SEDIV ERROR ON STARTUP Exception EOLeSysError Sediv.exe

[tutuyale]

HI please help me i have one problem whem im run sediv, show me this:

Exception EOLeSysError Sediv.exe







somebody can tell me how i can repair this¡???¡

[waqas_ali766]

Hello,
sediv not work in windows 7. it is for windows Xp.

Regards
Waqas Ali
www.sediv.net

[labtech]

Hello,
sediv not work in windows 7. it is for windows Xp.

Will a version for Win 7 and newer be released sometime soon?

[tutuyale]

OHHH, thanks, but you can tell me if have one version of sediv for win7?

[HaQue]

I trust no more dev will be done for XP right?
No-one should be running XP and either connecting any drive to it, or using an XP Box on the internet now that support is stopped.
imagine the cost of a court case if you have an infected XP box and you connect a clients drive to it and PII or PCI info is leaked. Laws in AU have recently been upgraded from "slap on the wrist" to up to $1.7 Million for a company and, IIRC, $300,000 for an individual.

so customers should be doing a lot to force these developers that take the easy route and only dev for XP to get to a modern OS.

Saying that windows 7 cant do what XP does is plain balderdash.

[Spildit]

Win7 or whatever OS you chose will have the same chance to get exploited/infected as XP or any other unpatched OS.
It's the procedure of the tech that matters and not the OS.
I can plug a drive full of exploits for xp (like the exploit that infects unpatched XP just by preview icon files) on a machine with pc-3000 UDMA and first version ever realeased and unpatched of XP and use the PC3K to fix the firmware of the infected drive without getting infected.
As long as the file system of the infected drive is not mounted you should be OK.
Running SeDiv with a rs-232 on a seagate drive even if you have XP shouldn't pose any problem as long as you don't use the XP machine to browse the files on the infected/client drive.
Even if you have the latest patched version of win 8 or any other OS, with all the latest version of codec packs, pdf readers, etc .... there is no guarantee that the infecetd drive will have some code that will exploit some flaw on some of the apps rendering the files, sometimes even by preview them only, as example, just by windows getting a preview of jpg or movies to display, if there is a flaw on windows itself it's possible to execute code embeded on the non-executable app and you will get bitten no matter how updated you are. So there will allways be the chance for infection.
Best practice, don't even get the machine that you are using to browse client files on the net. And i'm not talking about the SeDiv/PC3K machine, i'm talking about the machine that you are going to use for cheching/copy the clients data.

If you are going to use windows use something like sandbox IE to browse the client files. Preferable boot the computer from a CD/DVD OS or a pen drive with write-lock protection (physical slider that disconnects the write channel on the memory chip). You don't want to plug the client drives directly on your PC.
Remember, on PC3K UDMA as long as you don't use the mount option on the universal utility the files on the client drive will not have any intecation at all with the files on your machine.
Even flaws on Data Extractor could allow for maliciouse code (exploits) on the files on the client drive to execute.

If you are going to be *that* paranoid about XP remember that there were cases of flaws on some AV products that the simple fact of the anti-virus resident protection opening the files to "analyze" them would "inject" code of the AV product itself that would then mis-behave and infect the machine.

It's allways a question of good practice and what you are doing and how.

I'm running XP here on all my machines without any AV or anti-malware protection and i have never got a single infection on any of those machines.
Running *ALL* software that is *Untrusted* or even passible to be untrusted under SandBox and discarding changes on the machine, etc .....
Running with modifyed host file at router level, opening pen drives and other untrusted drives with sanboxed explorer, etc ....

[SOSdonnees]

Win7 or whatever OS you chose will have the same chance to get exploited/infected as XP or any other unpatched OS. It's the procedure of the tech that matters and not the OS

I agree with most that Spildit says.

A little story
As you know, banks always their customers they should use the latest version of Windows or Mac OS on their PC to use their e-banking systems. At the time where Windows 7 was already the most popular OS, and Windows 8 had maybe already been released, I went to an ATM to withdraw some money.
A technician was taking care of the machine, which was rebooting. And guess what: I saw Window's XP logo showing. The ATM was thus of a major financial institution in Switzerland, not a small provincial bank.
I don't know if they use a physically separate network than Internet, but I think it would cost a lot. Hence, I assume a VPN or so.
Of course more recent versions of Windows will have security patches that were absent from older versions, but if Windows XP had been so insecure, the ATM wouldn't probably have stay with it so long.
Don't forget that scaring people with the theorical lack of security of old versions helps selling the new ones ...
Every software that you put in your OS represents a risk, either close source or open source.
Open source should in theory be more secure, but the truth is that 99,999% of us don't have the time to check and understand the code of open source softwares and to compile them. Most softwares have become complex and rely on other components.

I'm running XP here on all my machines without any AV or anti-malware protection and i have never got a single infection on any of those machines.

I also still use several XP computers and agree with Spildit.
From my experience the most infected PCs that I have seen were those with the most antiviruses and antimalwares installed, whichevery they were with Windows 7, Windows 8, a.s.o.
However, it would probably be wiser to say "any visible single infection", as I believe that the most and the most pernicious infections are probably invisible to the end user.