IC TC5504P
Thomas Altenbuchner
4kx1 SRAM of Toshiba which was produced in the eighties, but wasn't able to
find any datasheet for this IC.
I wrote to Toshiba but they answered that the datasheet is no longer
available.
Are there any similar datasheets online I could use, or could you give me
some information about the usage of this part on another way?
Otherwise, how can I figure out the pin connections?
Thanks in advance
Thomas
Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"
"Thomas Altenbuchner" <aon.96...@aon.at> wrote in message
news:42e3d26d$0$30410$91ce...@newsreader02.highway.telekom.at...
I couldn't find anything useful with google. www.nteinc.com might have
something, but the paper crossref only gives a 65101 for a static mem
chip, which is 22 pins.
My old 1984 TI MOS memory data book shows the following crosses for a
4k x 1 mem chip (but nothing for Toshiba)
TI TMS4044 / TMS40L44
AMD AM4044
Intersil IM7141 / IM7141L
Nat'l MM2141
Mitsubishi M5T4044
Mostek MK4104
NEC uPD4104
Synertek SY2141 / SY2141L
You should be able to find some info on one of those online. If you can
verify that your chips cross to one of the above, but you still can't
find a pinout, then email me and I'll try to get you a pic of the
manual.
Include the word NOSPAM in the subject line. I'm alondra101 <at>
hotmail.com. I get an extreme amount of spam at this address, so please
obey that rule, and hope I can find yours among all the litter. :-(
Piotr Piatek
>I recently found some old IC's of the type TC5504P. I found out that it's a
>4kx1 SRAM of Toshiba which was produced in the eighties, but wasn't able to
>find any datasheet for this IC.
Here's the datasheet: http://www.pisi.com.pl/piotr433/tc5504.zip
Piotr
Thomas Altenbuchner
"Piotr Piatek" <piot...@pisi.com.pl> wrote:
> Here's the datasheet: http://www.pisi.com.pl/piotr433/tc5504.zip
>
Thank you very much!
Thomas
Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"
"Piotr Piatek" <piot...@pisi.com.pl> wrote in message
news:ku69e1p1g3kf2kito...@4ax.com...
No offense, but I wouldn't download a .zip because it could be infected
with a virus. Sorry, but that's the reality of today's nasty malware.
Piotr Piatek
Dark Remover\" wrote:
>> Here's the datasheet: http://www.pisi.com.pl/piotr433/tc5504.zip
>>
>No offense, but I wouldn't download a .zip because it could be infected
>with a virus.
Are you serious? I cannot imagine how a computer could be infected by
saving any file to a disk, or typing PKUNZIP TC5504.ZIP from a DOS
prompt.
The archive contains four TIFF images. I believe that opening any file
with an image viewer should be safe.
Am I missing something?
Piotr
Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"
First off, there's nothing to gain and no need to use a .zip if the
files are already compressed, as .JPGs and .GIFs are. For line art and
print, a lossless compression such as .GIFs give better quality. .JPGs
look poor. For multi page documents use .PDF; freePDF is one prog to do
this.
And the average PC luser doesn't have a clue as to how to uncompress a
.ZIPped file, especially from the command prompt. Our helpdesk lady
often has to talk the average PC luser thru the process to get the IP
address of the PC: Start | run | cmd<enter? ipconfig<enter> etc.
Piotr Piatek
Dark Remover\" wrote:
>First off, there's nothing to gain and no need to use a .zip if the
>files are already compressed, as .JPGs and .GIFs are.
A single archive file is easier to handle than a bunch of files.
>For line art and
>print, a lossless compression such as .GIFs give better quality. .JPGs
>look poor. For multi page documents use .PDF; freePDF is one prog to do
>this.
Ok, future documents will be published in adherence to your hints.
>And the average PC luser doesn't have a clue as to how to uncompress a
>.ZIPped file, especially from the command prompt.
I assume a certain level of intelligence from people interested in
semiconductor datasheets :)
Piotr
Franc Zabkar
Dark Remover\"" <NOS...@dslextreme.com> put finger to keyboard and
composed:
Can you show me one antivirus program that is unable to detect malware
in .zip archives?
- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
Franc Zabkar
>For multi page documents use .PDF; freePDF is one prog to do
>this.
AFAICS PDFs offer no advantages over any other image format if the
document is a scan. In fact PDFs are tedious in this case because one
has to wait while Acrobat Reader or some other plugin is launched.
>And the average PC luser doesn't have a clue as to how to uncompress a
>.ZIPped file, ...
If you are using Windows, then click on the file, select Extract, and
specify a destination. I can't see that this would be too hard for
anyone watching this group.
Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover"
"Franc Zabkar" <fza...@optussnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:4f6oe1dniiar6u7m0...@4ax.com...
At work we use Antigen, and it _removes_any_ .ZIP, sticks a text file in
the that says it's removed to protect against viruses. People started
finding it was futile to send others a .ZIP thru the email. So that's
probably one good reason why the .ZIP has fallen out of favor.
Oh, BTW, _every_ antivirus program can't detect a _new_ virus, in or out
of a .ZIP, when it first comes out. Takes an update of the signature
file before it can detect it (we've BTDT, GTTS). Is this because the
antivirus prog makers don't want to lose their cash cow by making a
detector that they don't have to update? I thought that some detectors
were "holistic", could detect many variants of a virus. Just not all
variants...
Franc Zabkar
>
>"Franc Zabkar" <fza...@optussnet.com.au> wrote in message
>news:4f6oe1dniiar6u7m0...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 01:54:27 -0700, "Watson A.Name - \"Watt Sun, the
>> Dark Remover\"" <NOS...@dslextreme.com> put finger to keyboard and
>> composed:
>> >No offense, but I wouldn't download a .zip because it could be
>infected
>> >with a virus. Sorry, but that's the reality of today's nasty
>malware.
>>
>> Can you show me one antivirus program that is unable to detect malware
>> in .zip archives?
>At work we use Antigen, and it _removes_any_ .ZIP, sticks a text file in
>the that says it's removed to protect against viruses.
Is this the one?
http://www.sybari.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?Alias=Rainbow&TabId=3361&Lang=en-US
If so, then the FAQ would suggest that your sys admin is somewhat
paranoid:
===================================================================
Q: I read that attacks can be carried out against antivirus software
by nesting a large number of zipped files. Does Antigen allow the
Administrator to decide how many nested compressed files will be
scanned?
A: Yes. Administrators can set the number of allowed nested zipped
files. If this number is exceeded, Antigen will delete the file and
save a backup copy in the Incidents and Quarantine Database. See
"MaxNestedCompressedFile" in the General Options section of the User
Guide for more information on this feature.
Q: Can Antigen scan password protected Zip files?
A: No. Antigen cannot access password protected or encrypted file.
However, there is a feature that will allow password protected Zip
files to be deleted by Antigen.
===================================================================
>People started
>finding it was futile to send others a .ZIP thru the email. So that's
>probably one good reason why the .ZIP has fallen out of favor.
With respect, asking people to refrain from using ZIPs is like asking
the mountain to come to Mohammed.
>Oh, BTW, _every_ antivirus program can't detect a _new_ virus, in or out
>of a .ZIP, when it first comes out. Takes an update of the signature
>file before it can detect it (we've BTDT, GTTS). Is this because the
>antivirus prog makers don't want to lose their cash cow by making a
>detector that they don't have to update? I thought that some detectors
>were "holistic", could detect many variants of a virus. Just not all
>variants...
I'm prepared to accept that a bulletproof holistic approach to unknown
viruses is probably unachievable. However, I have a problem with any
antivirus product that fails to detect a *known* virus, or a known
variant. AFAIK, Kaspersky Labs produce the only product that
consistently scores 100% in this regard.
As for hiding viruses in archives, the most effective way would be to
avoid known archive types such as ZIPs. Instead, an intelligent
attacker could use one of many alternative self-extracting compression
formats specifically developed for the purpose. In fact, some AV
software doesn't even scan known archives. For example, Grisoft's AVG
ignores LZH files. One possible defence against these types of attacks
is to execute unknown software in a "sandbox". Finjan is one product
that does this.
Graham W
<...>
> I thought that
> some detectors were "holistic", could detect many variants of a
> virus. Just not all variants...
ITYM "heuristic".
Mine is EZAntivirus from Computer Associates which claims to to be such.
--
Graham W http://www.gcw.org.uk/ PGM-FI page updated, Graphics Tutorial
WIMBORNE http://www.wessex-astro-society.freeserve.co.uk/ Wessex
Dorset UK Astro Society's Web pages, Info, Meeting Dates, Sites & Maps
Change 'news' to 'sewn' in my Reply address to avoid my spam filter.
Franc Zabkar
<gra...@his.com.puter.INVALID> put finger to keyboard and composed:
>Watson A.Name - "Watt Sun, the Dark Remover" wrote:
><...>
>> I thought that
>> some detectors were "holistic", could detect many variants of a
>> virus. Just not all variants...
>
>ITYM "heuristic".
I knew that. :-)
>Mine is EZAntivirus from Computer Associates which claims to to be such.