| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
FireFoxx80
E X O D U S
Imperial Republic Of the North
   |
Posted - 2008.06.17 11:59:00 -
[1]
...IT administration goofs...
 Originally by:
The developers used a file named "boot.ini" as the configuration file for the update -- and an unfortunate extra backslash in the installer for the update. As a result, the installer overwrote the boot.ini file in the root of the C: drive that Windows uses to start up the computer, and then deleted itself after the patch was applied. When some players rebooted, Windows reported an error. A few PCs needed a Windows CD to affect repairs.
What I do the rest of the time - Vote for a Jita bypass! |
Ethidium Bromide
ZEALOT WARRIORS AGAINST TERRORISTS
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 12:03:00 -
[2]
boot.ini 
Originally by: George Petsch
Nochricht: Dei schwarer StroinlSser trifftn Karli[Baatzis] und ruiniert erm so richtig de Dosn, 1343.7 schhodn, oida.
|
Declan Intaki
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:02:00 -
[3]
Mmmyeah....... I almost quit the game over this one. Glad I didn't now, but Jesus H Christ that was annoying 
|
Lilan Kahn
The Littlest Hobos
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:15:00 -
[4]
the real question is, why woud a os rely on a simepel text file ? 
"Bringing Content to you 1 round of ammo at a time" |
Kirra Liu
H O R I Z O N
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:18:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Lilan Kahn
the real question is, why woud a os rely on a simepel text file ?
This.
I mean c'mon, CCP screwed up royally when they messed with the boot.ini file, however micro****e should not really have xp vuneralble by just deleting a simple text file.
|
Tippia
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:18:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Lilan Kahn
the real question is, why woud a os rely on a simepel text file ?
Because they all do…
Have you looked in your /etc/ folder recently?
|
Tamia Clant
New Dawn Corp
New Eden Research
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:18:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Lilan Kahn
the real question is, why woud a os rely on a simepel text file ?
The same reason a game patch would delete it.
Looking for queue-free research slots? Click here!
|
Mazaron
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:18:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Lilan Kahn
the real question is, why woud a os rely on a simepel text file ?
Got anything better to recommend?
|
Tarminic
Black Flame Industries
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:19:00 -
[9]
I'm not sure that should be in the top 5 really...the boot.ini thing was pretty bad but it only affected somewhere around 5% of users. That being said, I can't think of a worse one off the top of my head...
----------------
Play EVE: Downtime Madness v0.81 (Updated 4/8) |
The Wounded
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:25:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Lilan Kahn
the real question is, why woud a os rely on a simepel text file ?
Because they all doà
Have you looked in your /etc/ folder recently?
Yeah cant be overwritten if I apply a patch as a user.
644 FTW
|
Tippia
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:28:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Tippia on 17/06/2008 13:29:19
Originally by: The Wounded
Yeah cant be overwritten if I apply a patch as a user.
644 FTW
Different matter – the OS can still be killed dead by messing with the right text file.
A better question would have been "why would an OS not protect the files it relies on?"
…oh and a user could still kill it – you just have to trick him into give the patcher the sudo password 
|
The Wounded
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:31:00 -
[12]
True but if you installed it as a user there should eb a bell ringin if it ask for root pass, besides you can even protect against that.
And yeah such files should be protected by the OS
|
Kobushi
OCForums
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:34:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Kobushi on 17/06/2008 13:35:00
it's making it appear bigger then it actually was, the boot.ini eater was only available for what 3-4 hours, and only affected xp users with a very not up to date OS... Hell it ate mine (first thing I see at boot up after the Bios is "Can not find Boot.ini, loading boot.ini" and My PC as never worked better then with a still missing boot.ini and I do believe MS made this file irrelevant the previous sept/oct. So unless you are running a bootlegged xp OS there was no reason not to have a 3 month old OS patch...
|
LetsDoThis
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:40:00 -
[14]
This is not a windows flaw.
There are many potential reasons to be able to delete or modify boot.ini
There is even good reason to not require a confirmation window to popup.
The fault is CCP's alone. Don't delete boot.ini unless you have a reason to.
|
Ethidium Bromide
ZEALOT WARRIORS AGAINST TERRORISTS
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:43:00 -
[15]
Originally by: LetsDoThis
delete boot.ini unless you have a reason to.
i think it's funny with your name
Originally by: George Petsch
Nochricht: Dei schwarer StroinlSser trifftn Karli[Baatzis] und ruiniert erm so richtig de Dosn, 1343.7 schhodn, oida.
|
Riho
Mercenary Forces
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:44:00 -
[16]
i had a laugh when it happened...
yes i got my boot.ini deleted also.. but i didnt care. as i reboot my PC 1 or 2 times a year :P
i just noticed all of the threads and did a quick check :)
----------------------------------
Fighting for Minmatar o7
Yes... this is my main.
Extreme Troll Slayer...
|
Larg Kellein
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 13:44:00 -
[17]
Woot, finally some professional recognition for CCP :p
|
Yuleth Gix
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 14:31:00 -
[18]
Originally by: LetsDoThis
....delete boot.ini...
Posting out of context ftw \o/
|
Taedrin
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 14:35:00 -
[19]
Originally by: The Wounded
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Lilan Kahn
the real question is, why woud a os rely on a simepel text file ?
Because they all doà
Have you looked in your /etc/ folder recently?
Yeah cant be overwritten if I apply a patch as a user.
644 FTW
This is why Linux is so much better than XP (don't know about Vista, as I haven't tried it yet). In Linux, you don't have to be root to do things! While in XP, in order to get anything done (like simply burning a CD), you have to be logged in as an Administrator! Sure, maybe with a metric crap ton of configuration, you can get a robust permissions system set up on Windows, but it shouldn't take that much effort to set up a secure OS.
|
Cyrus Doul
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 14:42:00 -
[20]
hehe. It would suck that my comp would be bricked for a bit if i got that, but wouldn't a computer that booted straight into eve be sweet? Think of the 3d web browser of greatness that would be. Just make sure to stay away from the stargates that have the special "Chris Hanson" stool shaped CONCORD battleships orbiting it like a hawk looking for prey.
|
Tippia
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 14:50:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Taedrin
Sure, maybe with a metric crap ton of configuration, you can get a robust permissions system set up on Windows, but it shouldn't take that much effort to set up a secure OS.
To make matters worse, windows developers have never been forced to work within a limited-permission sandbox and have been able to assume that they can do pretty much as they please when it comes to where things are saved. As a result, even if you do manage to set up a limited account (which, tbh, isn't that hard once you get your head around how it works in WinNT), most programs will simply explode when they suddenly run across the "unexpected" error of not being allowed certain operation.
<historical tangent>
This has come back to haunt MS now that Vista is out: the whining and complaints about UAE popping up and interrupting all the time aren't really due to UAE being poorly implemented, but rather to programmers not understanding – or at least lacking the experience – how to make their programs work in a permissions-limited environment.
In many ways, this is much the same as when we made the move from Win98 to Win2k, especially in regards to gaming: you could instantly spot which games were made by competent people since they would run better on 2k than on '98 (in spite of the whole "2k can't run games" rumor), whereas crap games would crash instantly (which is what gave rise to that same rumor).
</historical tangent>
|
Nikita Alterana
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 15:07:00 -
[22]
Combat: CCP's Trinity Deployment perfectly strikes your boot.ini wrecking and rendering it unusable.
__________________________________________________
|
Shionoya Risa
The Xenodus Initiative.
Overclockers Podpilot Services
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 15:15:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Nikita Alterana
Combat: CCP's Trinity Deployment perfectly strikes your boot.ini wrecking and rendering it unusable.
Sure, mine was unusable because it wasn't there... Didn't stop my PC from booting though. 
-----
|
Viqtoria
Groping Hand Social Club
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 15:21:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Taedrin
Originally by: The Wounded
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Lilan Kahn
the real question is, why woud a os rely on a simepel text file ?
Because they all doà
Have you looked in your /etc/ folder recently?
Yeah cant be overwritten if I apply a patch as a user.
644 FTW
This is why Linux is so much better than XP (don't know about Vista, as I haven't tried it yet). In Linux, you don't have to be root to do things! While in XP, in order to get anything done (like simply burning a CD), you have to be logged in as an Administrator! Sure, maybe with a metric crap ton of configuration, you can get a robust permissions system set up on Windows, but it shouldn't take that much effort to set up a secure OS.
people like you got me to install linux.
or at least try, it was having none of my raid setup.
So in order to even install my OS i had to do a CRAPTON of stuff that makes setting up permissions look like an msn conversation with an invalid.
just to install my OS, and and then came using the thing, trying to install mp3 decoders, usenet programs, etc, etc....
And none of my games worked!
3 different 'flavours' of linux i tried, Mandriva, Suse and Xandros.
btw in vista you just turn UAC off and nothing bothers you.
|
Pan Crastus
Anti-Metagaming League
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 15:32:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Taedrin
Originally by: The Wounded
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Lilan Kahn
the real question is, why woud a os rely on a simepel text file ?
Because they all doà
Have you looked in your /etc/ folder recently?
Yeah cant be overwritten if I apply a patch as a user.
644 FTW
This is why Linux is so much better than XP (don't know about Vista, as I haven't tried it yet). In Linux, you don't have to be root to do things! While in XP, in order to get anything done (like simply burning a CD), you have to be logged in as an Administrator! Sure, maybe with a metric crap ton of configuration, you can get a robust permissions system set up on Windows, but it shouldn't take that much effort to set up a secure OS.
*******s, you have to be root to install software globally (unless you have an oldschool setup with group "bin" etc.) and I'm pretty sure EVE for Linux requires root to install (if not run) as well.
How to PVP: 1. buy ISK with GTCs, 2. fit cloak, learn aggro mechanics, 3. buy second account for metagaming
|
Beltantis Torrence
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 15:38:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Tippia
Edited by: Tippia on 17/06/2008 13:29:19
Originally by: The Wounded
Yeah cant be overwritten if I apply a patch as a user.
644 FTW
Different matter û the OS can still be killed dead by messing with the right text file.
A better question would have been "why would an OS not protect the files it relies on?"
àoh and a user could still kill it û you just have to trick him into give the patcher the sudo password
Because if its locked how is an administrator going to edit it? You need admin privileges to install software and you also need admin privileges to edit that file. Every operating system has an equivalent to boot.ini (in Linux you might say grub.conf).
It was a pretty bad blunder on CCP's part.
|
Jacob Mei
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 15:45:00 -
[27]
You would think that in regards to the boot.ini file that micro$oft would have some sort of failsafe in place. Something like "Warning, you are about to delete a file critical to your computers start up, proceed?"
--------------------------------
To borrow a phrase:
Players who post are like stars, there are bright ones and those who are dim.
|
Jenny Spitfire
LoneStar Industries
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 15:58:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Lilan Kahn
the real question is, why woud a os rely on a simepel text file ?
This is usar eror and can happend anywere. Nobidy fault.
---------
Technica impendi Caldari generis. Pax Caldaria!
Go vote!
Put voice for silent majority.
LOVE PVP, HATE grief |
The TX
Earth Inc.
Zeta Tau Epsilon
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 16:15:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Viqtoria
i had to do a CRAPTON of stuff
You heard this word here first. In a few years when people are saying it's another /b/tard thing, we'll all know the truth, the word CRAPTON was invented by Viqtoria in this thread.
--------------------
[Signature]
[/Signature]
|
Slickdrac
JET FORCE
|
Posted - 2008.06.17 16:23:00 -
[30]
*didn't read other pages of article*
Boot.ini is nothing, witness the awesomeness that was Myth II
I suck at forums |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |