Hi everyone,

I wanted to ask, especially the admins
Do you consider breaking into ring0 is a programming trick or a malicious code ?

thanks for your reply
Posted on 2003-09-01 03:05:09 by Chrishka
What is the point of this question, where is it leading?
Posted on 2003-09-01 07:14:49 by sluggy
I don't understand what you wanna know. Isn't the question clear ?
Posted on 2003-09-01 07:53:26 by Chrishka
I'm not a moderator, but I feel like voicing my opinion anyway.

I don't really see anything wrong with "breaking into ring0", apart from it most likely depending on quirky behaviour that could very easily make your code break on the next service pack release.

For "innocent" code, I don't really see much reason to obtain ring0 without the use of a driver, apart from the "because I can do it" attitude, though.
Posted on 2003-09-01 10:04:14 by f0dder
Jumping to ring0 isn't a bad thing, in fact the windows kernel does that all the time. Is it's possible uses that might not be legal (virus, etc.).
Posted on 2003-09-01 10:08:08 by QvasiModo
Well, usually you go to Ring 0 through tricks because you want your program to be in one file, and because it is shorter and requires less overhead.
Posted on 2003-09-01 14:06:45 by Sephiroth3
mm, ring 0...

i also wouldn't see anything bad on it but...
anyone have an example of non-driver useful/innocent code that switch to ring 0 ?

Posted on 2003-09-01 16:15:33 by Bit7
I've noticed that whenever there's a question about switching to Ring0 the questioner generally fails to mention what they intend to do in Ring0.
Posted on 2003-09-01 17:27:46 by Poimander
I don't intend to do anything, I don't know much about kernel mode programming, and I don't know anything about virii coding either, it's just a friend of mine that submitted this challenge to me, and I love challenge.
Posted on 2003-09-02 09:50:19 by Chrishka
Care to share? I am interested to know the value in dr7. :grin:
Posted on 2003-09-02 10:00:16 by roticv
Ok, here is what I came up with
Posted on 2003-09-03 03:45:14 by Chrishka
Thanks. I will peek into it later. :alright:
Posted on 2003-09-03 04:13:31 by roticv

And I wonder why they have build ring 0 into theprocessor.:tongue: ...if there wouldn't be any valuable use of it.

At least it's useful for the os to have ring 0. And there are also some people around trying to make their own os.
So, what coud be better than learning ring 0 from a simple programm before failing with the os??:grin:
Posted on 2003-09-05 05:57:12 by TCT
ring0 is useful for the OS and drivers - not for ring3 applications.

So, what coud be better than learning ring 0 from a simple programm before failing with the os???

There isn't really that much to learn about ring0 under windows - that is, ring0 itself. There's a ton of windows specific things and ring0 API etc, though. If you want to mess directly with paging tables etc, you're better off playing around with pure protected mode from a DOS boot - or your own floppy bootsector code.
Posted on 2003-09-05 08:15:30 by f0dder