceeded as expected, in the end it failed miserably. I even tried a second time with EMET mitigations disabled but that didn't help. Others may get better results. Definitely image your current setup before trying this SP.

 

The final two screenshots when things went south...

 

If anyone is interested, this is the original post & ongoing thread at RyanVM forum for the unofficial SP4 made by harkaz.

http://www.ryanvm.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10321&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

It's basically an enthusiast community there.

 

I tried it as an experiment on XP Pro SP3 and it worked perfectly. BTW, the fellow who made this spent a ton of time on it. You can see his progress over on the ryanvm forum. I think he should be applauded rather than ridiculed.

 

IMHO those that ridicule usually have no clue.

 

As with any major change to your system, you should make a backup or copy of your existing system before using it. This is a work in progress. Several of those involved were part of the unofficial upgrades for earlier versions of Windows. The early releases for those systems were a bit rough too. In the end, those efforts produced some fantastic results on systems that weren't nearly as popular. This is just the beginning and will get much better.

 

Someone wrote elsewhere that I found amusing -

 

I find it interesting that editing or modifying the registry in order to change the PCs behavior merits the term "hacking", a term that's also used to describe the unlawful entry into anothers PC or network. The use of that term demonstrates an agenda and the attitude behind it at M$. Whether they like it or not, the registry isn't Microsofts private property. Modifying it is not hacking or illegal.

 

Who defines when to make a new SP out of this? The patches will come until 2019 after all.

 

I believed some early data without being able to actually test the veracity of the claims myself. I think I even lacked a decent 2'nd/test rig to do so at the time and didn't wanna risk borking my only good one. Let's just say my opinion on this matter has changed over time.

 

If you have enough resources, you can try them out on a VM. If not, disk imaging is an option.

 

So odd how people who are so keen to stay on an older OS love to brag the second they get updates from someone who isn't MS.

Anyways, unless you get a patch in there that includes the last 10 years of security research, it's just a worse version of the bandaid approach.

 

I got nothing else to do other than the occasional software testing on my XP VM.

 

Who's bragging? I was simply correcting myself from a baseless comment I made earlier. And these updates have been there since XP's (supposed) EOL, people just didn't trust them right away and did their due diligence before applying them, as they should have.

As for the past 10 years... I'd say there's been more regression in terms of security & privacy than there has been progression in Windows OS's. And those improvements (if they even exist) don't come close to compensating for a gargantuan attack surface full of vulnerable services/processes that flat out cannot be closed without bricking the entire OS, because they're tied to essential functionality. It leaks and there's absolutely nothing you can do about it. And I'm sure that in those 10 years they've worked with 3 letter agencies to find crafty ways to hide backdoors into their OS's. And has there been a patch Tuesday to a post XP OS in the past year or so that hasn't F'ed things up?... and left people having to roll it back and wait for a new patch to fix the last one?

I don't have any of those problems. And there must not have been much headway made in the past 10 years if I can still use this just fine without being compromised, and it works better than what they're putting out now. Perhaps MS OS's are like cars... they don't make em like they used to?