I set it up the way I want it. It keeps changing it (for example, setting up the NIC's and bonding settings in the shop for the install particulars, then RH keeps changing it. One of many many examples)
So, a setting that says 'I'll set it up the way I want, and if there's problems I'll deal with them. Quit trying to help me".
Thanks.
I am not sure that there is a "Help Me" setting. What you are describing sounds like configurations being overwritten by defaults or processes. For instance, network files will be overwritten if you have DHCP enabled. You can customize your /etc/resolv.conf file all you want, but if you have dhcp enabled, that file will be updated and your changes lost. (unless you make it read only)
Is this what you are talking about?
Related
How do applications like CloneDVD2 or AnyDVD know that the free phase is over, even if the application was uninstalled and then re-installed? Those applications don't require the user to login so that they could identify the user again.
Also on deinstalling them a window pops up asking whether the "registration files" should be kept or not. Even if they are not kept, the re-installed application knows the demo-time is over.
How is that technically realized?
Could be everything...
You might reverse the algorithm to find out.
But to name an example:
It's possible to generate a hash, based on unique hardware identifiers, of your hardware configuration and send that over the internet to a database.
If your hash exists over there, the software knows you ran it before.
An other option is leaving tracking information inside of your OS. So the checkbox: delete register information, isn't deleting everything.
To test:
1) Switch GPU or CPU :P
2) Format & Reinstall computer
Is there anyway to replicate the terminal services Change Port command permanently, currently when i use said command it has to be done each time i logon, is there a way that this can be achieved permanently without stepping through MMC?
kind regards
stefan
If I am understanding right, I think this MS Support article is what you need.
How to change Terminal Server's listening port
I have half an answer; anyone with more clues is welcome to add to this. Also, this has only been tested on Windows 7.
There is a value "PortName" in "HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Enum\<vendor-specific>\Device Parameters" that contains the port assignment. Change this to the desired COM port. A reboot may be required to make the assignment take, but once it takes, it'll stick.
Unfortunately, the "FriendlyName" value in "HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Enum\<vendor-specific>" does not change when you do this, and (at least for my hardware on Win7) only SYSTEM has the rights to change that value, or to change the permissions on that key.
The other option, as mentioned above, is to add the relevant command to the Run section.
(EDIT: Sorry; didn't notice the "registry is a no-go" comment below.)
I want that an exe file can't be copied or cut from the Windows file system to paste somewhere.
The exe is made in C#. which must have to be in only one PC.
I have worked with FileSystemWatcher, NSIS, Clipboard. but for all I need to detect whether that file is being copied.
I also have seen 'Prevent'(http www free-download-blog.com disable-cut-paste-copy-delete-rename-functions-using-prevent ), but I need to prevent only that particular exe from being copied or cut.
Any pointer or idea will help.
As others have suggested you won't be able to disable the copy/cut behaviour so easily.
An alternative would be to disable the execution of the copied versions. In your executable you could check many things like :
The path of the present executable is explicitly your_path
The name of the machine and user is the one you authorise
You could even prevent the file of being executed more than once using Windows register entries (if already 1 don't launch). It won't be perfect since any experimented user could tweak that out, assuming they are seeking for that. But depending on your users profile it might be sufficient.
If you need the exe to be executable, you need to permit loading it into memory.
As soon as you do, anyone can read it to memory using ReadFile and then write to an arbitrary location using WriteFile. No shell-detectable copying involved.
A good reading: Raymond's post and its comments on preventing copying.
Well, this is a hard problem. Even if you get explorer.exe to disable cut&paste, what prevents a user from using the command window? Or writing their own exe to do it? Booting up in linux and reading it?
Still, you have a few options (there will be more, most likely) which you could try:
Use the right permissions: Set the
permissions such that the users who
you don't want to cut&paste cannot
read the file.
Write a device driver which can hook
onto the filesystem calls and do that
for you.
Encrypt the file.
And some hacky options like:
Use the APPINIT_DLLS regkey to put your own dll to be loaded into each process ( I am not sure if this will work with console process though). Then on your dll load, do IAT hooking to replace the kernel32.dll file calls.
Replace kernel32.dll with your own version. Might have to do some messing around with the PE format etc.
There are no guarantees though. If for instance, you expect them to be able to execute it, but not copy it, you are probably stuck.
Any local admin will be able to undo anything you do to prevent copying. I can pretty much guarantee the program on that page you mention relies on a service or background process to prevent copy-and-paste, and therefore is easily circumventable. If your users are in a closed environment where none of them are admins and they have very limited rights to their PCs, then you have a chance.
if you could completly block explorer from copying or moving files, then all u need is a 3rd party software for copying files (but make sure it can filter file extensions) for example Copy Handler
Set up an ENVIRONMENT variable in your machine
In your code add a check
if (ENVIRONMENT Variable=='Same as defined')
//Execute code
else
//Suspend execution
To me its a no-brainer. The settings for my program go into the Windows Registry. After all, that's what it's for, isn't it?
But some programmers are still hesitant in using the Registry. They state that as it grows it slows down your computer. Or they state that it gets corrupted and causes your computer to malfunction.
So they write their own configuration files, or may use the INI files that Microsoft has depreciated since a few OS's ago.
From what I hear, the problems with the registry that occurred in early Windows OS's were mostly fixed as of Windows XP. It may be the plethora of companies that make Registry Cleaners that are keeping up the rumors that "registry bloat" and "orphaned entries" are still bad.
So I ask, is there any reason today not to use the Windows Registry to store my program configuration settings?
If the user does not allow registry access, you're screwed.
If the user reinstalls Windows and he wants to migrate his settings, it's much more complicated than with a simple file
Working with a config file means your app is portable
Much simpler for the user to change a setting manually
When you'll want to port your app to other OS, what are you gonna do with your registry settings ?
Windows Registry is bloated. Do you really want to contribute to this chaos?
For me, quickly installing, migrating and moving applications is a key point to productivity. I can't if I need to care of hundreds of possible registry keys. If there's a simple .ini or .cfg or .xml file somewhere in my user folder (or even the application directory if it is a portable app), migration is easy.
Often-heard argument pro registry: easy to write and read (assuming you're using plain WinAPI). Really? I consider the RegXXXfamily of functions pretty verbose ... too many function calls and typing work for storing just a few bits of information. So you always end up wrapping the registry away .. and now compare this effort with a simple text configuration file, maybe just key=value-like.
It depends, when you have small entries that need to read by multiple programs registry is ok, as database have locking issues, and config files are application based.
The problem happens when the user does not allow registry access, that are lots of software in the market that will show a pop up when anyone tries to modify registry and the user can cancel or allow the users. These programs are too common with the anti virus programs.
Putting your settings into the Registry means that if your user wants to move your program and its settings to another computer, he can't. Backup, ditto. Those settings are in a mysterious invisible place. I find this to be a hostile approach to one's users.
I've written numerous small-to-medium programs, and always used a .ini file. A tech-savy user can edit this file using an editor, he can check the settings in it, he can email it to a tech supporter, he can do a large variety of things that are significantly harder to do with registry entries.
And my programs don't contribute to slowing the computer down.
Personally speaking, I just don't like binary configuration of any type. I much prefer text file format which can be easily copied, edited, diffed & merged, and put under change control complete with history.
The last of these is the biggest reason not to use the registry - I can stick configuration files into SVN (or similar) with the full support given to text files, instead of having to treat it as a blob.
I don't really have much of an opinion for or against using the registry, but I'd like to note something... Many answers here indicate that registry access may be restricted for a certain user. I'd say the exact same thing goes for config files.
With registry you need to write to the "current user" to be fairly certain about having access (and should do so anyway, in many cases). Config files should be put in a user based area as well (e.g. AppData/Local) if you want "guaranteed" access without questions asked. As far as I know putting config files in "global" areas are as likely to yield access problems as the registry is.
I have some code that is reading a config file, but when I open the file in TextPad, I see different values than my application does. I checked it with Notepad. Notepad agrees with my application, TextPad shows something else.
This is on Vista x64 Business.
Any idea what could be causing this? I've looked in the Context Menu->Properties->Previous Versions details, but it says "There are no previous versions available".
Here's the steps to replicate (I can't make it happen reliably):
Installed .NET app in Program files.
That app reads the config file, but is falling over.
I manually edit that config file in Textpad.
The change doesn't take effect.
I open the config file in Notepad, and see something different.
Try making the change in Notepad and saving, and get this error message:
Notepad
Cannot create the C:\Program Files (x86)\Daniel Schaffer\WorkingOn for FogBugz\FogBugz > WorkingOn.exe.config file.
Make sure that the path and file name are correct.
I can't put the content here as it's XML and is being encoded by Superuser.com, but here's a link to a screencast: http://screencast.com/t/zhERl7mocp4.
Sounds like a case of you don't have administrator privs, when you installed your app. Sometimes when you install an app with no admin privs, it behave really strangely because of vista security model. I had a similar problem to this last year. It wasn't the exactly, but it was strange behaviour, until I figured out it was vista's security model. It elevates it into application/user security context, from what I know, as my brain froze when I was reading about it, as it was pure muck and virtually useless from what I can see.
Try opening Textpad (excellent app) with Run as Administrator, and then edit the config. See what happens. If it stays then same then its a prives problem. If that doesn't work, deinstall you app, and then install it as an administrator. That will give the app the write admin privs to work. Then when you edit the config. See if that works.
Take a look at this. You can elevate an app to run as administrator, Using the techniques found here. How to elevate an application.. Try all these before you do a reinstall.
If that doesn't work, post your question to server fault. Also post it to a suitable MSDN forum.
Hope that help.
Bob.
This is interesting. My guess is that a Vista Feature called UAC Virtualization (aka Data Redirection) is at work here. It basically redirects legacy applications to %USERPROFILE%\AppData\VirtualStore\Program Files\... so they can write files in the program's directory.
Maybe Textpad tries to open the file in read-write mode while both your application and Notepad use it read-only?
You can fire up Process Monitor to see the exact magic, and please let me know ;-)
Try just to strip that whitespace character from application name; my guess is something related to canonical path building
try to copy file to another path and reopen it. see if it changes the result.
One thing you can do is observe what exact file each of those methods ends up opening. To do this,
launch Process Monitor from the sysinternal suite.
look only for file operations (deselect registry operations on the right of the toolbar)
select only your own process (filter out all the processes that you don't care about, or just include your own process name in the filter list)
You can also simply use the search function for your file name, this might be the faster route.
Process monitor has helped me find so many issues it's amazing.