Page 2 of 2

Re: #PB_Any object result values after PB 6.20

Posted: Tue Feb 04, 2025 12:50 am
by Little John
NicTheQuick wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 6:12 pm Why do you need these values in the first place? What is the reason to even look at these numbers or memory locations?
If you allow a user to input a memory location and your program does something with it, then that sounds like a good indicator for crashes and security problems.
What are the answers to these questions?

Re: #PB_Any object result values after PB 6.20

Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2025 8:03 pm
by PBJim
Fred wrote: Mon Feb 03, 2025 11:21 pm I don't understand your question :mrgreen:
I read about /dynamicbase:no Fred, and it seems that's all we need, in favour of allocating low memory over the randomisation in high memory.

We happened to try PB 6.20 Beta 1 64-bit with /dynamicbase:no inserted at the start of the code and it gives us the same range as PB 6.00. There appears to be no need for /HIGHENTROPYVA:no as we certainly don't want to store a 64-bit address in a 32-bit.

Code: Select all

...     Client
...     36914048
...     36901120
So in other words, the below is not necessary. We needed /dynamicbase:no only to obtain the same behaviour as PB 6.00. Thanks for helping with this.

Code: Select all

Import "/dynamicbase:no"
EndImport

Import "/HIGHENTROPYVA:no"
EndImport

Re: #PB_Any object result values after PB 6.20

Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2025 12:13 pm
by NicTheQuick
Can you please explain why this is so important for you? It still makes no sense to me.