Process Hacker Forums

Hi, with the new version 2.39 the driver is not working anymore on my Windows XP PRO SP3 (French language), here the error when i try to start the driver service:

---------------------------
Process Hacker
---------------------------
Unable to start KProcessHacker3: Specified procedure not found
---------------------------
OK
---------------------------

On the same setup it's working 100% with version 2.38 (checked).

KProcessHacker3 (included in the 2.39 release) does not support XP.

If you need the driver then continue using 2.38.

What was implemented in KPH3 that it doesn't support XP?

The new driver checks that PH is performing requests and prevents other programs from using the more advanced functionality. This requires the bcrypt library, which is only available from Vista onwards.

Hi,

at first i was wondering why i wasnt able to view kernel memory and handle stuff after upgrading to the latest PH 2.39.124 on my 32bit vista system, even by using an elevated PH. After some investigation i found out that the KPH driver (ver. 3.0.0) wasnt loaded. Not a big deal i thought...at first. I checked the PH settings and the settings xml file and both state "<setting name="EnableKph">1</setting>". First thing i was looking at was my COMODO CIS. Security software could be the reason why some drivers wont get loaded as we know. But CIS wont show any warnings on its logs, nor does it block anything related to PH. I also disabled it and rety it. I found out that the driver wasnt registered in the SCM with the installer as it seems and wasnt loaded on demand by PH either. So i tried to install it by hand and set it to system start and normal error control, restarted the system and it still wont be loaded. Checking the windows event logs show me simply the error message that it could not start the boot or system start driver "KProcessHacker3". Manually trying to start/load it fails with code 127 "The specified procedure could not be found.". Ntbootlog shows simply "Did not load driver \SystemRoot\System32\Drivers\kprocesshacker.sys". I moved the driver to the system directories drivers folder from its original "Program FIles" location. Just for the case. You newer know. Looking at the binary show me that it has all its runtime dependencies (hal,ksecdd,ntoskrnl) satisfied so there is nothing missing. I am pretty sure that its not a missing DriverEntry procedure that fails here. Other drivers will be loaded without any complain, including non-signed, non-microsoft. Luckily vista 32 has no signature enforcement, but this doesnt help here Now i am stuck on this. Maybe someone has an idea how to pin down this issue?

K.

2.38 and below use KProcessHacker2, KProcessHacker3 included with 2.39 doesn't support Vista.

dmex wrote:

2.38 and below use KProcessHacker2, KProcessHacker3 included with 2.39 doesn't support Vista.

Ok, i see.So i guess it uses some imports from kernel binaries only available in 7+.

keremg wrote:

dmex wrote:

2.38 and below use KProcessHacker2, KProcessHacker3 included with 2.39 doesn't support Vista.

Ok, i see.So i guess it uses some imports from kernel binaries only available in 7+.

The APIs are supposed to be supported on Vista but we're dropping support for XP and Vista in the next release (3.0) so there's not much point implementing any Vista fixes

dmex wrote:

keremg wrote:

dmex wrote:

2.38 and below use KProcessHacker2, KProcessHacker3 included with 2.39 doesn't support Vista.

Ok, i see.So i guess it uses some imports from kernel binaries only available in 7+.

The APIs are supposed to be supported on Vista but we're dropping support for XP and Vista in the next release (3.0) so there's not much point implementing any Vista fixes

Too bad. I am still using vista and i guess some others, too. But ist your project. You have to decide

dmex wrote:

keremg wrote:

dmex wrote:

2.38 and below use KProcessHacker2, KProcessHacker3 included with 2.39 doesn't support Vista.

Ok, i see.So i guess it uses some imports from kernel binaries only available in 7+.

The APIs are supposed to be supported on Vista but we're dropping support for XP and Vista in the next release (3.0) so there's not much point implementing any Vista fixes

BTW the code is really well documented. its not only the comments, its the whole way it is written! This is my first impression.

keremg wrote:

Too bad. I am still using vista and i guess some others, too. But ist your project. You have to decide

The stats show approx. 100 users that are still using Vista (which isn't even 0.1% of the total) while the very (very) large majority are Windows 7 users. There's not much point supporting such old platforms with almost no users, so we decided to remove all the legacy XP and Vista code to make performance, reliability and the overall experience better for the (very) large majority of users who are using newer platforms.

Theres always the option of the free Win10 upgrade offer (before it expires this July)

dmex wrote:

keremg wrote:

Too bad. I am still using vista and i guess some others, too. But ist your project. You have to decide

The stats show approx. 100 users that are still using Vista (which isn't even 0.1% of the total) while the very (very) large majority are Windows 7 users. There's not much point supporting such old platforms with almost no users, so we decided to remove all the legacy XP and Vista code to make performance, reliability and the overall experience better for the (very) large majority of users who are using newer platforms.

Theres always the option of the free Win10 upgrade offer (before it expires this July)

afaik vista users cant upgrade for free to windows 10.

You can upgraded Vista up to Seven and this upgrade fix many OS error., but 32/64 bit WINNT software can work on Win7. I tested.

viksoftru wrote:

You can upgraded Vista up to Seven and this upgrade fix many OS error., but 32/64 bit WINNT software can work on Win7. I tested.

yes, thats possible. upgrading from xp to 10 is also possible, but both ways are not for free.

Reply to PM.

dmex wrote:

Theres always the option of the free Win10 upgrade offer (before it expires this July)

i'd better be crucified than to accept that offer

TETYYS wrote:

dmex wrote:

Theres always the option of the free Win10 upgrade offer (before it expires this July)

i'd better be crucified than to accept that offer

Why?

keremg wrote:

TETYYS wrote:

dmex wrote:

Theres always the option of the free Win10 upgrade offer (before it expires this July)

i'd better be crucified than to accept that offer

Why?

Because windows 10 disp-GET WINDOWS 10 NEW GAME ONLY 19.99$ * (+ PARTIAL INFO SEND DISABLE DLC ONLY 59.99$$$$$)

* WHILE WE SELL YOUR SOUL TO DEVIL