Moderators: g3nuin3, SpeedWing, WhiteHat, mezzo
L. Spiro wrote:You can avoid corruption of the addresses by increasing your buffer size in the search options.
Corruption only happens when it has to swap in and out from the disk drive, which is yet another streamlined routine which is complicated more by being optimized to load sequentially, yet still supports loading in any order.
L. Spiro
L. Spiro wrote:I did modify the searches just a little and they are now connected to what may be the problem that is causing other people’s computers to die.
Try this and tell me if you get any message boxes at the start and what the message(s) is/are.
http://www.memoryhacking.com/MemHack/MHS2.rar
L. Spiro
L. Spiro wrote:Try an Exact Value for any number except 0 and -1. Check that the range is correct.
L. Spiro wrote:Try an Unknown for any range. Check that the range is correct.
L. Spiro wrote:If these tests still show results outside of the specified range, I will shoot myself.
Xanatus wrote:L. Spiro, you could just add an option to allow only to list addresses that are in the search rang. So when you generate the list, you could just check the address range again to make sure the listed addresses are in the range.
I don't see where the problem is?
L. Spiro wrote:As I explained, there is nothing wrong with its ability to search the range you specify. If I ever had such a simple problem I would shoot myself.
As explained, it has to do with the compression and decompression of the addresses.
How about this (Data-Type Search only):
Try an Exact Value for any number except 0 and -1. Check that the range is correct.
Try an Unknown for any range. Check that the range is correct.
If these tests still show results outside of the specified range, I will shoot myself.
Return to Bugs/Problems/Suggestions
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests