Windows 7 SP1 RTM 7601.17514.101119-1850 leaked

Discussion in 'Windows 7' started by torko26, Jan 14, 2011.

  1. torko26

    torko26 MDL Senior Member

    May 28, 2009
    497
    1,095
    10
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  2. torko26

    torko26 MDL Senior Member

    May 28, 2009
    497
    1,095
    10
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  3. andy5174

    andy5174 MDL Novice

    Jul 31, 2010
    16
    0
    0
    #1843 andy5174, Feb 17, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2011
    @torko26:
    I am aware that the hash values provided by WZT are exactly the same as that of MSDN. However, what I want to know are the actual hash values of the iso file which can be checked by using Hash Tab. I am asking this because I downloaded an iso stated to match MSDN's hash value, whereas it doesn't according to Hash Tab. Thank you.

    p.s. This is the file I downloaded
    ( thepiratebay.org/torrent/6118670/MICROSOFT.WINDOWS.7.ULTIMATE.RTM.WITH.SP1.X64.RETAIL.ENGLISH.DVD#filelistContainer )
     
  4. copo

    copo MDL Senior Member

    Feb 27, 2010
    250
    553
    10
    Didn't know that there were patches available for SP1. Thanks :)

    Althought, that program only works for english ISOs. How can I make my own patch for non english versions (as soon as the hashes come out on MSDN)?
     
  5. regal

    regal MDL Member

    Aug 26, 2009
    153
    6
    10
    I wouldn't trust that if the Hash value doesn't match MSDN/WZT, why not just download the torrent from the russian site instead of tpb?
     
  6. andy5174

    andy5174 MDL Novice

    Jul 31, 2010
    16
    0
    0
    Me too. That's why I wonder if the hash values of the iso file provided here matches that of MSDN.
     
  7. dareckibmw

    dareckibmw MDL Expert

    Jun 16, 2009
    1,200
    1,360
    60
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  8. hclarkjr

    hclarkjr MDL Member

    Nov 18, 2007
    148
    44
    10
    why? they are indentical as proven by the hashes
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  9. sps

    sps MDL Member

    Feb 6, 2008
    126
    33
    10
    #1849 sps, Feb 17, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2011
    Is it possible to tamper with the hashes? I remember once I read that you can make a ISO looks like original by changing it with an HEX editor, not sure though....
     
  10. hclarkjr

    hclarkjr MDL Member

    Nov 18, 2007
    148
    44
    10
    so now your saying WZOR is tampering with hashes? show me one time where that has happened
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  11. sps

    sps MDL Member

    Feb 6, 2008
    126
    33
    10
    Don't act like a child, I'm just asking a question. If you don't know the answer there is no need to reply...
     
  12. Myrrh

    Myrrh MDL Expert

    Nov 26, 2008
    1,509
    629
    60
    #1852 Myrrh, Feb 17, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2011
    With there being three differently calculated hashes for each file, there is a ridiculously high confidence level that the files are in fact the same, been a while since I did any college maths work but I believe the term I am looking for to describe the chance of a tampered file is "statistically insignificant"

    What I am saying is that anyone who can figure out successfully how to make a malicious change to one of those files and still pass all three hashes, is working on much bigger things and doesn't have the time to waste on such a project.
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  13. hclarkjr

    hclarkjr MDL Member

    Nov 18, 2007
    148
    44
    10
    lets see what you are saying here. i posted that there is no need to post identical downloads for the same thing when the hashes are identical proving that the images are real. you then ask if it is possible to mess with hashes. logical conclusion i would think. as for me acting like a child, googoo :dribble::weeping:
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  14. sps

    sps MDL Member

    Feb 6, 2008
    126
    33
    10
    Thanks for the explanation

     
  15. iHacker

    iHacker MDL Novice

    Apr 23, 2010
    35
    1
    0
    wzor would have to have known the hashes when he leaked it weeks ago?
     
  16. Enigma256

    Enigma256 MDL Senior Member

    Jan 17, 2011
    357
    309
    10
    #1856 Enigma256, Feb 17, 2011
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2011
    First, HashCheck is better than HashTab. Second, if what you downloaded doesn't match, then you either downloaded from a bad torrent (haven't looked at your torrent to see if it's real or maybe someone's self-made thing) or you have a corrupted download. In the latter case, you should do a force recheck in uTorrent.

    Hashes are used in cryptography, and are designed to be collision-resistant (which makes it tamper-proof). With MD4 and ED2K (used by eMule, and is based on MD4), it's possible (due to a flaw in MD4's design). With MD5, it's impossible. With SHA-1, it's even more impossible.

    (MD5 does have a collision weakness, but it's not an arbitrary collision weakness.)
     
  17. Stannieman

    Stannieman MDL Guru

    Sep 4, 2009
    2,228
    1,817
    90
    Offtopic, but why is hashcheck better? Is it faster?
     
    Stop hovering to collapse... Click to collapse... Hover to expand... Click to expand...
  18. Enigma256

    Enigma256 MDL Senior Member

    Jan 17, 2011
    357
    309
    10
    Smaller disk/memory footprint and more and better features (esp. the ability to check and generate checksum catalog files, like .md5, .sfv, etc. and the ability to checksum more than one file from the file properties tab). Speed is the same since, even on an Atom machine, checksumming is disk-limited, not CPU-limited.
     
  19. ttmax

    ttmax MDL Member

    Oct 27, 2009
    168
    44
    10
    Impossible I see what that means .... but more impossible than impossible ... :eek:

    :) Joke ..