email from geoff chapell

RE: windows7700
Some content in this message has been blocked because the sender isn't in your Safe senders list. I trust content from feedback@geoffchappell.com.
Some content in this message has been blocked because the sender isn't in your Safe senders list.
Geoff Chappell (Feedback) <feedback@geoffchappell.com>
Thank you for your enquiry. It's not at all clear to me how you mean your
email as feedback on anything I've written. Obviously you're very deeply
involved with the work you've done so far. I infer that you're hoping to
give old Windows versions the means to use new algorithms. A noble exercise,
to be sure, and I did indeed write 20+ years ago about back-fitting what was
then the new Crypto API into the original Windows 95.

But it is perhaps a forlorn exercise. For some sense of this, consider what
it might mean to be the "specific" location of the "true 'sha256' encryption
stuff". You perhaps have something very specific in mind. I, thrown in at
the deep end of your work, necessarily fall back to where the algorithm is
coded. Historically, this has typically been RSAENH.DLL but through
interfaces exposed by such DLLs as ADVAPI32.DLL. In their generally,
algorithms are coded in a Cryptography Service Provider (CSP), but having a
suitable CSP, e.g., by adapting one from a later Windows or writing one
fresh, won't do any good unless other DLLs in the old Windows know to expose
the new algorithms and unless any amount of other software, both from
Microsoft and not, know the new algorithms are there. Thus do "specific" and
"true" start to look open-ended!

In any case, I state explicitly at my website that I don't have anywhere
near the necessary resources for tracking pre-release builds and hotfixes
and similar such minor updates. The numerous updates of Windows 7 SP1 that
have never amounted to an SP2 are therefore very much out of scope. Worse
news for you, perhaps, is that even if you were consulting me, I'd have to
decline: there must yet be an announcement at my website but I am at least
planning for the likelihood of a forced retirement.

-----Original Message-----
From: MeKLiN x [mailto:beanxxx@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2022 00:18
To: feedback@geoffchappell.com
Subject: windows7700

do u know of what specific files of windows, and where in the registry other
than SystemCertificates and the binary blobs within, as i have found those
already, the true 'sha256' encryption stuff is located? i am adding
sh-2/sha256 to a windows iso im working on that is the fastest one ever made
so it needs to be able to run a few games that require that to work.
https://betawiki.net/wiki/Windows_8_build_7700
<https://betawiki.net/wiki/Windows_8_build_7700>


and my latest attempt is called windows for dota legends on my
archive.org/details/@meklin if you wouldnt mind downloading it i can also
give you a steam account with the game on it and dont have a lot of money
right now but when my court case is over i will

i have done a well noted sp1 edit for the 900mb sp1 file which has something
in it that disables certain windows users from installing it, i cant
remember now but i edited the .cat or .mum file and its all xml and was
basically the same thing as changing installed=permanented or 'removable' or
whatever, one line fix. i believe all the same files are on windows 7700
even tho its windows 8 beta. so do u have any ideas there, completely
changing the name of all the winsxs packages, editing every single xml file
in an update like say kb3033929(?) the regular win7 sp1 sha256 needed
patch..., or tricking CBS / sessions.xml to install things it shouldnt? i
got the 'windows 8 beta' to show it has installed sp1, and the reason behind
all that is because kb3033??? needed it to even install. there are many to
install sha256, but easy anticheat mostly asked for 3033929 or 404472? both
the major mentioned ones on MS pages. thanks for reading!