There is no OEM-Sync or oemscan in the new project. I just downloaded it to check and all required files are included. Like Mr.X said, check your AV.
OK now there is some progress lol Read above and OEM-sync.exe and oemscan.ini are non-existent anymore... ok?
By the way, its the protection wrapper used on the compiled exe that sets off AV's, not its contents. It is safe. AV's now days see everything as a threat...end users must learn to use their AV's. And no, there is nothing I can do to make it friendly on all AV's. Virustotal results are posted on first page to let end users know it is safe if downloaded from MDL site. Some Mods and Admin know of its contents and they know it is safe.
Read this thread and you will find your answers. lol OEM-Sync didn't work on some machines. Plus searchengine left and I had to figure it all out. He abandoned the project and us.
At least I shared the source with some here so the project will always continue...unlike searchengine did. I wont leave this project and ppl here hanging and having to figure it all out from scratch. At least I thought of ppl here. @ Mr.X, Don't worry about it sir. I have came to the conclusion I cant please everyone. lol
I can verify this is the case because anti-virus scanners will go off for the vaguest of reasons. They will say o Idk what the hell this thing is I'm gonna call it malicious malware. Hell if we digitally signed this no anti-virus would be bitching over it. @ The Guardian: I have been doing some clever time management to get work done on the Project of mine. Does the executable include a silent install switch? (grins evilly) And is it architecture neutral? I've also been working on the lack of powershell in Vista / Server 2008. I think I have a solution for that which is to use cmd to identify if its Windows Vista or Server 2008. Then install using a arc check with the wusa extracted from the system32 directory in the same folder.
I know digital signature would solve it but even if open source project it still requires my info which I will not let out. I would also have to renew it every year. Just not worth it to me. I have read some info on how to make your own but that isn't a secure method either that I would trust. Malware is using this method and I don't want to go that route either. The exe is safe and only does some checks before unzipping....that is all it contains. Either ppl trust me or they don't but I will not use the fake signature method because it makes it more questionable. I would rather leave it as it is then resort to those questionable methods.
The key to end these questions and controversy about false positives is exactly like you've said: either people trust you or not, in other words take it as is or leave it.
I agree 100% with you Mr.X....this has been discussed long enough and everyone's answers are in this thread so no more need to keep bringing it up. I will not reply to these discussions no more for it has been covered more then once and the same answer still applies within this thread. End of discussion.
I need some clarification on something if you all dont mind. Ive followed this project for years and I have made my own disc for oem installs on clients computers for years. to make a long story short, I read on another post that this project includes daz loader in it. if this is correct wouldn't that defeat the whole purpose of the whole project to apply a genuine slic. Im not against the daz project but if it integrates with this project I could never use it again because on the business end i need to stay legal. Could someone help me with this question because i love this project and I hate to abandon it .. Thanks
Perhaps you read a post of mine or s1ave77, don't know. The fact is, this Multi-OEM project does not contain Windows Loader whatsoever. What you saw in the other thread is a custom made $oem$ folder which of course anyone can add Windows Loader or any other stuff. Again, this project as is, does not have anything else besides the already provided.
I have a few questions. First of all, what's the point in password protecting Install.7z? you're not making(and cannot legally make) money from this as far as I can tell, you're not allowing people to learn from what's being done, and to be entirely frank, it doesn't inspire a whole lot of trust. On top of that, why does every single computer I use disks made using this project say Windows is Activated after installing? This should only be activating Windows IF the MultiOEM detects an SLIC key in the BIOS. It should not be activating Windows using keys that do not belong on those computers. The previous thread version which is no longer maintained did this properly, and it was usable in a professional environment. This version is not, because it allows technicians to forget to activate Windows using the correct key. I'd like to see this go a little more legitimate. Windows should only activate if an SLIC key is detected or if the user has entered one. And there should be no closed-source files in the project.