Sysinternals Suite


Ad

Advertisements

J

Johnny

If only there were some way to know the answer to that question, say
by ... oh, I don't know ... maybe looking at the domain name in the
URL?
It's not obvious at all.

I found that the person that started the website worked for Microsoft in
1996, and may still work for them, but his website is not part of Microsoft.

Microsoft will refer people to his website for help, but calls the tools
on the site third party tools not supported by Microsoft.


To resolve this issue, contact Sysinternals to obtain an updated version
of Process Explorer. To do so, visit the following Sysinternals Web
site:http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/default.aspx
Microsoft provides third-party contact information to help you find
technical support. This contact information may change without notice.
Microsoft does not guarantee the accuracy of this third-party contact
information. The third-party products that are discussed in this article
are manufactured by companies that are independent of Microsoft.
Microsoft makes no warranty, implied or otherwise, regarding the
performance or reliability of these products.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/816683/en-us
 
Ad

Advertisements

N

Nil

It's not obvious at all.

I found that the person that started the website worked for
Microsoft in 1996, and may still work for them, but his website is
not part of Microsoft.
Yes, it is part of Microsoft. There is no "him" any more - the products
are now owned by Microsoft, and are available only on their web site.
Hence the "microsoft.com" part of the URL.
 
S

s|b

Yes, and the tools are invaluable.
I don't know the exact reason anymore, but I dropped Process Explorer a
while ago and replaced it with System Explorer. I think it was because
Process Explorer wasn't showing certain processes (after the project was
taken over by M$).
 
T

The Other Guy

It's not obvious at all.

I found that the person that started the website worked for Microsoft in
1996, and may still work for them, but his website is not part of Microsoft.
YES, it is!!!







To reply by email, lose the Ks...
 
C

charliec

Yes, and the tools are invaluable.
I looked at the site and there are so many things in there! What do
you use it for and what might be the most common uses? I have had MS
applications for many years, but have not seen this one?
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

If only there were some way to know the answer to that question, say
by ... oh, I don't know ... maybe looking at the domain name in the
URL?
Nah, too easy...
 
Ad

Advertisements

J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

[QUOTE="Paul said:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb842062
Is this a Microsoft website, or is it supported by Microsoft?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sysinternals

"On July 18, 2006, Microsoft Corporation
acquired the company and its assets.

Currently, the Sysinternals website is moved to
... a part of Microsoft TechNet."

And the URL you posted, tells you thatanyway.
Domain: microsoft.com

Paul[/QUOTE]

Someone who doesn't know already is right to be wary of assuming that a
domain name of xxx.somecompany.com is actually run by the same company
as www.somecompany.com or just somecompany.com .
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)[email protected]+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The difference between me and the rottweilers is that I served up my questions
in a polite voice. That does not change the nature of the question; it's still
a tough question. Today, as fewer and fewer people turn out to vote - and
society gets increasingly ruder - I wonder whether a return to politeness on
radio and television would be no bad thing. - (Sir) Jimmy Young, Radio Times,
20-26 April 2013
 
C

Char Jackson

[QUOTE="Paul said:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb842062
Is this a Microsoft website, or is it supported by Microsoft?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sysinternals

"On July 18, 2006, Microsoft Corporation
acquired the company and its assets.

Currently, the Sysinternals website is moved to
... a part of Microsoft TechNet."

And the URL you posted, tells you thatanyway.
Domain: microsoft.com

Paul
Someone who doesn't know already is right to be wary of assuming that a
domain name of xxx.somecompany.com is actually run by the same company
as www.somecompany.com or just somecompany.com .[/QUOTE]

How so? Can you provide an example?
 
N

Nil

I looked at the site and there are so many things in there! What
do you use it for and what might be the most common uses? I have
had MS applications for many years, but have not seen this one?
I use Autoruns to disable/enable startup programs. I use Process
Explorer and Process Monitor to find out what programs and processes
are touching which files and registry keys. I use TCPView to see what
network activity is going on - it's kind of a GUI netstat. I use PSList
and PSKill to list and kill processes on other computers on my network.
 
G

Gene E. Bloch

How so? Can you provide an example?
He can't :)

That is, of course, true by definition. But you knew that.

But to be fair, J. P. Gilliver didn't actually *say* that it could be a
different company, but that someone who doesn't know should be wary -
*if* he meant someone who doesn't know URL syntax. This is a direct
consequence of Bloch's Lemma #1.

Bloch's Lemma #1: It's crazy not to be paranoid.
 
W

...winston

"Johnny" wrote in message
Is this a Microsoft website, or is it supported by Microsoft?
Sysinternals was a company started by Mark Russinovich.
Microsoft purchased the company a few years ago (~5 or 6 iirc)

Russinovich is now a fellow at MSFT
- a fellow for lack of a better definition in MSFT is one with global expertise who can accurately answer any question about the
under-the-hood workings of Windows, the impact it has on other supporting files and software. (i.e. this man is really smart)

The web site, software, upgrades and the rest of the ball of wax are all now provided by Russinovich, others personnel from the
original company and additional MSFT employees assigned to support the product development and release.

Seeing him speak is pretty incredible too. One of the few people I've ever seen that can start a multiple mult-media slide show,
talk to the audience, interact with a pc live to the presentation material on different screens without ever missing a beat or
needing to stop the presentation until pausing to ask for questions.
 
Ad

Advertisements

V

VanguardLH

Johnny said:
It's not obvious at all.
In all your research, you couldn't find that Microsoft *purchased*
Sysinternals? After Microsoft's purchase, SysInternals changed to
Windows SysInternals. For some history, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sysinternals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winternals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Russinovich

Russ was best known for his Windows internals (WinInternals)
expertise. His software was a side effect and benefit to tech users.
He was probably the number one reference from his books on how Windows
works. He was a great source of NON-MICROSOFT information on the
internal workings of Windows. Russ was not a Microsoft employee until
he joined Microsoft when he sold his WinInternal company's assets to
Microsoft back in 2006.

You've never heard of developers, even a group of them, toying with
their own code and then choosing to release it for public access but
it's not a sanctioned project by Microsoft hence it isn't supported by
Microsoft? Ever heard of Powertoys for XP?
 
V

VanguardLH

J. P. Gilliver (John) said:
Someone who doesn't know already is right to be wary of assuming that a
domain name of xxx.somecompany.com is actually run by the same company
as www.somecompany.com or just somecompany.com .
Then that someone could lookup the domain registrant, like:

http://www.whois.com/whois/sysinternals.com

Or, as the OP did, ask as to who is its owner if they don't know how
to lookup domain registrations. It really would not have taken much
Googling to discover the history of SysInternals.
 
J

Joe Morris

That is, of course, true by definition. But you knew that.
But to be fair, J. P. Gilliver didn't actually *say* that it could be a
different company, but that someone who doesn't know should be wary -
*if* he meant someone who doesn't know URL syntax. This is a direct
consequence of Bloch's Lemma #1.
Bloch's Lemma #1: It's crazy not to be paranoid.
....or the more traditional version: "Just because you're paranoid doesn't
mean they're not out to get you."

Back to Sysinternals: arguably, Microsoft purchased Winternals in order to
get Russinovich to work for MS.

I suspect (without any proof) that Mark put into his contract with Microsoft
that the Sysinternals tools would continue to be both distributed and
updated. Many people (yours truly included) were worried that MS would kill
off the Sysinternals tools, but thankfully that's not happened. (And it's
worth noting that Mark has had a large hand in the "Windows Internals" books
from MS Press).

Having said that, the Sysinternals tools aren't necessarily the best choice
for every user in every situation. Jason Fossen gave a 2-hour presentation
on the "Process Hacker" open-source tool last Wednesday at Sansfire; it's
similar to Process Explorer but with a few additional bells and whistles.
You can download the handout from Jason's web page at SANS:

http://www.sans.org/windows-security/2012/05/31/process-hacker

This page also has a link to the SourceForge distribution point.

Incidentally, Fossen teaches a 6-day class on Windows security. It's
expensive (that's true of all the SANS classes) but is an excellent training
tool (also true of the SANS classes). It's also exhausting; I finished the
class this afternoon.

Joe
 
Ad

Advertisements

G

Gene E. Bloch

...or the more traditional version: "Just because you're paranoid doesn't
mean they're not out to get you."
The reasons I made my own version are that:

(a) I find the standard one ugly

(b) If you parse the standard one carefully, it doesn't make sense. Why
would you have to refute that "they" are not (or, equally, are) out to
get someone because he or she is paranoid? There's simply no causal
relationship there.

Of course I know what it is intended to mean - I just object to the fact
that the words don't mean that.

If you said that "your paranoia has no bearing on whether someone is out
to get you", I'd accept that. But then, why would anyone say that? :)
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top