-
DNS Benchmark v2 is Finished and Available! Guest:
That's right. It took an entire year, but the result far more accurate and feature laden than we originally planned. The world now has a universal, multi-protocol, super-accurate, DNS resolver performance-measuring tool. This major second version is not free. But the deal is, purchase it once for $9.95 and you own it — and it's entire future — without ever being asked to pay anything more. For an overview list of features and more, please see The DNS Benchmark page at GRC. If you decide to make it your own, thanks in advance. It's a piece of work I'm proud to offer for sale. And if you should have any questions, many of the people who have been using and testing it throughout the past year often hang out here.
/Steve. -
Be sure to checkout “Tips & Tricks” Dear Guest Visitor → Once you register and log-in please checkout the “Tips & Tricks” page for some very handy tips!
/Steve. -
BootAble – FreeDOS boot testing freeware
To obtain direct, low-level access to a system's mass storage drives, SpinRite runs under a GRC-customized version of FreeDOS which has been modified to add compatibility with all file systems. In order to run SpinRite it must first be possible to boot FreeDOS.
GRC's “BootAble” freeware allows anyone to easily create BIOS-bootable media in order to workout and confirm the details of getting a machine to boot FreeDOS through a BIOS. Once the means of doing that has been determined, the media created by SpinRite can be booted and run in the same way.
The participants here, who have taken the time to share their knowledge and experience, their successes and some frustrations with booting their computers into FreeDOS, have created a valuable knowledgebase which will benefit everyone who follows.
You may click on the image to the right to obtain your own copy of BootAble. Then use the knowledge and experience documented here to boot your computer(s) into FreeDOS. And please do not hesitate to ask questions – nowhere else can better answers be found.
(You may permanently close this reminder with the 'X' in the upper right.)
It's NEW, so Microsoft has no 'history' to go by.
Give it time - other's Windows have already found it to be safe.
Your's just needs some new "oh, GRC" from Microsoft.
Patience ...
So, how's it working for ya?
Give it time - other's Windows have already found it to be safe.
Your's just needs some new "oh, GRC" from Microsoft.
Patience ...
So, how's it working for ya?
The issue is every version is personalized for the user, so Windows can't get a single "hash" that it can already know is good. The "we can't know who it's from" is some sort of a lie though, you can easily determine this yourself by right clicking on the exe and looking at the properties... it will be properly signed by GRC with a proper certificate that Windows seems to accept on many other machines. (Including my own.) A little looking around says it's a Windows 11 only feature, so that's the difference from my configuration, I'm still on Windows 10.
Google's AI answered this question as if I was Steve asking it... but it may be helpful to explain why there's an issue:
@Steve & @PHolder it looks like it is now working. Thanks for the quick reply. I had a feeling it would eventually start working. However, I am still concerned that Steve may have other happy customers get frustrated when they cannot use their brand new software because windows won't let them.
I am still trying out the new tool to see what it tells me. Thanks for the hard work!
I am still trying out the new tool to see what it tells me. Thanks for the hard work!
It sounded to me that this is has been more of a soft launch. Steve is holding off on sending out the main GRC email announcing it. The development testers and now the hardcore Twit and GRC fans are getting the Windows and third party security firms used the makeup of it. Even if every copy is unique, 99.9% of the code is static right? Each will hash differently but the heuristic tools will be mainly encounterting the same code time and time again.
Guys...
I encountered the first instance of this earlier today. This may turn out to be a nightmare, but it's unclear yet.
This new Windows 11 SAC is nasty. There's NO per-app override and while it CAN be turned off if it presents a real problem, believe it or not, once turned off it can not be turned back on without a full fresh re-install of Windows 11. Microsoft's thinking here is that they want to prevent ANYTHING malicious from ever getting onto a user's machine. So ONLY IF "SAC" is enabled from installation and NEVER disabled, are they able to claim that the system has never been unprotected.
I was very relieved to learn that @txz28 was able to later run the Benchmark, since it was obviously a false positive and perhaps some "patterns" or AI (as Microsoft of course claims) somewhere was fixed.
I encountered the first instance of this earlier today. This may turn out to be a nightmare, but it's unclear yet.
This new Windows 11 SAC is nasty. There's NO per-app override and while it CAN be turned off if it presents a real problem, believe it or not, once turned off it can not be turned back on without a full fresh re-install of Windows 11. Microsoft's thinking here is that they want to prevent ANYTHING malicious from ever getting onto a user's machine. So ONLY IF "SAC" is enabled from installation and NEVER disabled, are they able to claim that the system has never been unprotected.
I was very relieved to learn that @txz28 was able to later run the Benchmark, since it was obviously a false positive and perhaps some "patterns" or AI (as Microsoft of course claims) somewhere was fixed.
I just downloaded version 2.0.9477.3 and Smart App Control is blocking it from running. Interestingly, SAC is not blocking version 2.0.9470.3
I will report back here in a few days to let you know if
A) SAC decides to let version 2.0.9477.3 run for me, or
B) SAC still not letting version 2.0.9477.3 run for me
UPDATE: it is 3 hours later and Windows 11's Smart App Control *is* letting me run version 2.0.9477.3. I have rebooted once in the last 3 hours.
I will report back here in a few days to let you know if
A) SAC decides to let version 2.0.9477.3 run for me, or
B) SAC still not letting version 2.0.9477.3 run for me
UPDATE: it is 3 hours later and Windows 11's Smart App Control *is* letting me run version 2.0.9477.3. I have rebooted once in the last 3 hours.
Last edited:
Appreciate the update/follow-up. This is an annoyance... But it does appear that Win11's indecisive fickleness is at least short lived and that, so far, the problems have been few and far between. Thanks!
Just throwing out an idea.
Could asking the development newsgroup team to download the newest exe 24 hours or more before release to the public help? Win11 users obviously.
Request they:
Download but not run it (perphaps using Edge and not a 3rd party browser), instead scan the file with defender, maybe even a few times. Then start trying to run.
I am assuming Microsoft collect everything if they can, so all that extra telemetry will be fed into the antimalware mothership.
If anyone has access to the commercial version of Micosoft's antimalware software, maybe scan and whitelist it there too.
New is now bad. Domains & files!
It appears to me each new version needs to age a little first.
Could asking the development newsgroup team to download the newest exe 24 hours or more before release to the public help? Win11 users obviously.
Request they:
Download but not run it (perphaps using Edge and not a 3rd party browser), instead scan the file with defender, maybe even a few times. Then start trying to run.
I am assuming Microsoft collect everything if they can, so all that extra telemetry will be fed into the antimalware mothership.
If anyone has access to the commercial version of Micosoft's antimalware software, maybe scan and whitelist it there too.
New is now bad. Domains & files!
It appears to me each new version needs to age a little first.
It's an interesting idea, but since every file is unique to the user because of how their serial number is embedded, I doubt it would make any difference.
We have seen some "calming down" of VirusTotal's false-positives over time when the code stops changing. But so far I've been playing with fixing last bugs and adding a few last features. So the base code hasn't had much chance to settle down. I'm expecting to be done fussing with the post-release code before long.
Similar threads
