nortond@well.UUCP (05/28/87)
As a systems programmer, I have discovered a variety of complex
ways to bring computers to their knees, but usually it requires at least
1,000 lines of perfectly good code with one line missing.
I have recently discovered, however, that all of my previous work
was entirely unnecessary. An MS-DOS system can be brought to a grinding
halt with a single command:
echo >"="
Yes, that's all that it takes. The system barely has time to echo back
the new line sequence before everything is frozen. One time, the system
did manage to display "File creation error", but that was it. This
method is so effective that even CTRL-ALT-DEL is ignored.
I consider this method superior to writing a program which 1) wipes out
program memory 2) wipes out the interrupt vectors or 3) pushes the stack
without popping it. I have had years of experience with all of these
methods and have decided that the "echo" method of crashing the system
is best, especially since it can be executed from a batch file (most
notably AUTOEXEC.BAT).
--
Daniel A. Norton ...{lll-lcc,ptsfa,hplabs}!well!nortondmarkg@amd.UUCP (05/29/87)
In article <3163@well.UUCP> nortond@well.UUCP (Daniel A. Norton) writes: >An MS-DOS system can be brought to a grinding halt with a single command: > > echo >"=" >[deleted] Why would you want to do this?? Sure does work! My machine stopped dead! -- Mark Gorlinsky - AMD Processor Products Division/APPS SQA UUCP: {decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amd!markg AT&T: (408) 982-7811 DISCLAIMER: My opinions are mine, not my employers.
bill@westpt.usma.edu (Bill Gunshannon) (05/29/87)
In article <3163@well.UUCP>, nortond@well.UUCP (Daniel A. Norton) writes: > > An MS-DOS system can be brought to a grinding > halt with a single command: > > echo >"=" > I found the temptation too much to refuse so I tried it on my ZENITH. Surprise Surprise, all it did on mine was cause a reboot. Now did mine get right and your's get it wrong or vice versa. :-) bill gunshannon UUCP: {philabs,phri}!westpt!bill PHONE: (914)446-7747 US SNAIL: Martin Marietta Data Systems RADIO: KB3YV USMA, Bldg 600, Room 26 AX.25 KB3YV @ WA2RKN West Point, NY 10996
freak@ihlpa.ATT.COM (Malloy) (05/29/87)
> echo >"=" > > Yes, that's all that it takes. The system barely has time to echo back > the new line sequence before everything is frozen. One time, the system > did manage to display "File creation error", but that was it. This > method is so effective that even CTRL-ALT-DEL is ignored. While this command does stop my AT&T PC6300, the CTRL-ALT-DEL sequence will re-boot the system. Does this make the AT&T PC6300 superior??? -- ____ _______ _____ _______ ------- Clancy Malloy / __ \ |__ __| / _ \ |__ __| -====------ Unix System Administrator | (__) | | | \ \ \_\ | | -======------ ...!ihlpj!freak | __ | | | / \ __ | | --====------- IH 4A-245 x3946 | | | | | | | (\ / / | | ----------- AT&T Bell Labs |_| |_| |_| \_____/ |_| ------- Naperville, IL
cbenda@unccvax.UUCP (carl m benda) (05/31/87)
In article <4068@ihlpa.ATT.COM>, freak@ihlpa.ATT.COM (Malloy) writes: > > echo >"=" > > method is so effective that even CTRL-ALT-DEL is ignored. > > While this command does stop my AT&T PC6300, the CTRL-ALT-DEL > sequence will re-boot the system. Does this make the AT&T PC6300 superior??? > I don't think so... I have a QSP 10Mhz and all I have to do to re- boot is push a square red button on the front of the machine which reboots the machine including running my autoexec in about 15 seconds, and thats with counting 1Meg of ram. /Carl
mrk@gvgspd.UUCP (Michael R. Kesti) (05/31/87)
In article <724@unccvax.UUCP> cbenda@unccvax.UUCP (carl m benda) writes: >> >> While this command does stop my AT&T PC6300, the CTRL-ALT-DEL > I don't think so... I have a QSP 10Mhz and all I have to do to re- >boot is push a square red button on the front of the machine. Note that the 6300 *also* has a little square button (not red though!). I believe that Malloy is saying that he doesn't have to use it, and that his system still "hears" CTRL-ALT-DEL. As to whether that makes the 6300 superior, I don't *really* think so! =================================================================== Michael Kesti Grass Valley Group, Inc. P.O. Box 1114 Grass Valley, CA 95945 UUCP: ...!tektronix!gvgpsa!gvgspd!mrk
todd@uhccux.UUCP (The Perplexed Wiz) (06/01/87)
In article <4040@amd.UUCP> markg@amd.UUCP (Mark Gorlinsky) writes: >An MS-DOS system can be brought to a grinding halt with a single command: > > echo >"=" Here's another interesting one. I haven't tried it myself but have heard a report from a "reliable source." cd any_subdirectory del .. DO NOT TRY THIS ON YOUR HARD DISK!!!! Try it on a "scratch" floppy. If I recall the report correctly, the 'del ..' scrables all sorts of things in the parent directory. I have not tried it yet so I don't know or understand the full effects of 'del ..' Anyone care to enlighten me?...todd -- Todd Ogasawara, U. of Hawaii Computing Center UUCP: {ihnp4,seismo,ucbvax,dcdwest}!sdcsvax!nosc!uhccux!todd ARPA: uhccux!todd@nosc.MIL INTERNET: todd@uhccux.UHCC.HAWAII.EDU
ndp@aluxz.UUCP (N. D. Parikh) (06/01/87)
In article <3163@well.UUCP> nortond@well.UUCP (Daniel A. Norton) writes: > > I have recently discovered, however, that all of my previous work >was entirely unnecessary. An MS-DOS system can be brought to a grinding >halt with a single command: > > echo >"=" > >Yes, that's all that it takes. The system barely has time to echo back >the new line sequence before everything is frozen. One time, the system >did manage to display "File creation error", but that was it. This >method is so effective that even CTRL-ALT-DEL is ignored. > (Deleted Text). I tried this on my 6300 and first time I made a typing mistake (booo!). I found that it still worked. (i.e. 'dcho >"=" '). so I tried a few combinations. What I found was that the minimum you need to do to bring down the machine is just type >"=". Anything before '>' is don't care. Interesting. Anybody know the reason ? N. D. Parikh AT&T Bell Laboratories Allentown, PA
keithe@tekgvs.UUCP (06/02/87)
In article <3163@well.UUCP> nortond@well.UUCP (Daniel A. Norton) writes: >An MS-DOS system can be brought to a grinding >halt with a single command: > > echo >"=" > >Yes, that's all that it takes. The system barely has time to echo back >the new line sequence before everything is frozen. The MKS Toolkit "ksh" reports 'cannot create "=" for output' and returns, as happay as a clam at high tide, ready to keep on working. keith THIS LINE INCLUDED TO FOOL THE NEWS POSTER PROGRAM INTO THINKING I ADDDED MORE STUFF THAN I REALLY DID. IT'S REALLY OBNOXIOUS!!!!! THIS LINE INCLUDED TO FOOL THE NEWS POSTER PROGRAM INTO THINKING I ADDDED MORE STUFF THAN I REALLY DID. IT'S REALLY OBNOXIOUS!!!!! THIS LINE INCLUDED TO FOOL THE NEWS POSTER PROGRAM INTO THINKING I ADDDED MORE STUFF THAN I REALLY DID. IT'S REALLY OBNOXIOUS!!!!!
nez@bucc2.UUCP (06/02/87)
/* Written by ihlpa.UUCP!freak in comp.sys.ibm.pc */ >> echo >"=" >> >> Yes, that's all that it takes. The system barely has time to echo back >> the new line sequence before everything is frozen. One time, the system >> did manage to display "File creation error", but that was it. This >> method is so effective that even CTRL-ALT-DEL is ignored. > > > While this command does stop my AT&T PC6300, the CTRL-ALT-DEL >sequence will re-boot the system. Does this make the AT&T PC6300 superior??? The Tandy 1000EX shifts the screen one location left, and then reloads COMMAND.COM. No rebooting is necessary! Does this make the Tandy 1000EX better than a PC6300???? :-) Rich Neswold =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= / bucc2!nez ...!ihnp4!bradley!- cyber!xx64194 \ buee730!nez =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
cjdb@sphinx.uchicago.edu (Charles Blair) (06/02/87)
In article <3163@well.UUCP> nortond@well.UUCP (Daniel A. Norton) writes: >[...] >An MS-DOS system can be brought to a grinding >halt with a single command: > > echo >"=" > >Yes, that's all that it takes. The system barely has time to echo back >the new line sequence before everything is frozen. Building on your pioneering discovery I have discovered it takes even less: >" " That stops my AT running PC-DOS 3.2 cold. Now, what's the Mac equivalent, I wonder. -- Bitnet: lib.cb@uchicago.bitnet Internet: lib.cb@chip.uchicago.edu uucp: ..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!cjdb
ray3rd@ssc-vax.UUCP (Ray E Saddler III) (06/02/87)
In article <4040@amd.UUCP>, markg@amd.UUCP (Mark Gorlinsky) writes: > In article <3163@well.UUCP> nortond@well.UUCP (Daniel A. Norton) writes: > >An MS-DOS system can be brought to a grinding halt with a single command: > > > > echo >"=" > >[deleted] > > Sure does work! My machine stopped dead! Yo! Over here! It worked just great on my Zenith 158! How `bout you over there? It worked?!? Great!!! Now try FORMAT C: <cr> -- Ray E. Saddler III CAD Support and Administration | __ __ __ __ Boeing Aerospace Company Ballistic Systems Division | / / / // //| // P.O. Box 3999 M.S. 3R-05 Kent Space Center East | /-< / //- // |// _ Seattle, Wa. 98124 USA (206)657-2824 or (206)657-3369 | /__//_//__ // //__/
amir@booboo.UUCP (06/03/87)
In article <853@aluxz.UUCP>, ndp@aluxz.UUCP (N. D. Parikh) writes: > > I have recently discovered, however, that all of my previous work > >was entirely unnecessary. An MS-DOS system can be brought to a grinding > >halt with a single command: > > > > echo >"=" > > (Deleted Text). > I tried this on my 6300 and first time I made a typing mistake (booo!). > I found that it still worked. (i.e. 'dcho >"=" '). so I tried a few > combinations. What I found was that the minimum you need to do to bring > down the machine is just type >"=". Anything before '>' is don't care. > Interesting. Anybody know the reason ? > Sure. That's because command.com like sh on Unix tries to handle the output redirection first before executing the command. The problem must be in the file creation routine in MS-DOS. I wonder what the signifcance of "=" is though. Does it have some undocumented special meaning (like wildcards)? -- Amir H. Majidimehr Gould Inc, Computer Systems Division {sun,pur-ee,brl-bmd}!gould!amir
markg@amdcad.UUCP (06/04/87)
In article <1271@ssc-vax.UUCP> ray3rd@ssc-vax.UUCP (Ray E Saddler III) writes: -In article <4040@amd.UUCP>, markg@amd.UUCP (Mark Gorlinsky) writes: -> In article <3163@well.UUCP> nortond@well.UUCP (Daniel A. Norton) writes: -> >An MS-DOS system can be brought to a grinding halt with a single command: -> > -> > echo >"=" -> >[deleted] -> -> Sure does work! My machine stopped dead! - -Yo! Over here! It worked just great on my Zenith 158! How `bout -you over there? It worked?!? Great!!! Now try FORMAT C: <cr> - That was a JOKE SON! Who cares if it worked. Are you going to it everyday or just on Mondays? Maybe people with Zeniths should do FORMAT C: <cr> to find out if they can do UNFORMAT.
ralph@ee.brunel.ac.uk (Ralph Mitchell) (06/08/87)
In article <4068@ihlpa.ATT.COM> freak@ihlpa.UUCP (45261-Malloy,C.E.) writes: >> echo >"=" >> ... > While this command does stop my AT&T PC6300, the CTRL-ALT-DEL >sequence will re-boot the system. Does this make the AT&T PC6300 superior??? My ACT Apricot just says "Divide overflow" and carries on going. Does this make it even more superior ?? This is with Microsoft MS-DOS version 2.11. Ralph Mitchell -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Ralph Mitchell | VOICE: +44 895 74000 Ext 2561 Computer Centre | ARPA: ralph%ee.brunel.ac.uk@ucl-cs.arpa Brunel University | UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!ee.brunel.ac.uk!ralph Uxbridge | JANET: ralph@uk.ac.brunel.ee UB8 3PH | UNITED KINGDOM | "Noli illegitemi carborundum" =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
rassilon@eddie.MIT.EDU (Brian Preble) (06/10/87)
In article <541@brueer.ee.brunel.ac.uk> ralph@ee.brunel.ac.uk (Ralph Mitchell) writes: >In article <4068@ihlpa.ATT.COM> freak@ihlpa.UUCP (45261-Malloy,C.E.) writes: >>> echo >"=" >>> ... >> While this command does stop my AT&T PC6300, the CTRL-ALT-DEL >>sequence will re-boot the system. Does this make the AT&T PC6300 superior??? > >My ACT Apricot just says "Divide overflow" and carries on going. Does this >make it even more superior ?? This is with Microsoft MS-DOS version 2.11. My 286 AT says "Invalid filename" before dying. At least it displays the right error message. Don't you think there's been enough on this? Has anyone talked to Microsoft about it? -- Rassilon