Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by .Lou
Messpatch has a feature to add a new image inside the conversation window, so you can instantly go to your recieved files.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RaceProUK
You can hook API calls, which allows you to add all sorts of stuff. Hooking API calls involves patching the EXE's Import Address Table, either on the disk or in memory.

---

Damn... then how can I explain that .exe's can't be changed as you can change .js's or .htm's?
* Matti gives up...

You can't
After all, EXEs are files, like anything else.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mattike
then how can I explain that .exe's can't be changed as you can change .js's or .htm's?
* Mattike gives up...

---

exe are compiled, js and html are just a txt with a different extention

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mattike
Good try, but those use Resource Hacker which can change hexadecimal codes. They can't add new features, like a new menu, in it, but only modify the images and UIFILES.

---

oh yeah?





[/late reply]

quote:

---

Originally posted by .Lou

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mattike
They can't add new features, like a new menu, in it, but only modify the images and UIFILES.

---

Messpatch has a feature to add a new image inside the conversation window, so you can instantly go to your recieved files.

---

It works because there is already support for that within the program. The image existed as a resource and the command to go to your recieved files already exists. All the patch does is re-arranging what is seen. It doesn't add anything new. What Mattike means are adding new features.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mattike
Good try, but those use Resource Hacker which can change hexadecimal codes. They can't add new features, like a new menu, in it, but only modify the images and UIFILES.

---

oh yeah?

[/late reply]

---

Instead of replying with a 2 word line, explain what you mean (I know this, but other people might not).

And what Mattike obviously means is that you can not add new features to a program just like that (and certainly not with program such as resource hacker as he mentioned in the quote, but which you apparently conveniently missed).

You can modify stuff (and thus "creating" a "new" feature out of it), but it is as good as impossible to add true new features (eg: add a custom name feature like in WLM to MSN Messenger).

All you can do is altering what already exists.

This said, we all know there are ways of adding stuff to programs (this is what virusses do for example), but in the context of this thread and for the purpose of explaning the differences, it is not possible.

Again, in the quote you replied upon, Mattike also mentionned Resource hacker, which is nothing more than an editor/compiler for resources. With that, as you know, you can do even less and only change stuff like menu names, some layouts, etc. In short stuff which is already supported and/or used within the program. He is dead-on correct in what he said.

All this said, what the top poster wants is altering a routine which already exists in the program's code. He doesn't want anything new, just some values changed. This can perfectly be done by disassembling and patching as Segosa already suggested. In that context Mattike was not correct.

Even RaceProUK's reply isn't complete if you want to be technical, as there are more ways of hooking APIs and/or letting a program do something which it wasn't designed to do.

--------

I post all this because with an (pardon my french: stupid) "oh yeah" nobody will ever be helped at all. A more detailed explanation is in place here.


--------



EDIT:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ
You can add a feature, but depending on the feature it'll usually be incredibly hard...

---

...what I said in paragraph 5 and 7 of this post....

Anyways, at least that new reply of yours is far more helpfull than "oh really"...

quote:

---

Originally posted by ShawnZ
in paragraph 5 and 7, you just came to the conclusion that it wasn't reasonably possible

---

which is exactly what you said "depending on the feature it'll usually be incredibly hard..."



... are we starting this again? The point is that instead of trying to make witty comments, why don't you actually post a helpfull post as in posting more than just stuff like "oh really", but more stuff like those last replies.

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
...what I said in paragraph 5 and 7 of this post....

---

in paragraph 5 and 7, you just came to the conclusion that it wasn't reasonably possible with basic knowledge of assembler and the structure of compiled C++ programs in windows, it isn't exactly impossible to add functionality to a part of a program, you could even compile compile c++ code and add a button or menu to execute it if you were skilled enough.