SysWOW64??

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

I located a spyware SYSLEM.EXE and sucessfully cleaned it.I found it in the
folder "C:\Windows\SysWOW64\". But this folder seems to contain files n
folders similar to that in " C:\Windows\System32 ". Now Im having a doubt as
to whether SysWOW64 is a valid Vista folder or was it created by the spyware.
Im on Vista Ultimate. Help anyone????
 
NISH said:
But this folder seems to contain files n folders similar to that
in " C:\Windows\System32 ". Now Im having a doubt as to whether
SysWOW64 is a valid Vista folder or was it created by the spyware.
Click to expand...

It's a valid Vista folder.
 
It is valid, if (and only if) you're running 64-bit Vista.

WoW64 stands for "Windows on 64-bit Windows", and it contains all the 32-bit
binary files required for compatibility, which run on top of the 64 bit
Windows. So, yeah" it looks like a double copy of everything in System32
(which despite the directory name, are actually 64-bit binaries).

If you are running 32 bit Windows then finding this SysWoW64 directory is a
bit weird ...

Hope it helps
Andrew
 
You have system32 (for.... 32 bit system files)
SysWOW64 is really only a fancy name for system64 (for 64 bit system files.)

Of course things are not quite that simple as anyone who has tried to
install Flash 9 on a 64 bit system will know.
Sticking files in in the wrong system folder and wondering why it can't find
them isn't helpful


Phypps
 
phypps said:
You have system32 (for.... 32 bit system files)
SysWOW64 is really only a fancy name for system64 (for 64 bit system
files.)
Click to expand...

It's actually the other way round ...

64 bit files go into System32, and 32 bit files go into SysWoW64.

Yes it sounds crazy ... but the System32 name had to be preserved for
compatibility reasons, even when the directory now holds 64 bit binaries.

"SysWOW64" actually makes sense (kinda) as a name ... this is "Windows,
running on Win64"; ie, 32 bit binaries, running on top of a 64 bit OS.

For confirmation and more background, see
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/06/05/x64/default.aspx

Cheers
Andrew
 
I stand corrected (though I was sort of right in principle in answer to the
original question)
I didn't realise that this is more sleight of hand redirection in Vista.
Of course it makes sense if you think about it.
Thanks for putting me right.

Phypps
 
hehe...

Andrew McLaren said:
It's actually the other way round ...

64 bit files go into System32, and 32 bit files go into SysWoW64.

Yes it sounds crazy ... but the System32 name had to be preserved for
compatibility reasons, even when the directory now holds 64 bit binaries.

"SysWOW64" actually makes sense (kinda) as a name ... this is "Windows,
running on Win64"; ie, 32 bit binaries, running on top of a 64 bit OS.

For confirmation and more background, see
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/06/05/x64/default.aspx

Cheers
Andrew
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top