regedit.exe
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
Anyone ever read the entire registry?
How difficult would it be to attempt and identify undocumented windows registry keys to tweak windows in previously unknown ways?
General registry thread, what do you think about windows registry?
>>53890524
>>53890524
A terrible design decision.
>>53890394
Remote registry isn't enabled by default without good reason. It's a spook paradise in there.
>>53890788
>A terrible design decision.
What's it's biggest flaw?
>>53890870
>spook paradise
what did he mean by this?
>>53890955
>>53890955
>What's it's biggest flaw?
>what did he mean by this?
Not that guy, but IMHO they go together. So much leftover garbage data is in there, and if you were doing something shady, it could be used to help identify or verify some of your activities.
I think, when it comes down to it, I dislike the idea of a registry in general. I greatly prefer human-readable config files, especially since you could copy them to a new machine safely, whereas importing part of another machine's registry is almost always a bad idea.
There is also the whole things with the hives, and how some related or even identical keys are spread out with no way to show or examine their relationship. In fact, it is easy to wind up with unidentified keys, some legit and some malware, but you don't know because you can't tell what installed it unless it is properly labeled.
I like the idea of a global config directory with text files for global configs (what HKLM should be), another config file in an application's directory for installation specific configs, then an optional set of configs for the current user (similar to HKCU). The biggest difference would be ease of reconfiguring and better tracking of what put what where.
It also precludes many unintended sideeffects, since it is a text file that is only read when an application with permission launches, whereas it is possible to tuck malware directly into registry keys, and have then autolaunch whenever the machine boots or something worse, like deleting keys critical to certain software or even hardware devices.
>>53890955
>What's it's biggest flaw?
ACLs still spontaneously fuck up
Good luck trying to dig into 20+ years of old hacked around compatibility variables.
>>53890394
>undocumented windows registry keys
If its not documented, its not in the registry. MS is pretty thorough on their documentation mainly for businesses\governments. There are keys you can add that are not documented too well\at all, that can tweak certain functionality. One that I can think of is TabProcGrowth. This may be in HKLM but I don't think I've ever seen it in HKCU and its usually a completely different data type in CU.
>>53890394
>How difficult would it be to attempt and identify undocumented windows registry keys to tweak windows in previously unknown ways?
Pretty difficult. You'd have to learn the general use of all the major branches, and common uses. Basically, you'd have to learn all the Microsoft documentation AND industry practices (e.g. COM registration, device driver configuration).
Unless you just want to dick around with semi-random changes, in which case go for it. Back up your entire registry and when you fuck it up restore it.
Registry is actually a really cool idea and I'll even say I like it better than the old textfile config approach. Like how you can remotely load up a hive or deploy a configuration across an entire corporate network. It is in theory a much smoother and better way to configure a system.
Unfortunately it's pretty much fucked now because of how it has 20 years of cruft attached to it making it basically unreadable. I would like it if Microsoft would sweep it all out and start fresh but of course that's never going to happen so just live with it.
>>53892041
>>53891195
If being cluttered with compatibility junk is the biggest flaw, would you say that Windows 2000 had a pretty good registry system?
>>53892041
>Registry is actually a really cool idea and I'll even say I like it better than the old textfile config approach.
Yeah. If they used a hierarchy of text files, it would take forever to do tasks that are literally performed hundreds or thousands of times per seconds.
>it has 20 years of cruft attached to it making it basically unreadable
Eh. Most "cruft" is the result of 1) independent software people who can't be bothered to look up the correct way to do things (e.g. all the programs that try to write to Program Files) and 2) endless rebranding and uncoordinated team conflict within Microsoft.
