Serious flaw discovered in Windows Vista's Explorer


Recommended Posts

For anyone who is interested, here are the reproduction steps:

  1. Click on Start, and then click on Documents.
  2. In the Search entry box, type "NOT Shortcut" (without the quotes).
  3. Click on the "Save Search" button and save the search query as "Search Test".

I've removed the rest of the post due to the un-necessary amount of spam that I have received in the past 24 hours.

Edited by iCeFuSiOn

Very close to being blogspam. This is a serious flaw? Worst case scenario is the explorer process crashes and restarts without even restarting the OS. It may have taken down XP, but Vista just restarts the process and it's fine. Should MS fix it...of course. Is it a major flaw that's going to have any real impact, no. MS can fix it easily with a patch. Nice try to fabricate an issue out of nothing though. In fact demonstrates how Vista is much more robust against these sort of glitches than XP ever was.

Uhh... so you're searching for something that is NOT a shortcut? ie: pretty much everything? What do you expect to happen? :laugh:

If you're trying to search for documents only and the explorer brings back a list of shortcuts as well, NOT Shortcut will hide them. What it ISN'T supposed to do is crash the shell. This was bugged for SP1 and was marked as "won't fix".

If you're trying to search for documents only and the explorer brings back a list of shortcuts as well, NOT Shortcut will hide them. What it ISN'T supposed to do is crash the shell. This was bugged for SP1 and was marked as "won't fix".

Right, but usually you have something like "<some doc title> NOT Shortcut" and that doesn't crash, in fact it works exactly as expected. But placing just "NOT Shortcut" without any other filter does crash it instantly. So, yea, it crashes if that is your intention, but really this isn't much of an issue. Although it should probably be fixed, it's really not a big deal. Either way, I'm sure a patch will be released eventually. Probably after SP1, though.

I won't call this a serious but probably an unfortunate bug. Vista has other issues that are more important that this. Such as slow copying speeds and folder view thingy.

If you're trying to search for documents only and the explorer brings back a list of shortcuts as well, NOT Shortcut will hide them. What it ISN'T supposed to do is crash the shell. This was bugged for SP1 and was marked as "won't fix".

can use kind:document ? or just remove appdata folder from your index locations...that is what I do.

:rofl:

And to think I actually expected to read about a serious flaw...

Good grief, even in XP bringing back a crashed explorer is as easy as bringing up the task manager and doing a File >> Run explorer.exe

Apparently Vista does that all for you. Hardly anything to bash Vista for.

Not to mention that nobody out there even searches for "NOT Shortcut" by itself (given by the fact that it took over a year to even find this flaw...)

-Spenser

Why are we the source?

heh. we say they are the sourc they say it's us. A nice vicious cycle of sourcing.

Anyway it doesn't seem overly serious but it definitely should be fixed. I doubt it will kill anyone but it's blemishes like this that day in day out tarnish Vista's image. It's not the most pressing issue by all means, but still should be looked at.

We can only curse at things like this because WinFS would have certainly avoided such problems.

*sigh*

:ike:

Go look up WinFS and come back and give us a report on it. WinFS is not what you think it is. ;)

Why are we the source?

He changed it. Here's the original link: http://www.windows-now.com/blogs/kmkenney/...plorer-bug.aspx

As I said... This post is total flame bait and some people have already bitten the hook. ;)

wow the thread title and original post really tries to make this sound like a big deal. unfortunately for them it really isn't i'm sure it will be fixed but i wonder how many times people actually search for NOT shortcut. and anyway explorer restarts quickly really not much of a problem. if this is a seriuos flaw i would like to see how the author would describe all the problems that device drivers are causing in vista.

At a time where everyone is anxiously awaiting the upcoming service pack for Windows Vista (and while others flock back to Windows XP in droves), yet another flaw in the Windows Vista operating system has been discovered that can bring the Windows shell ("Windows Explorer") to its knees within 20 seconds. Even worse, this issue occurs under every day usage of the operating system if you use the Search function regularly with boolean search operators.

  1. Click on Start, and then click on Documents.
  2. In the Search entry box, type "NOT Shortcut" (without the quotes).
  3. Click on the "Save Search" button and save the search query as "Search Test".

This has been confirmed as a flaw in Windows Vista (all editions) and Windows Vista 64-bit (all editions), and even worse, the issue still occurs on the latest release candidate for Service Pack 1, and has been marked as "will not be fixed". The bigger question is, will Microsoft step up to the plate and fix this issue or will they let it pass on by while they work heavily on Windows "7", ignoring the fact that Windows Vista still has flaws and inconsistancies that are seeing larger companies hold back deployment until 2009 or even skip Vista?

Source of instructions to reproduce issue: ActiveWin.com

So from this we can learn a few things.

1) Vista must be in better shape and more on track and stable than the anti-Vista zealots would like for people to believe if it has taken a year for something like this to be classified as a serious flaw. For people that can think for themselves, this is the best pro-Vista post in history...

2) The person that found this flaw is a bit scary to expect this to be a valid search, especially so important to save it as a Search Folder. But hey, everyone to their own thing, so I'm over the scary part.

3) The person that posted this thinks MS is heavily working on Windows 7. Well it is true MS's NT cycle always starts at the end of a product release, so we can assume they are working on Windows 7. However, it is time for the idiots that keep running around thinking MinWin is Windows 7 or any different than the 'tight' kernel that is already in Vista and all previous versions of NT to wake up and watch the presentation or talk to someone at Microsoft for an accurate source on the subject. Windows 7 is not very active yet, and its kernel technology is the same as Vista, and it is scary that after 15 years of NT, people don't yet realize that the NT kernel is in fact very tight and small when you remove the API interface layers. (NT is a light API interface hybrid kernel technology) - This is why MinWin was a basic recompile of Vista kernel with the external APIs turned off, PERIOD.

4) Let's hope the person that found this fatal flaw doesn't do a nested search in a search that is recursive. They will really be mad at Windows then... Which points out another good thing about this bug, instead of dragging the system to a grind in an endless loop, or even choking, Vista just restarts Explorer and goes on its way. PS It will only restart the 'Folder Window' and not fully restart Explorer if you have "Launch folder windows in a separate process" (PS Which is handy to turn on)

Now for the unknown:

There is already an easy fix for this, pick a different freaking syntax, Vista has the most diverse search engine in OS history, with the most extensive set of search options including natural language and strict syntax as the user chooses.

Here is the 'fix' or way to perform the search effortlessly without killing Explorer if you really want to do this search:

NOT (ext:lnk OR ext:url)

-This also excludes Internet shortcuts, and is more accurate as you don't get folders in the mix of results.

NOT ext:lnk

-This is if you only want to exclude plain shortcuts and not Internet shortcuts, and again works better as it doesn't mix folders in the results.

You could also do:

-(ext:lnk OR ext:url)

or

-ext:lnk

Get the idea here? There are numerous ways to get the same results that don't involve killing Explorer

Now with that MAJOR flaw out of the way, this would be a good time to remind people that the search features in Vista are pretty powerful in doing more than just searching for items.

Look up a tool called Start++ from brandontools.com - (it is handy) and from it you can get an idea of how powerful the searching system is and how it can be extended in basic shell and commandline usage even. (Most people don't realize you can get search results in a CMD prompt, or from within their applications.)

Also for people doing more than causal searches, take a minute and read some up on some of the syntax options Vista offers and see why it makes Leopard and even Google Desktop Search look like toys.

This is a good reference page to begin with for the basics of advanced searching in Vista:

http://search.msn.com/docs/toolbar.aspx?t=...earchSyntax.htm

So from this we can learn a few things.

1) Vista must be in better shape and more on track and stable than the anti-Vista zealots would like for people to believe if it has taken a year for something like this to be classified as a serious flaw. For people that can think for themselves, this is the best pro-Vista post in history...

2) The person that found this flaw is a bit scary to expect this to be a valid search, especially so important to save it as a Search Folder. But hey, everyone to their own thing, so I'm over the scary part.

3) The person that posted this thinks MS is heavily working on Windows 7. Well it is true MS's NT cycle always starts at the end of a product release, so we can assume they are working on Windows 7. However, it is time for the idiots that keep running around thinking MinWin is Windows 7 or any different than the 'tight' kernel that is already in Vista and all previous versions of NT to wake up and watch the presentation or talk to someone at Microsoft for an accurate source on the subject. Windows 7 is not very active yet, and its kernel technology is the same as Vista, and it is scary that after 15 years of NT, people don't yet realize that the NT kernel is in fact very tight and small when you remove the API interface layers. (NT is a light API interface hybrid kernel technology) - This is why MinWin was a basic recompile of Vista kernel with the external APIs turned off, PERIOD.

4) Let's hope the person that found this fatal flaw doesn't do a nested search in a search that is recursive. They will really be mad at Windows then... Which points out another good thing about this bug, instead of dragging the system to a grind in an endless loop, or even choking, Vista just restarts Explorer and goes on its way. PS It will only restart the 'Folder Window' and not fully restart Explorer if you have "Launch folder windows in a separate process" (PS Which is handy to turn on)

Now for the unknown:

There is already an easy fix for this, pick a different freaking syntax, Vista has the most diverse search engine in OS history, with the most extensive set of search options including natural language and strict syntax as the user chooses.

Here is the 'fix' or way to perform the search effortlessly without killing Explorer if you really want to do this search:

NOT (ext:lnk OR ext:url)

-This also excludes Internet shortcuts, and is more accurate as you don't get folders in the mix of results.

NOT ext:lnk

-This is if you only want to exclude plain shortcuts and not Internet shortcuts, and again works better as it doesn't mix folders in the results.

You could also do:

-(ext:lnk OR ext:url)

or

-ext:lnk

Get the idea here? There are numerous ways to get the same results that don't involve killing Explorer

Now with that MAJOR flaw out of the way, this would be a good time to remind people that the search features in Vista are pretty powerful in doing more than just searching for items.

Look up a tool called Start++ from brandontools.com - (it is handy) and from it you can get an idea of how powerful the searching system is and how it can be extended in basic shell and commandline usage even. (Most people don't realize you can get search results in a CMD prompt, or from within their applications.)

Also for people doing more than causal searches, take a minute and read some up on some of the syntax options Vista offers and see why it makes Leopard and even Google Desktop Search look like toys.

This is a good reference page to begin with for the basics of advanced searching in Vista:

http://search.msn.com/docs/toolbar.aspx?t=...earchSyntax.htm

Actually, about the MinWin thing, the Core effort (which is the sliced off APIs) used to be called MinWin, but there's another effort to remake the kernel called MinWin and that does involve changing the kernel architecture.

The current slimmed-down kernel need the entire source tree to be built to build the kernel, because even though it doesn't call the APIs above, they're still needed to complete dependencies.

The new MinWin will enable the kernel to be built alone, or parts of the system, which helps in the layering, upkeep and testing of the OS.

Other than that, very informative post :)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Dude, im talking about simply disable it from settings app. Because of the eu regulation, you could disable it here for years.
    • One big question about Mars was answered thanks to Einstein's 100 year old theory by Sayan Sen Image via DepositPhotos Scientists at the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have calculated how time passes on Mars compared with Earth, adding detail to how timekeeping would need to work beyond Earth’s orbit. The study, published in The Astronomical Journal, found that clocks on Mars run an average of 477 microseconds, or millionths of a second, faster per day than clocks on Earth. A microsecond is one millionth of a second, a very small unit used in precise scientific timing systems such as atomic clocks, which measure time using consistent atomic behavior. This difference is not constant. Because Mars moves around the Sun in a non-circular path (an eccentric orbit, meaning its distance from the Sun changes over time instead of staying fixed) and is affected by gravity from other bodies, the daily difference can vary by as much as 226 microseconds over a Martian year. The study also identifies smaller repeating changes of about 40 microseconds per day linked to synodic cycles (repeating periods that describe how planets line up with each other as they orbit the Sun from different positions). These longer patterns affect how time differences slowly rise and fall. To make these estimates, researchers compared Mars with Earth and the Moon. The work looks at relativistic proper time (the time actually measured by a clock depending on its speed and the strength of gravity where it is located, as described in Einstein’s relativity). This shows that each world has its own slightly different “rate” of time. This becomes more important as space missions expand into cislunar space (the region between Earth and the Moon) and toward Mars. On Earth, time systems rely on atomic clocks and satellites, which stay closely synchronized for navigation and communication. The study is based on Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity, which shows that time is affected by gravity and motion. Stronger gravity makes clocks run slower, while weaker gravity makes them run faster. “The time is just right for the Moon and Mars,” said NIST physicist Bijunath Patla. “This is the closest we have been to realizing the science fiction vision of expanding across the solar system.” A day on Mars is about 40 minutes longer than on Earth, and a Martian year lasts 687 Earth days. But the main question is not just about days and years, but how fast time itself passes. An atomic clock placed on Mars would function normally, but compared with one on Earth, the two would slowly drift apart due to differences in gravity and motion. This requires careful calculation of what is similar to a time-zone difference across planets. Researchers modeled Mars using a reference surface and included gravitational effects from the Sun, Earth, the Moon, and other planets. This includes a multi-body gravitational system (often described as a three-body or four-body problem, where predicting motion becomes difficult because multiple large objects all pull on each other at the same time through gravity). Mars also follows a Keplerian orbit (an idealized elliptical orbit based on simple gravitational laws that assume smooth motion, before adding real-world disturbances from other bodies). In addition, the researchers accounted for solar tides (small changes in gravitational force caused by the Sun that slightly distort planetary motion and timing, especially in systems involving Earth and the Moon). These combined effects are described as relativistic proper-time offsets (small but measurable differences in elapsed time between locations caused by gravity and motion), which must be included when comparing clocks across planets. “But for Mars, that’s not the case. Its distance from the Sun and its eccentric orbit make the variations in time larger. A three-body problem is extremely complicated. Now we’re dealing with four: the Sun, Earth, the Moon and Mars,” Patla explained. “The heavy lifting was more challenging than I initially thought.” Although the differences are extremely small, they matter for navigation and communication systems that depend on precise timing. Even modern networks on Earth, such as mobile systems, rely on timing accuracy at very small fractions of a second. Communication between Earth and Mars currently takes about four to 24 minutes or more depending on planetary positions, meaning signals are not real-time. A shared and accurate time system could help future missions reduce confusion in navigation and data exchange. “If you get synchronization, it will be almost like real-time communication without any loss of information. You don’t have to wait to see what happens,” Patla said. Researchers note that fully developed interplanetary communication networks are still far in the future. However, understanding how time behaves across planets helps prepare for those systems. “It may be decades before the surface of Mars is covered by the tracks of wandering rovers, but it is useful now to study the issues involved in establishing navigation systems on other planets and moons,” said Neil Ashby. “Like current global navigation systems like GPS, these systems will depend on accurate clocks, and the effects on clock rates can be analyzed with the help of Einstein’s general theory of relativity.” Patla added that the results also help improve understanding of time itself under relativity. “It's good to know for the first time what is happening on Mars timewise. Nobody knew that before. It improves our knowledge of the theory itself, the theory of how clocks tick and relativity,” he said. Source: NIST, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 by Razvan Serea TeraCopy is a compact program designed to copy and move files at the maximum possible speed, also providing you with a lot of features. Copy files faster. TeraCopy uses dynamically adjusted buffers to reduce seek times. Asynchronous copy speeds up file transfer between two physical hard drives. Pause and resume transfers. Pause copy process at any time to free up system resources and continue with a single click. Error recovery. In case of copy error, TeraCopy will try several times and in the worse case just skips the file, not terminating the entire transfer. Interactive file list. TeraCopy shows failed file transfers and lets you fix the problem and recopy only problem files. Shell integration. TeraCopy can completely replace Explorer copy and move functions, allowing you work with files as usual. TeraCopy is free for non-commercial use only. For commercial use you need to buy a license. The paid version of the program includes the following features: Copy/move to your favorite folders. Save reports as HTML and CSV files. Select files with the same extension/folder. Remove the selected files from the copy queue. TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 changelog: Added support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. Improved exception handling and automated bug report upload. Fixed several minor bugs and small memory leaks. Build 26 (June 24) Fixed a rare exception when a transfer completed. Features added since version 3.17: Enhanced speed graph. New multi-threaded copy engine. Support for copying to multiple targets. Queue system for managing multiple copy operations. Support for receiving files via the LocalSend protocol. TeraCopy entry in the modern Windows Explorer context menu. Integrated toolbar in the title bar. Why receive LocalSend transfers with TeraCopy? Handle file conflicts: Skip, overwrite, or rename files when a file with the same name already exists. LocalSend always creates another copy, which can waste time and disk space, especially when resuming an interrupted transfer. Filter unwanted files: Apply ignore lists or remove files manually before accepting a transfer, so unnecessary files are not downloaded. Better performance on fast networks: In tests over a 10 Gbps connection, TeraCopy received files several times faster than the standard LocalSend app on Windows. Download: TeraCopy 4.0 Build 26 | 14.5 MB (Freeware, paid upgrade available) View: TeraCopy Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Briefly used Turbo Pascal (and Turbo C++) in 97 and soon after that I bought PC magazine that included a full version of Delphi 2. I still use Delphi today, some 29 years later.
    • Age of Empires Mobile comes to PC, here's how to carry over progress from your phone by Ivan Jenic Image: YouTube/Microsoft Microsoft just released Age of Empires Mobile for PC. The game, officially called Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, is available for free on Steam and Microsoft Store, almost two years after its initial release for handheld devices. Age of Empires is one of those franchises that entire generations grew up with. The original came out in 1997, and immediately got people hooked to building civilizations and crushing their enemies on the battlefield. However, the franchise today is a far cry from its roots, as Age of Empires Mobile is, well, a game optimized for handheld devices, and not a classic RTS title we’ve all loved for years. And, of course, it includes in-game purchases. The PC version is still a mobile game at its core, but it’s been optimized for desktop play. There’s mouse control, full keyboard compatibility, and a refined UI. Microsoft also refreshed the visuals with some 4k textures, so the game should look better on larger screens. The game supports Crossplay, so you can switch between your phone, tablet, and PC without losing anything. But linked progress doesn’t come out of the box, as you have to enable it first. Here’s how to link your progress: On your mobile device, open Age of Empires Mobile. Go to Settings (Gear icon) > Account. Select Bind Account and choose a sign-in option. Once you enable account binding, sign in on PC using the same method, and your progress will be accessible across all your devices. Xbox Game Pass subscribers also get a bonus reward pack on PC, which includes: 1 Monthly Pass Token 1 Custom Resource Chest 10 Universal 60-Minute Speed-Ups 1,000 Empire Coins Exclusive Player Portrait Frame You can find more info about Age of Empires Mobile: PC Edition, as well as download links, on the Age of Empires official website.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      Tom Schmidt earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      D0nn13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Rookie
      +ChiefOfNeo went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      458
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      124
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      79
    5. 5
      Xenon
      76
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!