If C and C++ are such great languages according to this board why are they so much more vulnerable t…

Home Forums Science & tech If C and C++ are such great languages according to this board why are they so much more vulnerable t…

Viewing 15 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #183706
      Anonymous
      Guest

      If C and C++ are such great languages according to this board why are they so much more vulnerable to buffer overflow? Isn’t Rust far less vulnerable to buffer overflow? Why learn C and C++ when rust is a thing? I personally am as it is useful for my field and understanding assembly, but for everyone else does it make sense? What other reasons justify learning C and C++ over Rust?

    • #183707
      Anonymous
      Guest
      • #183708
        Anonymous
        Guest

        im gonna be honest im a zoomer please elaborate on what’s said there

        • #183711
          Anonymous
          Guest

          if you code in SPARK, it’s impossible to code a wrong program

          • #183713
            Anonymous
            Guest

            That’s absolutely not what it means.

            SPARK doesn’t have undefined behavior, which means that it’s theoretically possible to conduct a rigorous formal verification, which would let you verify that a given program acts according to a given formal specification.

            This has nothing to do with right or wrong. Your program can have dead-wrong logic (e.g. using a wrong formula to calculate a missile’s trajectory) and you’ll only discover it with FV if you write the proper test.

        • #183714
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Rust is a hobby project. C/C++ are professional tools.

          If you want to do anything serious on Rust, you have to use unsafe, and as the docs say: "you are on your own, it makes Rust as vulnerable as the code you are importing"

          • #183717
            Anonymous
            Guest

            Even if you stick with safe code, Rust code just isn’t mature enough. I’m getting an endless amount of panics from allegedly production-ready libraries I’m using.

            • #183724
              Anonymous
              Guest

              lmao

          • #183719
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >Rust is a hobby project. C/C++ are professional tools
            that must be why fortune 500 companies are starting to use Rust now too
            >you have to use unsafe
            you say this as if it’s supposed to be forbidden, or illegal to use "unsafe". you don’t seem to understand the point of having explicit unsafe blocks and are trying conflate it with the code being "bad", or somehow invalidates the entire language, which is absurd

            • #183720
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >fortune 500 companies are starting to use Rust
              They aren’t. The Rust cult keeps a list whenever a company makes a passing comment of having written 1 line of Rust for one module, and then go on to pretend all the products are powered by Rust.

              One good example is Dropbox which Rustaceans love to brag about using rust, yet you check their job offers and there’s nothing for Rust, just Python/Go/C/C++/Java/JavaScript

              • #183722
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >They aren’t.
                except, they are, why are you lying? I personally know someone who was hired at one specifically to use Rust on a new project with a new team of people.
                Microsoft is even working on their own new language with similar concepts to Rust, to help create more secure and malware resistant software. you’re just willfully ignorant, this is the future of software

                • #183725
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >Microsoft is even working on their own new language
                  so….not rust? what a resounding endorsement of rust.

                  • #183727
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    so if MS makes a clone of Rust with all of its core features, everyone’s fine with using that, as long as it’s not called Rust?

                    • #183732
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      Only if they also ban all the trannies.

            • #183731
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >that must be why fortune 500 companies are starting to use Rust now too
              They are only using it for web services. Apples listing about Rust was for a webservice

            • #183789
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >that must be why fortune 500 companies are starting to use Rust now too
              Lickers, leave.
              Get out.

        • #183728
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Important systems will continue using Ada not Rust. You use Rust when safety is nice to have but not a life-or-death requirement. Such as a browser.

        • #183781
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Dude, I’m a crummy programmer, and I read that while 75% drunk and understood what was said. How on Earth did you not understand?

          • #183784
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >cummy programmer

        • #183792
          Anonymous
          Guest

          rust defaults to crashing on runtime errors, which is just a complete no go in safety critical software.

          • #183795
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >defaults to crashing
            so does C++
            and if you’re writing safety critical software you never do things the default way, I don’t care what language you’re using, so this is a non agrument

            • #183828
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >if you’re writing safety critical software you never do things the default way
              Ada says hi

          • #183796
            Anonymous
            Guest

            no it doesn’t
            pretty much everything returns a Result<> or an Option<>
            you can unwrap() it causing panic or handle it properly it’s up to you

      • #183712
        Anonymous
        Guest

        that has way more to do with government and military specs requiring standards for every freaking tiny thing. it doesn’t mean Rust is bad or unfit for any purpose. there is so much freaking red tape to do anything government related that private industry doesn’t have to deal with

        • #183718
          Anonymous
          Guest

          The Rust team doesn’t have the capability to work on that level because it’s a hobby project. That’s why it has one lone compiler with over 7000 bugs (and growing), everyone uses the nightly version because anything slightly outdated is inadequate, no standard (let alone a safety standard), package manager has another 1000 bugs, they are swamped in bugs and can’t keep up, and they keep ousting all the key people that made Rust (the lead dev, the Rust book guy)

          • #183721
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >The Rust team doesn’t have the capability to work on that level because it’s a hobby project.
            the bit about not using in military context because of not having secure coding standards has nothing to do with the language itself, or does it suggest it’s somehow insecure, it LITERALLY means no one has sat down and put together a formal standard of recommendations for secure coding practices. the fact that no one has sat down and done this means they can’t use it
            it has absolutely nothing to do with Rust, or the people working on Rust. anyone could do this, just no one has bothered to do it.

            • #183735
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >just no one has bothered to do it.
              And why do you think that is? Because the faries haven’t said "Go!"?
              >I work on such systems. Maturity matters.

              • #183737
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >And why do you think that is?
                doing standards work like that isn’t free, and it’s time consuming. if no one has a vested interest in doing it then it won’t get done
                and who’s to say someone isn’t working on it right now? there may be a team of people interested in using Rust in such projects and is working to get such standards written, it wouldn’t surprise me if it was true
                I also wouldn’t be surprised if it wasn’t happening because shit takes eons to change in government and military, and they already have things in place that "just work" and probably won’t see change for 10-20 years

              • #183739
                Anonymous
                Guest

                >And why do you think that is?
                There hasn’t been much motivation to do so. Safety standards exist for C and C++ because if such standards didn’t exist, every program written in them would potentially be a time bomb. For Rust, there’s not much that needs to be said. Just…

                1. Don’t use unsafe when a safe alternative exists. If unsafe must be used, have someone else verify.
                2. Don’t use panics unless you mean to crash everything (you don’t). Don’t use functions that can panic unless you can verify they can’t.
                3. Don’t rely on a crate without verifying its safety, and when you do, specify an exact version number to prevent supply chain attacks.

                Honestly there’s not *too* much to be concerned about.

                • #183742
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  every allocation can panic in Rust, such a great language

                  • #183759
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    There’s a reason why the try_new and try_reserve family of methods are being implemented on Rust data types that allocate. That said, panicking on allocation only happens when a system is out of memory, at which point, there is very little that an application can do normally.

                    • #183769
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      >something that any relevant language would have implemented on first day is being implemented 6 years later in rust

                      You actually *can* catch panics.
                      https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/panic/fn.catch_unwind.html

                      >not recommended to be used as try/catch mechanism
                      >cannot catch all panics
                      this isn’t even why it was added to begin with, scrotebrained shills don’t even know a thing about rust, cute

                      source?

                      Where are you pulling this 2 weeks number from?

                      2 more weeks to flatten C++ programmer curve

                      • #183770
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        what’s the quivalent of try_new and try_reserve in C++?

                      • #183772
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        new(std::nothrow)

                      • #183778
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >not recommended to be used as try/catch mechanism
                        You should focus on the reason why. Most functions in Rust’s standard library that panic have alternatives that do not panic, and instead return an Option or Result. It is much more preferable to either use that return value or propagate it, than it is to force panics into the role of try/catch as they are used in languages where exceptions are the standard error model. Panics should be treated as a scenario for which no recovery exists.

                        >cannot catch all panics
                        Rust panics can take two forms: unwind or abort. This is specified at the level of the crate, in your Cargo.toml file, and the default is to unwind. If a panic can unwind, it will ALWAYS be caught by catch_unwind. If you choose to abort instead in order to minimize binary size, catch_unwind will not catch it, because the program will abort at the site of the panic, with no room for cleanup. Since the programmer can control how they want panics to behave in their program, however, this is not that much of an issue.

                      • #183779
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        if only anything in Rust returned option or result instead of randomly panicking…

                      • #183786
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Memory allocation is one of the few things in Rust that can only panic on failure, and there is current work being done to stabilize an API that allows for failable allocations. Nearly every other thing in Rust that can panic also has an alternative that does not.

                      • #183788
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        if trannies cared about safety, it would’ve been default

                        You’re gonna need to show that picture of the C++ conference trans chick.

                        >exception to the rule is the rule

                      • #183791
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >if trannies cared about safety, it would’ve been default
                        If every function that allocated memory returned an Option, most programs would have to be more verbose. The reason why panicking is a default is because in nearly all cases, running out of memory is practically impossible, and in the odd event that it does happen, there is nearly nothing that a programmer could do to recover. It is only in certain embedded applications where you both have memory being tight, and also have failure being unacceptable, that this comes up.

                        >exception to the rule is the rule
                        Funny thing is… the "rule" in Rust is that nearly all users are straight white guys. Not trans people.

                      • #183793
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >The reason why panicking is a default is because in nearly all cases, running out of memory is practically impossible, and in the odd event that it does happen, there is nearly nothing that a programmer could do to recover
                        What the fuck are you talking about?
                        Take Photoshop as an example, try to load xbox huge raw file, i.e try and allocate 1TB ram, oops can’t do it, WHY THE FUCK WOULD THE PROGRAM CRASH WHEN IT CAN DISPLAY "NOT ENOUGH MEMORY FOR THAT FILE" AND KEEP GOING?
                        This is why no one can take rust seriously.

                      • #183790
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >if only anything in Rust returned option or result instead of randomly panicking…
                        Now imagine a language where pretty much anything could throw an exception, return a type system ruining magic value not part of the function signature, maybe set a global flag somewhere and silently fail, or return a number you manually have to look up to know what it means.

                      • #183802
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        The only thing that panics is alloc, so std. I don’t think that military software is gonna use std at all. Rust doesn’t alloc by default.

                        https://llvm.org/

                        >rust compiler is mostly written in sepples
                        >rust compiler is written in rust
                        >but muh the back end it uses is written in sepples so it means that it’s written in sepples
                        kys

                      • #183804
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        the backend is part of the compiler anon-kun. you could even argue its the most important part

                      • #183807
                        Anonymous
                        Guest
                      • #183809
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >cranelift
                        that toy which got archived because trannies can’t into systems programming?

                      • #183812
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        cranelift is not really a toy, it’s meant to be used as a jit compiler, not an aot compiler

                      • #183815
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >jit
                        so a toy

                      • #183816
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >no true scotsmanning a non sequitur
                        just for how long do you intend to keep digging?

                      • #183817
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        cranelidt is archived repo, but since you don’t actually use it, it makes sense that you’d miss such an unimportant detail, waiting for Rust to be archived soon

                      • #183810
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        which one do you choose?

                      • #183805
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Backend is what actually generates real code than runs on bare metal
                        >and rust compiler has this part written in c++ because it just does okay, we could rewrite in rust anytime!

                    • #183826
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      >there is very little that an application can do normally

                      • #183830
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Are you really going to attempt to free up system resources and/or compact memory in some random non-critical application? I understand the need for that ability to exist, but in most applications crashing is the sensible [albeit still undesirable] solution.

                      • #183839
                        Anonymous
                        Guest
                • #183743
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  also, rust is like 6 years stable, that’s basically still a new language, I wouldn’t expect strict military coding standards to exist yet, I don’t know why this surprises anyone

                  • #183744
                    Anonymous
                    Guest

                    if it were relevant in the field the standard would already exist and it would already be used
                    >but it isn’t
                    >will never be
                    >just like you will never be a woman

                    • #183748
                      Anonymous
                      Guest

                      how on earth do you expect a secure coding standard to just come into existence out of thin air for a new language?

                      • #183749
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        when people actually use the tool, these things just happen to be made
                        >when will the realization kick in, chud?
                        oh no no no no

                      • #183754
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >when people actually use the tool, these things just happen to be made
                        correct, and I’m sure there will be a secure standard at some point
                        you’ve clearly never worked for the government, 6 years is basically no time at all, it’s not private industry. Rust probably won’t make it into any major projects there for at least another 5-10 years
                        and again, who cares what the military does? why is this a sticking point for anyone?

                      • #183757
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Who cares at all anyway? Use what you want. They all freaking work at the end of the day and what someone uses doesn’t affect you whatsoever.

                      • #183765
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >what someone uses doesn’t affect you whatsoever
                        then does Rust specifically, more than seemingly any other language, make some on LULZ seethe so freaking hard that it even exists, or that some people like to use it?

                      • #183768
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        *why does

                      • #183771
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Because it’s community is a symptom of a current major social issue, and one that seems to be plaguing the tech industry the most.

                        LULZ also argues about which web browser to use every single day.

                      • #183758
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >just in 2 more weeks rust will replace C++
                        HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
                        >just 2 more weeks!1one!!!

                        you skipped the other part. show me a non-toy project that gracefully catches out of memory exceptions and actually does something with them

                        >leak code of proprietary software
                        Anon, just remember, you said non-toy…

                      • #183762
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        >just in 2 more weeks rust will replace C++
                        ???

                      • #183763
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        2 more weeks guys, in 2 more weeks rust will be viable in aviation!

                      • #183766
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        source?

                      • #183767
                        Anonymous
                        Guest

                        Where are you pulling this 2 weeks number from?

        • #183741
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >code that may cause people to die needing standards is bad because it just is
          reminder that even trannies wouldn’t date trannies

          • #183745
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >code that may cause people
            what?

            every allocation can panic in Rust, such a great language

            how is that a Rust problem? same thing can happen in C or C++, or any language. if you request more memory for an allocation and the OS can’t give it to you, what do you expect to happen?

            • #183746
              Anonymous
              Guest

              C++ never panics

              • #183750
                Anonymous
                Guest

                of course not, it throws an exception, which if uncaught will terminate the program, totally different
                but please point me to a program that gracefully catches and handles an out of memory exception

                • #183752
                  Anonymous
                  Guest

                  >can’t into try catch

            • #183825
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >same thing can happen in C or C++
              wanna know how I know you’ve never written a line of C?

            • #183834
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >what do you expect to happen?
              it returns a NULL pointer and you handle that however you want lmao scrotebrain

      • #183831
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >over 100 rules to turn a crippled scrotebrain language into something that still doesn’t work
        That’s because C is a toy language that sucks.
        https://github.com/mortdeus/legacy-cc

    • #183709
      Anonymous
      Guest

      with great power comes great responsibility.
      just have a working brain and learn to avoid bad buffer manipulation.

      • #183710
        Anonymous
        Guest

        what makes C/C++ more powerful than Rust?

        • #183797
          Anonymous
          Guest

          write a complex piece of code in c++ (or even better in c) using all of its features and translate that directly to asm with pseudocode. break down everything into the most fundamental of instructions the cpu would understand. you may not like the result but what you will end up with is fake asm code that looks incredibly close to the actual asm code gcc or any other compiler would come up with. some things WILL be different and there may be extra code that can be cut down in either the actual or the fake translation.

          now try and do that with rust. you can’t; unless you’re actively working on expanding and changing the language itself.

          with rust you get "safe" code. with c you get pure freedom to do anything you want, hack or otherwise. now that’s
          > t r u e
          > p o w e r

          • #183798
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >break down everything into the most fundamental of instructions the cpu would understand.
            I didn’t know there were compilers that generated instructions the CPU can’t understand

            • #183801
              Anonymous
              Guest

              >I didn’t know there were compilers that generated instructions the CPU can’t understand
              literally freaking what mate?

              hint: translate BY HAND and BY COMPILER and then compare. does that maybe help you understand what i mean?

              • #183808
                Anonymous
                Guest

                I guess you’re good at predicting what asm the compiler will generate from your C code? good for you I guess?

          • #183803
            Anonymous
            Guest

            ok ill explore this when i have more time IDA Pro can just autocreate the pseudocode youre talking about right? do i have to do it by hand like you told that other guy?

            • #183811
              Anonymous
              Guest

              listen, you have no reason to do this. why you’d want to do a by hand translation of a piece of c code into, say, x86 asm to compare with the results of gcc is beyond me. it’s just that you can do it, it’s just one reason why c is the best.

              as for ida pro, i have no idea what it offers but i’d guess it doesn’t do this, no.

          • #183806
            Anonymous
            Guest

            >with c you get pure freedom to do anything you want, hack or otherwise

            • #183813
              Anonymous
              Guest
    • #183715
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Yes. Rust is the future. C/C++ stopped innovating so that’s why Rust was created.

      • #183740
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Rust innovation: find, grep, gpu terminal and SRS

      • #183818
        Anonymous
        Guest

        C++ stopped innovating? Modules, concepts, coroutines, constexpr… Try doing a for-loop at compile time in Rust.

        • #183822
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >Try doing a for-loop at compile time in Rust
          Although C/C++ and Rust use the same keyword and all use it in loop constructs, that’s where the similarities end. The closest to a C/C++ for-loop you’ll find in Rust is a while-loop; which, coincidentally, are allowed in constant functions.

    • #183716
      Anonymous
      Guest

      template<typename Type>
      class Array
      {

      Type &operator[](int idx)
      {
      must(("out of bounds", idx < this->size));
      return this->arr[idx];
      }

      • #183794
        Anonymous
        Guest

        what happens when idx < 0 dumfuck

    • #183723
      Anonymous
      Guest

      there’s more to programming than just avoiding buffer overflow. rust can’t handle complex data structures without throwing unsafe {} around the entire program. there’s a reason that the rust compiler is mostly written in C++.

    • #183733
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Rust is definitely more popular online and social media than with people actually shipping code. We’ve hired about 20 programmers in the past year and I’ve never heard Rust come up even as a topic. To say "Rust is the future" is quite premature. There’s a lot more to a language than memory safety by default.

      • #183736
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Rust has a lot more to offer over C++ than memory safety. Cargo is absolutely amazing for having reproducible builds, for instance, because every library on crates.io is effectively locked in place. It is impossible to remove or update a library at version x.y.z, you can only make changes at a new version number. Moreover, since the same tool used for building is also used for package management, leaving instructions for building a program is as simple as "use rustup to install cargo, and then run the command cargo build".

        • #183738
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >use rustup to install cargo, and then run the command cargo build
          only for toy programs. anything more complex will still require other tools/libraries. just look at the setup page for servo lmao

        • #183747
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >Rust has a lot more to offer over C++ than memory safety.
          It’s not that Rust doesn’t offer more it’s that when it comes to replacing C/C++ there is a lot more to consider than memory safety.
          >All you have to do is this one command
          It’s never quite that simple in the real world.

        • #183819
          Anonymous
          Guest

          You can do this exact style of package versioning with C++ using cmake and git.

          • #183821
            Anonymous
            Guest

            you can do the same thing with conan for C++, we use it at work for most of our dependencies. it does the same thing, tracking dependency trees, segregating builds by version and build configuration, and allowing coarse or fine grained control of what versions to use

    • #183753
      Anonymous
      Guest

      ook guys im not sure rust is that good i just saw this in another thread

      • #183761
        Anonymous
        Guest

        She’s cute

    • #183760
      Anonymous
      Guest

      It’s a lot easier to understand how to avoid the memory pitfalls of C/C++ than it is to understand a completely new paradigm like Rust.

    • #183773
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Current industry is still using C and C++ an order of magnitude more than Rust. Most Rust libraries are in an experimental stage. C and C++ ecosystems are mature, well maintained time tested libraries exist for everything.
      Rust is hopefully the future but C and C++ are never going away either.
      Writing sepples in and of itdelf is a massive pain but dealing with an experimental Rust library in active development is not much better.

      • #183774
        Anonymous
        Guest

        all rust libraries are copy paste from C libraries and sometimes just straight up a C library wrapped in ruschud interface

        • #183776
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Don’t remember asking.

    • #183775
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Use C and C++

      • #183777
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >C and C++
        not going to use C, chud

        • #183780
          Anonymous
          Guest

          >C is noww chud
          how scrotebrained are you?

          • #183782
            Anonymous
            Guest

            always was

            • #183787
              Anonymous
              Guest

              You’re gonna need to show that picture of the C++ conference trans chick.

      • #183785
        Anonymous
        Guest

        leftychan falseflaggot.

    • #183814
      Anonymous
      Guest

      LEARN ABOUT DIFFERENT BUGS

    • #183820
      Anonymous
      Guest

      A language is not vulnerable, a programmer is.
      If you write shit code, no programming language will save you, not even Rust.

      • #183823
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >no programming language will save you
        you’ve clearly never written Rust code. you have to go out of your way to create the same vulnerabilities that you can trivially do in C or C++ without being very careful, it will straight up fail to compile if you have common errors in your code
        so yes, it can save you by forcing you to write correct code in the first place

        • #183827
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Do you claim it is impossible to write vulnerable code in Rust?

          • #183829
            Anonymous
            Guest

            no, it’s just harder to do, and it’s much safer by default. no language is invulnerable, even managed languages

    • #183824
      Anonymous
      Guest
    • #183832
      Anonymous
      Guest

      The popular opinion on LULZ is almost always scrotebrained and wrong.

    • #183833
      Anonymous
      Guest

      >buffer overflow
      if you don’t stop making such mistakes after your first 5 years of programming then kys. scrotebrains always fret over things that aren’t issues to anyone competent and well-organised.
      >oh no le memory management is sooo hard I need a free for every alloc this is too much a bloo bloo
      lmao

      • #183835
        Anonymous
        Guest

        Ctards have been making the same mistakes since C came out. They can have 30 or 40 years of experience and they make the same mistakes. It doesn’t matter who is using it, the language is designed to make those bugs easy.
        >scrotebrains always fret over things that aren’t issues to anyone competent and well-organised.
        That’s because anyone competent and well-organized wouldn’t use C.

        • #183840
          Anonymous
          Guest

          Rust will come with its own minefield. All languages do.

      • #183836
        Anonymous
        Guest

        first year guess i have four more to go

      • #183837
        Anonymous
        Guest

        >oh no le memory management is sooo hard I need a free for every alloc this is too much a bloo bloo
        this is much harder to do in non-trivial programs, not every allocation is immediately freed a few lines after it was used, or even within the same scope.
        if it was a non-issue we still wouldn’t be having the same memory related bugs recreated over and over again after 50+ years of writing software. if this stuff was easy no one would bother trying to create GC languages or things like Rust in the first place

Viewing 15 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
startno id