"Really Hidden Files"?

[Centurian]

Hey ChakanTGM,

Your program sounds rather interesting in the fact that you say it stops IE from replacing those files.

However there is another way.

Go in under dos and delete the "hidden files"  from the history folder first. You will have to use attrib and in order to that. Then go to Temporary Internet Files (C:\windows\tempor~1) and using attrib and dir change the attributes and remove EVERY FILE and FOLDER under the Temporary Internet Files folder. Then lastly delete the Temporary Internet Files folder.

Now when you reboot to windows don't use IE (or any browser based on the IE engine) to surf the net. Use only Mozilla based browsers and those files will not return.

I do that every time Windows crashes on me and I have to reinstall. Just crashed again a few days ago but this time I am expecting a set of Mandrake Linux disks tomorrow so I did not worry about it. I am hoping to permanently remove Windows soon.

Later
Centurian

[jtpenrod]

quote: And I think I might know why they autorecreate these directories and don't want anyone to see them (God I hate to defend MS). I think if you have an old machine
                   with Win95 on it you will see that the cache is not so hidden, and if you delete it it will not recreate the cache on startup. This will cause many errors/problems and it
                   takes a little work to recreate this (there are instructions in microsofts KB)

There is *nothing* evil about these "really hidden files". It's just more Macro$uck incompetence in action: security through obscurity. (And we all know what an effective strategy that is :-D )They just couldn't put those files in, let's say, a protected, priviledged account (Root would be a nice, catchy name for it) requiring, like, its *own* password that would lock out all other users? Seems I've heard of something like that somewhere. Not only that, but these files *never* go away! I've had the same rig for six years, and up till a month ago, it ran Win 95. Now why in the hell would I want to know what web sites I visited six years ago? And yet there they were! Didn't anyone suggest to His Gatesness an auto-expire feature?(!) Deleting those damn things took a little over 12 minutes. And I freed up almost 50 MB of disk space. That is rediculous! Once they were gone, I had no problems whatsoever. In fact, Win 95 seemed to run considerably faster than before. Then I got Mandrake and parted company with His Gatesness for good. I can't say I miss him.

[<Rick>]

To view the "Really Hidden Files," I just use my Gear Pro version 5. Its a CD writing software, and I can see EVERY file on my hard drive.

Have fun guys.

[gump420]

I seriously doubt that these files are necessary to the operation of Windows/IE in any way shape or form, but I'm equally skeptical of them being malicious. I'm not very concerned about them in the first place, since I only use IE for, shall we say, web browsing situations where I want to be discreet . . . as in, not have certain URLs autocomplete when I'm trying to show my mother something on my computer. (-; (And I could care less if Macrohard things I'm a pervert, although I did make the mistake of using my current main e-mail account in IE somewhere, and ever since I've been getting quite a slew of rather lewd junk mail in my inbox. Oh well, gotta be a wee bit more careful, I suppose.)

In any case, this is one more reason I can't wait to get back to using a Macintosh! Only one month left to wait, woohoo!

[IsraeliTerrorist]

quote:Um, sorry, that will not work. The "really" hidden folders CANNOT be viewed under DOS without first patching command.com. (Going into the code and stop whatever mechinism is hiding the files.)
An example of such folders would be

C:\windows\tempor~1\content.ie5

and

C:\windows\history\history.ie5

Without knowing the names of these files, you will never find them. These files also have subdirectories in them, which makes them particularly interesting. Go take a look.

Are the following "really hidden files" (or directories rather) as you said they were?  These images were captured in Real Mode DOS using Screen Thief.

[IsraeliTerrorist]

quote:Um, sorry, that will not work. The "really" hidden folders CANNOT be viewed under DOS without first patching command.com. (Going into the code and stop whatever mechinism is hiding the files.)

I'd like to point out that I made no modifications to command.com.

[theriddler]

I hate these arguments.  Nobody really takes the time to read anymore.  They just spew.

This discussion would not exist if "IsraeliTerrorist" (fantastic name), wouldn't have (intentionally?) missed my earlier note that the information doesn't apply whote-heartedly to ME, 2K, or XP.  One more time for the ones who need it spoon-fed:  This article was written for 9x systems.  I mentioned that in the article, and I even mentioned in the very thread that was created to answer the frequently asked.

Listen.

- There is no "Hide protected operating system files" option in 9x.  When you enable Windows Explorer to "view all files" on a 9x box it will not display the corresponding index.dats.

- The dir/a/s is not a problem with NTFS -- it is a problem with 9x.  Retry your tests with any 9x system.

- Like ChakanTGM already mentioned, the index.dat is not needed to make Windows operate.  It's the database file that references your Internet Explorer cache/history/cookies.  (Again, mentioned in the tutorial.)  And it's not so much that the index.dats get automatically re-created on every single boot.  What people should be thinking about is why Windows makes sure they are hidden on every single boot

--the riddler

[ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: The Riddler ]

[Kupotek]

quote:Originally posted by jtpenrod:


There is *nothing* evil about these "really hidden files". It's just more Macro$uck incompetence in action: security through obscurity. (And we all know what an effective strategy that is :-D )They just couldn't put those files in, let's say, a protected, priviledged account (Root would be a nice, catchy name for it) requiring, like, its *own* password that would lock out all other users? Seems I've heard of something like that somewhere. Not only that, but these files *never* go away! I've had the same rig for six years, and up till a month ago, it ran Win 95. Now why in the hell would I want to know what web sites I visited six years ago? And yet there they were! Didn't anyone suggest to His Gatesness an auto-expire feature?(!) Deleting those damn things took a little over 12 minutes. And I freed up almost 50 MB of disk space. That is rediculous! Once they were gone, I had no problems whatsoever. In fact, Win 95 seemed to run considerably faster than before. Then I got Mandrake and parted company with His Gatesness for good. I can't say I miss him.

Your problem is youre a noob.  You  are upset that you werent told to  periodically  empty your cache/ temporary internet files, and instead of realizing this, you  attack the maker's of the product. 12 minutes to clear a 50MB file?  YOu need to upgrade your computer as well as your mind.

[ June 13, 2003: Message edited by: Emiko ]

[neo_x500]

Hey, at least he is free from his gateness. Thses files always have uses. The index.dat file, for instance, makes it easier to track the websites sex offenders visit. But on the other hand, what if microsoft is sending information on the wbesites I visit, to oh, say, 3rd party partners. It's an invasion of privacy if these files are making it to redmond. Oh, by the way, even if you do clear your cache files, the files in the content.ie5 folder will stay there. It takes a little bit more to kill those files. And you have to wonder, "why are they keeping these files?" Because gates is a d-bag, thats why!

[Laukev7]

Just thought I'd ask, but do you realise that this topic is more than two years old? I have good reasons to think that the original poster of this story is very unlikely to get your answers.

[wookiefoot]

just wandering if there is any way to delete these files from XP, since there's no MS-DOS

[Refalm]

Doesn't matter, all the MS-DOS commands still work. But if you try to run Duke Nukem 3D, it kinda fails...

[Laukev7]

Not quite. In Windows NT, command.com has been replaced by cmd, which is not the same. Therefore, it is possible that some commands have been crippled, like in Explorer, to keep users from seeing "really hidden" files.

Consider that Windows XP has been crippled to keep users from deleting system files, in order to keep them from uninstalling Explorer or WMP manually.

[Kupotek]

Running command still works in XP.

Personally I dont suffer from  any of the paranoia so many seem to relish and indulge in, concerning hidden files, I really am not worried about the sites I browse to getting sent to MS for some global takeover machine or whatever the hell people are so worried about.

[Laukev7]

Well, me neither; but then, that's nothing compared to the restrictions planned by Microscoff in their NGSCB, or "Palladium" project. They will actually prevent you from running software if the binary is not certified (and certification comes with a cost, which means bye-bye freeware for Windoze).

Oh, and "command" in XP is, in fact, cmd. It's easy to check: go in the commandline and type something like "BillGatesIsAPrat". If you get "Bad command or file name", it's command. If it's a long answer like "This command is not recognised by the system blah blah blah", then it's cmd.