Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

This is for discussing general topics about how to use VirtualBox.
galitsyn
Posts: 82
Joined: 4. Jul 2012, 16:09

Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by galitsyn »

You can download the release here.
VirtualBox 6.1.36 is a maintenance release.

Changelog is here.
AndyCot
Posts: 296
Joined: 29. Feb 2020, 03:04

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by AndyCot »

With the 6.1.36 release should the following sticky post have the sticky removed?
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=90853

It may be worth adding a new sticky post on the 6.1.36 and Hyper-V so that users can see that it now works (if they look, which does not always happen). I have installed it, but have not rebooted as I have Hyper-V disabled at the moment as I am doing some dev that needs it disabled.
multiOS
Volunteer
Posts: 800
Joined: 14. Sep 2019, 16:51
Primary OS: Mac OS X other
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: WIN11,10, 7, Linux (various)
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by multiOS »

Installation of Extension Pack on macOS (Big Sur) failed with following message:
Failed to install the Extension Pack /Users/[username]/Downloads/Software Updates/Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack-6.1.36.vbox-extpack.
Failed to load the main module ('/Applications/VirtualBox.app/Contents/MacOS/ExtensionPacks/Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack/darwin.amd64/VBoxPuelMain.dylib'): VERR_FILE_NOT_FOUND - dlopen(/Applications/VirtualBox.app/Contents/MacOS/ExtensionPacks/Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack/darwin.amd64/VBoxPuelMain.dylib, 6): no suitable image found. Did find:
/Applications/VirtualBox.app/Contents/MacOS/ExtensionPacks/Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack/darwin.amd64/VBoxPuelMain.dylib: code signature invalid for '/Applications/VirtualBox.app/Contents/MacOS/ExtensionPacks/Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack/darwin.amd64/VBoxPuelMain.dylib'

Result Code: NS_ERROR_FAILURE (0x80004005)
Component: ExtPackManagerWrap
Interface: IExtPackManager {70401eef-c8e9-466b-9660-45cb3e9979e4}
Bugtracker Ticket: https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/21024
Reverted to VirtualBox 6.1.34 (and matching Extension Pack) and working again.
galitsyn
Posts: 82
Joined: 4. Jul 2012, 16:09

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by galitsyn »

multiOS wrote:Installation of Extension Pack on macOS (Big Sur) failed with following message:
Failed to install the Extension Pack /Users/[username]/Downloads/Software Updates/Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack-6.1.36.vbox-extpack.
Failed to load the main module ('/Applications/VirtualBox.app/Contents/MacOS/ExtensionPacks/Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack/darwin.amd64/VBoxPuelMain.dylib'): VERR_FILE_NOT_FOUND - dlopen(/Applications/VirtualBox.app/Contents/MacOS/ExtensionPacks/Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack/darwin.amd64/VBoxPuelMain.dylib, 6): no suitable image found. Did find:
/Applications/VirtualBox.app/Contents/MacOS/ExtensionPacks/Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack/darwin.amd64/VBoxPuelMain.dylib: code signature invalid for '/Applications/VirtualBox.app/Contents/MacOS/ExtensionPacks/Oracle_VM_VirtualBox_Extension_Pack/darwin.amd64/VBoxPuelMain.dylib'

Result Code: NS_ERROR_FAILURE (0x80004005)
Component: ExtPackManagerWrap
Interface: IExtPackManager {70401eef-c8e9-466b-9660-45cb3e9979e4}
Bugtracker Ticket: https://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/21024
Reverted to VirtualBox 6.1.34 (and matching Extension Pack) and working again.
Thank you for pointing out. This issue should now be fixed with https://download.virtualbox.org/virtual ... ox-extpack (link on Downloads page is now also updated).
multiOS
Volunteer
Posts: 800
Joined: 14. Sep 2019, 16:51
Primary OS: Mac OS X other
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: WIN11,10, 7, Linux (various)
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by multiOS »

@galitsyn

Thanks for the speedy response. i can confirm that installation is now back in good order.

Will note the Bugtracker ticket
tonny
Posts: 20
Joined: 7. Jan 2010, 23:54
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Windows 7

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by tonny »

Just noticed that installing Guest Additions 6.1.36 on Windows XP takes a long time (4-5 minutes).
The culprit seems to be a "VBoxCertUtil display" command that outputs a long list of certificates in the installer.
After that it finishes without other issues.
scottgus1
Site Moderator
Posts: 20965
Joined: 30. Dec 2009, 20:14
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Windows, Linux

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by scottgus1 »

tonny wrote: installing Guest Additions 6.1.36 on Windows XP takes a long time (4-5 minutes).
Try unplugging the VM's network "cable". This has been happening rather a while. We suspect it's a phone-home in the XP OS that has to time out.
tonny
Posts: 20
Joined: 7. Jan 2010, 23:54
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Windows 7

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by tonny »

By chance the network on this VM is already disconnected.

I tried manually logging the output of "VBoxCertUtil display-all" to a file and it only takes a few seconds but it generates about 2MB of text.
When the installer is running this command it is also drawing the text output on screen, and I think it's the drawing that is actually taking a long time (I've attached a screenshot of what it shows).
I double checked this by running with the installer minimized and in this case it runs much faster since Windows ignores drawing for apps that are not visible.

I've never noticed this behaviour in previous additions versions so that's why I wrote about it.
Attachments
VBoxAdditions.png
VBoxAdditions.png (52.99 KiB) Viewed 8313 times
robpats
Posts: 10
Joined: 27. Apr 2013, 19:29

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by robpats »

The integrity of Windows binary cannot be verified by SHA1 digital signature.
It can be verified by SHA256 digital signature though.
Is this a concern?
Attachments
sig.png
sig.png (45.44 KiB) Viewed 7949 times
fth0
Volunteer
Posts: 5668
Joined: 14. Feb 2019, 03:06
Primary OS: Mac OS X other
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Linux, Windows 10, ...
Location: Germany

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by fth0 »

robpats wrote:The integrity of Windows binary cannot be verified by SHA1 digital signature.
It can be verified by SHA256 digital signature though.
Today's Windows versions only accept SHA-256 digital signatures, while some older Windows versions only accept SHA-1 digital signatures. To have only one VirtualBox installation package for all (supported and unsupported) Windows versions, ... ;)
robpats
Posts: 10
Joined: 27. Apr 2013, 19:29

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by robpats »

To be more specific, I noticed that the time of signing by SHA1 digital signature is in 2014.
I have checked the binary on Windows 7 and XP.
Its integrity cannot be verified on Windows 7 and XP as well.
Same error messages are shown.

VirtualBox 6.1.34 Windows binary is only signed by SHA256 digital signature.
I wonder if this is the intended way of signing for compatibility or there are some bugs in the signing procedures.
scottgus1
Site Moderator
Posts: 20965
Joined: 30. Dec 2009, 20:14
Primary OS: MS Windows 10
VBox Version: PUEL
Guest OSses: Windows, Linux

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by scottgus1 »

robpats wrote:I wonder if this is the intended way of signing for compatibility or there are some bugs in the signing procedures.
I can't speak to the devs' intentions on signing certificates, or to what they're actually able to do nowadays with what certificates they can get.

Windows 7 is no longer a supported host OS with 6.1, so I'd bet the devs would no longer consider it a requirement to get 6.1's executables to have a Windows 7-compatible certificate.

However, Windows 7 can apply Server 2008 r2's Microsoft update to get SHA256 signature capability, see viewtopic.php?f=6&t=103731&p=505523#p505520
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/top ... a4cde8e64f

I have a vague recollection that Vista might be able to get the same signing capability, if the Server 2008 r1 update exists.

XP has the "Continue anyway?" button to allow unsigned executables, so one could simply "continue anyway" when the lack of signature is pointed out. I don't remember any attempt by MS or others to give XP SHA256 capability.
phild
Posts: 26
Joined: 7. Aug 2016, 17:31

VB 6.1.36

Post by phild »

I upgraded my version of VB from 6.1.34 to 6.1.36 this morning and now I cannot start one of the VMs. I am getting the message that the start was abored. I did try to look at the logs but being non technical I didn't fine much in there. There are three VMs on the machine - the WinXP and Kubunbu VMs start fine. It is the Fedora 35 Server VM that will not start. Not sure what I should be looking for.
phild
Posts: 26
Joined: 7. Aug 2016, 17:31

Re: VB 6.1.36

Post by phild »

It would appear to be a VB problem as I restored an earlier working version of the VM, and its the same thing- after the grub menu it aborts.
phild
Posts: 26
Joined: 7. Aug 2016, 17:31

Re: Discuss the VirtualBox 6.1.36 release here.

Post by phild »

Should it help - here is a log from the aborted machine.

Update - I just tried to boot the Fedora Server 35 ISO and it also aborts - it does the countdown for the boot and then aborts!

[
Attachments
FedoraLog202207-23.txt
Log from aborted Fedora 35 Server VM
(84.25 KiB) Downloaded 21 times
Post Reply