|
The name of the process is "winword.exe", not "winword".
Oh! And your code is making the rather LARGE assumption that there will only be one instance of Word running, created by your application. That is simplly not going to be the case and you should NOT be blindly killing off every instance of Word you find.
|
|
|
|
|
Your entire concept is flawed. You cannot reliably check to see if the time has been altered without using an external (on the Internet) time source.
And you really don't need two processes for this...
|
|
|
|
|
I know my code is "FLAWED" but my concept is not wrong as because in my area everybody does not have internet connection or Internet connection is not available for everybody as everybody can not bear the cost of internet connection.
So I have to do it without internet connection (External resource of DateTime checking).
I again say my code is FLAWED and that is why I am asking a help from you people. I know you all are exparts.
|
|
|
|
|
Again, there is NO WAY to check to see if the Date/Time has changed without an external time source. You can NOT do what you want without one.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you sir for your reply.
But I know one thing. THERE IS NOTHING IMPOSSIBLE IN THIS WORLD. I do not want to invent anything but I have to discover the solution of my problem.
But the problem is I DO NOT HAVE MORE KNOWLEDGE IN VB.NET.
Thank you again for your quick and kind reply.
|
|
|
|
|
Biplob Singha Shee wrote: THERE IS NOTHING IMPOSSIBLE IN THIS WORLD
One, you're one THOSE. OK Mr. Smarty Pants. Lay flat on the ground and have a 6 ton African elephant stand directly on your chest for 10 minutes. Live to tell us about how it felt.
Biplob Singha Shee wrote: I have to discover the solution of my problem.
For the last time... Without a connection to an external time source, be it on the internet or a physically and properly secured server machine on the network that your client machine is connected to THERE IS NO WAY TO DETECT IF THE SYSTEM CLOCK IS NOT CORRECT.
Have a nice life.
|
|
|
|
|
Ha ha ha ha 
Do you want to give me solution or wanna kill me ?? 
Actually I do not want to argue with you or this forum is not for the ARGUMENT. I just want to eat an apple but you are preventing me for cutting the apple tree. Oh boss why should I cut the tree ??? I can get it from the tree or if I cannot, I can easily get it from the market no ???
Important thing is how and which way a person implements his/her idea or concept. It is not that he/she should stroke his/her head with a hammer to get the real way.
I again say I do not want to argue with you as you are an expert and I am just a novice and I accept that. and NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE in terms of implementing the code.
If you have solution then please give me. If not I am requesting you please do not try to use abusive language. Please try to respect everybody as they are not actually hurting you... as YOU ARE AN EXPERT I am accepting..... and everybody will accept also, but that does not mean the others are less.
modified 9-Jul-13 13:48pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Biplob Singha Shee wrote: NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE in terms of implementing the code.
Really? Outside of the code itself, just how are you going to RELIABLY determine if the clock has been rolled back without an external time source?
I guarantee that every method you come acrossed, that doesn't use an external time source, can be easily defeated.
You're looking for a solution that doesn't exist!
|
|
|
|
|
Somewhere somebody told this type of negetive answer before human reaches moon.
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: I guarantee that every method you come acrossed, that doesn't use an external time source, can be easily defeated.
I know it can be defeated but not
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: easily
It is not that easy for everybody to defeat others.
I am confident because I have already implemented my concept (not windows process) of clock manipulation in visual basic 6.0 (without any external resource of DateTime) and I somewhat succeeded. Yes SOMEWHAT as I know (as I have already told some time ago) my code is not full-proof but my concept is not wrong. What is the wrong in it if I want to try At least ?
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: You're looking for a solution that doesn't exist!
One thing I would like to ask you.....
DO YOU KNOW EVERY PROCEDURE/SOLUTION ???
|
|
|
|
|
Biplob Singha Shee wrote: One thing I would like to ask you.....
DO YOU KNOW EVERY <br />
PROCEDURE/SOLUTION ???
To this problem?? Yes.
And, yes, EASILY defeated. The ONLY methods to combat clock tampering that have any security at all all involve using an external time source.
The whole point behind doing this is protecting your application from people who "try" but never "buy". There are various levels of people who will steal your software. The "script kiddies" being at the bottom of the list and all-out "hackers" at the top. What you propose will stop the know-nothing "script kiddies" and that's about it. Get someone who know anything about what you're doing watching the clock and your code starts to fall very easily.
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: your code starts to fall very easily.
Do you really want to help me ? It seems you are continuously trying to make me wrong. Ok. I accept I am wrong. But what is the problem if I try with that ? I KNOW MAY BE MY METHOD IS WRONG BUT MY CONCEPT IS NOT WRONG OR I HAVE TO REVIEW MY METHOD.
You do not have even a single solution for a local system where internet is not connected and you are trying to teach me with external source.
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: And, yes, EASILY defeated.
No, sorry, not easily. Because everybody is not Dave Kreskowiak right? I am confident because I have already implemented that and I somewhat succeeded. Yes SOMEWHAT because I know my loose points but a user never never never finds that as users are not Dave Kreskowiak right?
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: The "script kiddies" being at the bottom of the list and all-out "hackers" at the top
This will happen when my program will be popular and will be found from any source. And with in that period if I live, I will solve it believe me.
and last...............
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: To this problem?? Yes.
Then you are GOD ............
...........and I don't wanna argue with him.
So please don't waste your time to answer me. I know I cannot get any help from you, at least I didn't get any for last 4 hours.
So many thanks for your kind valuable time for me. Thank you again....
|
|
|
|
|
Biplob Singha Shee wrote: Then you are GOD ............
No, just very educated on the subject.
Have a nice life!
|
|
|
|
|
Dave Kreskowiak wrote: Have a nice life!
Same to you Boss.
|
|
|
|
|
Biplob Singha Shee wrote: I do not want to invent anything but I have to discover the solution of my problem.
There is no way to "guarantee" that you are getting "the real date". Take a step back; what if your code runs in a VM? How would you know? How would you verify that today isn't Christmasday 1999?
The worst part of copy-protection schemes is that they piss of real users; would you invalidate my copy when Europe hits summer-time?
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: would you invalidate my copy when Europe hits summer-time?
Certainly not but what would you do if a computer does not have the internet connection ?
Eddy Vluggen wrote: There is no way to "guarantee" that you are getting "the real date"
Boss, I am talking about local system not remote system.
Five local systems connected with LAN without any internet connection. What would you do in that ?
|
|
|
|
|
Biplob Singha Shee wrote: Certainly not but what would you do if a computer does not have the internet connection ?
Trust the datetime returned by the normal system-calls.
Biplob Singha Shee wrote: Five local systems connected with LAN without any internet connection. What would you do in that ?
A USB hardware (c)lock.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: A USB hardware (c)lock.
What to do with that? and what it does ?
|
|
|
|
|
Biplob Singha Shee wrote: What to do with that? and what it does ?
As the name suggests; you can get hardware-dongles like these[^] that offer "more" protection than a standard date-time call.
Or, alternatively, a clock[^].
There's no software solution to the problem of getting the "real current date".
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Yes Boss you are right. But in our area, a user won't pay for that. They want Cheapest price but feature full software.  Boss you cannot understand in which environment we have to work...
Our users want....
a. Cheapest price
b. Software with extended feature
c. Development support (Any time they can tell us to develop a new module within a short period)
d. No renewal
e. If system crashes, data recovery
and many more....... you cannot believe
modified 9-Jul-13 17:43pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Biplob Singha Shee wrote: Our users want....
f. should be done yesterday
g. should not contain ANY errors (expected or unexpected)
h. should run on the oldest hardware in the company, but at the same speed as newer computers
i. if the OS (or even the printer) gives an error while running your app, it's the apps fault
j. should be available on the internet, even without connection
k. should be built using WPF, and still run on Linux
l. should not be in a managed language because that's slow, but it has to be a .NET language
m. should be able to handle 8 Gb of memory, even on a 1Gb 32bit XP machine. After all, it's got "virtual memory".
..whatever they want will come at a price-tag, and will have to be realistic.
You can write the last "known datetime" to a textfile, and check that when you start your app; if your last previous start was "in the future", compared to today, you'll know that the clock has been turned back. Or that the battery of the internal clock died, either one.
That's also easy to circumvent if one wants to copy the app illegaly - so the question is rather if the users "need" this.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: You can write the last "known datetime" to a textfile, and check that when you
start your app; if your last previous start was "in the future", compared to
today, you'll know that the clock has been turned back. Or that the battery of
the internal clock died, either one.
In fact, I have a system running well for nearly five years.
Is provided to the client an encrypted file for activation and with license information, which contains the current date (validated by our services). In the process of software installation, this file is copied to the client system.
Whenever the application starts up, this date in the license file is compared with the data from the local system. If the local system date is older than the date recorded in the license file, this indicates that the user manipulated the date (or the BIOS battery is over).
In such case, the application will inform the user of this and will automatically terminate. Even in this case the current system date is recorded in the file whenever it is greater than data recorded previously.
In any situation, you should call on our helpdesk services for assessment.
The system is working very well for the needs. So far, no complaints from customers.
Just trying to help.
Artur Gomes
|
|
|
|
|
This strikes me as an adequate solution, won't guarantee a hacker won't break it but obviously works well for a real world solution. There are probably a limited number ofpeople who would bother breaking some reasonable encryption (we use to add 127 to each character in the early 90s and it worked fine).
I can't understand why Dave didn't suggest this 120 posts ago!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Deeming wrote: Even if you use the IP address?
I'd curse for a second and fire up fiddler as a reverse proxy.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I have a form with about 10 text boxes . Now I need to allow the user to press the Enter key .
For Example -:
Textbox1.Text
Textbox2.Text
Textbox3.Text
Textbox4.Text
Textbox5.Text
Textbox6.Text
Textbox7.Text
Textbox8.Text
Textbox9.Text
Textbox10.Text
When i enter the detail in first Textbox user need to press " ENTER ". If user press ENTER button cursor will moving Textbox2.Again press "Enter" cursor will going Textbox 3.So I need to make for all textboxes likethis ? How can i ? Can You help me ? Thank You....
|
|
|
|
|
It's the TAB key, not the Enter key. The Enter key is expected to cause the same effects as a click on the OK button.
Make sure that the TabIndex property of your TextBoxes matches their expected order.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
