I'm trying to port a win32 application to Windows Mobile 6 / 6.1 / 6.5. It uses winhttp which doesn't appear to be available on the mobile platforms.
My initial thought was to replace it with WinInet - but I wondered if anyone had a better idea?
WinInet is actually a more appropriate HTTP client library for client nodes.
Here's some things I like about WinInet voer WinHttp:
If your client app needs to make lots of requests from the same server, WinInet will implicitly queue the requests up so as not to flood the server. (But is transparent to the client app). In other words, it respects RFC 2616 guidelines on simultaneous connections. This is great when your app is pulling down a lot of images (or files) from the same server simultanously.
Will the use the IE cache for fetching content. (Which I assume an equivalent cache exists on Mobile platforms).
Proxy server auto-detected from IE settings. Probably less of an issue with mobile since the IP network is a bit more open. But if you had to support proxy servers with WinHttp, you'd have to use other API calls to specify the server directly.
I've used Wininet and it works. But it's not ideal as its timeouts are broken. And developing a complete asynchronous design with it required a ton of code.
So instead, I'm trying libcurl.
So far though, I still haven't managed to get it compile properly and link. Porting stuff is such a pain sometimes. But I digress. ;)
Related
I have recently been sharing the connection of my mobile device to my laptop, when i'm out and about, through the use of an app called netshare. It provides a https proxy I believe through which it acts as a network repeater?(not sure about this part). I can access webpages and such quite easily. However, I have realised that I cannot connect to some apps. For example, I cannot use spotify. Installing some other apps like games etc also prove to fail. I have done a bit of research and found that apparently I could only surf the web with a https proxy. However, I found this to be unambiguous. Does this mean that I can only make https requests? Or is this because of https using TCP over UDP? What are the limitations and what can I do to possibly solve it?
Thanks
I have setup a windows 2003 ftp server and using chilkat to connect to this ftp inside my customized application. My application is developed in VB6 with ftp support of chilkat. The application works on different places of the city and connects to my ftp. Unable to access ftp and transfer files using the customised application, from some networks like idea netsetter / bsnl. It works perfect on other networks.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Sam
This is likely to be a firewall issue at the client end. FTP is often blocked by firewalls.
Just as well, FTP has its problems making it a less than ideal alternative. There are better options such as SFTP or FTPS but support for those is limited in Windows and you'll have to buy both server and client pieces to use one of them.
Fewer firewalls block HTTP and HTTPS though some are finicky enough to block traffic that doesn't look like Web browsing. Stiil, your odds of success go up substantially.
An obvious choice might be to use WebDAV. IIS supports WebDAV and it is pretty easy to write simple WebDAV client logic in VB6 based on one of the many HTTP components available. I'd probably use XmlHttpRequest or WinHttpRequest for that. A search ought to turn up several VB6 classes written to wrap one of them to support WebDAV client operations. You can also buy WebDAV client libraries.
Stick to using HTTPS (which means you need a server cetificate for IIS) and you won't have passwords going over the network in the clear. Even if you use HTTP you'll be no worse off than using FTP, plus it'll work through the vast majority of firewalls except those that specifically block non-browsing HTTP requests.
This could be a firewall configuration on the Client or Server. You're not going to be able to do much about the client, but for the server it may depend on whether your doing Active or Passive FTP connections.
If you are doing Active connections, make sure ports 20 and 21 are open.
If you're doing Passive connections, you may want to check out this article about configuring the PassivePortRange in Server 2003 FTP- http://support.microsoft.com/?id=555022.
I am searching for a server push technology for my web application.
I would like to use a similar technology as StackOverflow, as that one is working very well.
So, are there any suggestions?
For server-to-client push Server-Sent Events is a better choice than WebSockets. GitHub uses SSE for automatically showing new comments, pull requests, etc.
SSE is HTTP-compatible, so it will work with proxy servers and you won't need HTTPS to have it working in practice (e.g. plenty of mobile operators have a HTTP proxy that breaks unencrypted WebSockets, but SSE works fine).
SSE connection is lightweight and quick. There's no extra handshake and connection upgrade procedure. If you have SSE on every page, then your server will have less work to do.
SSE protocol is super simple. You don't need special web server or library for it, and it can be polyfilled for old browsers.
I suggest you have a look at QWebSockets, if you control the server-side.
Otherwise, socket.io is a good candidate.
There are also ghosted services like Pusher and PubNub, which are free for a moderate number of push messages.
Need to be able to continuously receive calls when a Chrome webpage is open. How do I do that even for users who are inside a strict enterprise network?
WebSockets? (but there's the proxy problems that doesn't know what wss:// is)
HTTP? (but will I have to poll?)
Other?
Since you included the "vLine" tag, I'll reply with some information on how our WebRTC platform will behave in an enterprise network. vline.js will use a secure WebSocket by default if the browser supports it and fall back to HTTPS long polling. As described here, the secure WebSocket may work depending on the exact proxy configuration. Feel free to test it out by using GitTogether or creating your own vLine service for testing.
I have an app, and it makes an https connection to a server. Is it possible to use something like wireshark or charlesproxy to just see the useragent that it's connecting with? I don't want to see any of the actual data, just the useragent - but I'm not sure if that is encrypted as well? (and if it's worth trying)
Thanks
Is it possible to...
No. Browser first establishes secure connection with server, then use it for transfer all data including requests' data, various headers etc.
Too late for the original inquirer, but the answer is that it may be possible in some cases, depending on application implementation.
You can use fiddler, and by turning on the 'decrypt https traffic' you also have visibility to the HTTPS content in some cases.
What fiddler does (on windows at least) is register itself within the wininet as system proxy. It can also add certificates (requires your approval when you select to decrypt https traffic) and generates on the fly certificates for the accessed domains, thus being MitM.
Applications using this infrastructure will be 'exposed' to this MitM. I ran fiddler and ran a few applications and was able to view https traffic related to office products (winword, powerpoint, outlook) other MS executables (Searchprotocolhost.exe) but also to some non-microsoft products such as apple software update, cisco jabber)