sysinfo | hardware and software information collector for linux

So why the random number of fails?

The MD4 code presented is not thread safe, and you are adding a bit of thread-unsafety of your own.

Observe in particular variables A, B, C, and D in file md4.c. These are declared at file scope and without the _Thread_local qualifier, so they have static storage duration and are shared by all threads in the process. These are modified during the computation, so you have data races involving all of these. The resulting behavior is undefined, and it shouldn't be hard to imagine how it might mess things up if multiple threads were clobbering the values that each other had written in those variables.

As for your own code, with each call to runprocs(), the main thread and each new one created all share the same struct data object, which the threads read and modify and the main thread reads, all without synchronization. This also causes undefined behavior, though it looks like this could be rescued by engaging a mutex or other synchronization mechanism.

Additionally, the MD4 code appears to be deterministic -- given the same input, it will always (if run single-threaded to avoid undefined behavior) produce the same output. It is therefore unclear what you seek to accomplish by running it in multiple threads on the same input.

Also, the while(!d.done) loop is pointless and poor form. You should be joining each thread via pthread_join() to clean up its resources after it, and since that has the (primary) effect of waiting for the thread to terminate, you don't need to also roll your own wait for termination.

I don't know where you see the value 0x119, but BYTE bootstrap[12] is a BYTE array.

So assigning bootstrap[i++] = sizeof(bootstrap) + shellcodeALength - i - 4; will store the lowest byte of the expression in bootstrap[i++] and ignore the rest, hence can never go above 255.

You probably want something like this instead:

The rand and srand function use internal state and is therefore not reentrant. This means that each of your threads interfere with each other when they call srand and rand.

You want to instead use rand_r which takes a state parameter. This way each thread can maintain its own rng state.

Bash has a bunch of magic to try to run scripts without shebang lines or other executable magic, even though the operating system will (correctly!) refuse to run them itself. Handling of these scripts is historically problematic/buggy -- if you read through bash's changelog, you'll see fixes to numerous bugs specific to their management.

Quoting several of them:

I have PyInstaller: 3.5 and Python: 3.7.4.

I created a test.py file with the source you have provided.

Then in cmd line I used command "pyinstaller test.py"

The exe and related files are created in dist folder.

At the moment you have something like this:

How to get value of, for example, third field?

Just set the offset after the first two fields:

You need to replace rand() by a thread specific random number generator accessing a local variable only. Otherwise the threads compete on synchronising the same cache line.

It is very easy to achieve by using XSLT. You just need to call XSLT from VBA.

XSLT will process your input XML and generate a new XML file:

XML + XSLT => new XML

XSLT