Freeware to view hidden registry entries.
in [Freeware]
|
From: za kAT on 8 Apr 2010 18:46 On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 15:22:17 -0700, John Corliss wrote: > I got 802 items Peanuts, I just tried it on Windows 7 x64 clean new install and I got 2831. -- zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - www.zakATsKopterChat.com
From: VanguardLH on 8 Apr 2010 19:00 John Corliss wrote: > VanguardLH wrote: > >> I already had Nirsoft RegScanner installed but never bothered to use the >> size range. I did a test where I specified a range of 250 to 999999999 >> bytes (I didn't know what else to specify for an undefinded upper range so I >> used a value that far exceeded the total size of my registry). It found >> 3112 items in that size range. Corliss claimed that regedit.exe would not >> display such overly long items (these are registry keys with data items >> whose value are usually binary and very long). > > I was only quoting what I saw on the internet. For example: > > http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/pavely/archive/2008/07/02/malware-and-hidden-registry-keys.aspx > > And what I saw said that Regedit and Regedit32 use the Win31 API to view > the Registry and suffer from that limitation. Programs which use the > Native API don't suffer from that problem. But it does appear true. First, the preview pane showing the values for data items cannot be expanded without limit. Eventually the very long values just have "..." at the end of them. Even the hex/text view window when you double-click on a data item appears to have an upper limits of just just 5000 characters. One data item in my range search came up at 1 megabyte (for the tray icon cache). So the articles you read were correct that regedit won't let you see superlong values.
From: za kAT on 8 Apr 2010 19:02 On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 15:22:17 -0700, John Corliss wrote: > I got 802 items I just tried it on XP SP3 clean install and I got 1265. How come you only got 802? -- zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - www.zakATsKopterChat.com
From: John Corliss on 8 Apr 2010 19:07 Johnw wrote: > John Corliss wrote: >> I'm want to be able to see hidden (and if necessary, delete) entries >> in the Registry. These entries can be: >> >> 1. anything over 256 characters in length >> 2. anything with a "/0" (a "null" character) in its name. >> > John, you have mentioned in a previous post that you have used RegSeeker > for cleaning the registry, but have you used > Find in registry ( the > 1st entry on the page ) > > Tick all the keys boxes, I just put "/0" into it & found one entry. > > Armadillo search took less than 2 minutes. Thanks! I'll give it a try. (5 minutes later) I got a lot of entries which RegSeeker labeled as "(string too long)..." Also, I got several entries where "/0" was part of a date, as in "05/01/2007". Couldn't find the Armadillo one though. -- John Corliss BS206. I block all Google Groups posts due to Googlespam, and as many posts from anonymous remailers (like x-privat.org for eg.) as possible due to forgeries posted through them. No ad, CD, commercial, cripple, demo, nag, share, spy, time-limited, trial or web wares OR warez for me, please. Adobe Flash sucks, DivX rules.
From: John Corliss on 8 Apr 2010 19:11
za kAT wrote: > John Corliss wrote: > >> I got 802 items > > I just tried it on XP SP3 clean install and I got 1265. > > How come you only got 802? I set the lower limit at 1000. -- John Corliss BS206. I block all Google Groups posts due to Googlespam, and as many posts from anonymous remailers (like x-privat.org for eg.) as possible due to forgeries posted through them. No ad, CD, commercial, cripple, demo, nag, share, spy, time-limited, trial or web wares OR warez for me, please. Adobe Flash sucks, DivX rules. |