Comments
Sort by recent activity
Brian,
I confirm that Authenticode does work. The confusion was coming from the SDK tool that I was using to verify that assemblies were marked as released or not.
It would be nice to add to the SmartAssembly UI a simple assembly management tool (list assembly marked as released, edit this setting, etc).
Thanks,
Antoine / comments
Brian,
I confirm that Authenticode does work. The confusion was coming from the SDK tool that I was using to verify that assemblies were marked as released or not.
It would be nice to add to the Sm...
I will reply to my own question 2!
Playing with the SDK I found two things:
- a bug
- how to get build version
In order to understand the following, open the SmartAssembly.Database project found in the SDK.
1- The bug:
The DataBase application incorrectly reports the Build Date. Instead of displaying the Build Date it displays the Build Last Access Date.
See:
private void getBuilds_Click(object sender, System.EventArgs e)
In:
Form1.cs
2- How to get Build Date and Build Version:
Open: BuildInformation.cs
At the bottom of the file, you will find a switch() with the following cases:
- "AssemblyID"
- "ProjectID"
- "LastAccessDate"
- "Released"
- "Map"
After a quick debug, I have found that the DB records two additional fields:
- "BuildDate" (DateTime type)
- "BuildVersion" (String type)
From there it is easy to add BuildDate and BuildVersion to the switch() and BuildDate and BuildVersion properties to the BuildInformation class.
A few modifications to Form1 will allow you to display complete information about builds with Build Date, Version, etc.
To Red Gate: it would be a good idea to at least fix the bug I have found in the SDK sample! Better, also add the modifications I have suggested.
Knowing exactly which builds are marked as released is quite useful.
Thanks,
Antoine / comments
I will reply to my own question 2!
Playing with the SDK I found two things:
- a bug
- how to get build version
In order to understand the following, open the SmartAssembly.Database project found in...
Thanks for your reply, Paul.
The wording in SmartAssembly is a bit misleading for that feature.
Suggestion:
- change the wording.
- much better: add to SmartAssembly what your are telling me! Since SmartAssembly already Strong Name sign the assemblies, it should not be too complicated to compute and verify a hash.
Antoine / comments
Thanks for your reply, Paul.
The wording in SmartAssembly is a bit misleading for that feature.
Suggestion:
- change the wording.
- much better: add to SmartAssembly what your are telling me! Since...
Thanks Dom for the info.
Two suggestions:
- Add a link to this doc in the app (or if it is already there make it more visible).
- Have a kind of white paper written on SmartAssembly. It is difficult to understand what are the pros and cons of each SmartAssembly option. Also a quick crash course on Obfuscation would be nice. Your customers are probably experienced developers but are not necessarily very knowledgeable on obfuscation.
Thanks,
Antoine / comments
Thanks Dom for the info.
Two suggestions:
- Add a link to this doc in the app (or if it is already there make it more visible).
- Have a kind of white paper written on SmartAssembly. It is difficul...