Hi,
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 05:34:57PM +0800, Daniel Sim wrote:
> Unless there are undiscovered vulnerabilities in the .NET framework itself,
>
> 1. It is necessary to move away from pure C programs for Windows.
> Microsoft's documentation for the services API apart from the .NET
> framework is non-existent / hard to find. The lack of documentation will
> make such programs increasingly hard to maintain. Fact is, GUIs written in
> pure C/C++ are not really encouraged by Microsoft anymore, and even
> openvpn-gui would benefit from moving to C#.
This is actually a fairly strong (I would even say "compelling") argument
for the C# rewrite. "Working and reliably supported API" is a killer :-)
("Having to install .NET runtime" might not be such a big issue nowadays,
as most of the machines should have it already)
[..]
> The source code for openvpnserv.exe (C) isn't long, and neither is the
> source code for openvpnserv2 (C#). I think one could review it in less than
> an hour. However, to implement the same features in the old openvpnserv
> would have required quite a bit of low-level juggling.
In case we stay with openvpnserv2, I think some followup questions
need to be asked...
- do we want to migrate "interactive service" functionality into
openvpnserv2 as well? More code, but not overly complex stuff
(if the network/route API in C# isn't totally different from C) -
and all the arguments from above apply to the interactive service
as well, of course
- should "the service(s)" live inside the main openvpn repo, in the
GUI repo, in their own repo, ...?
- what code change rules apply? I tend to opt for "openvpn main repo"
rules, that is, no change goes in without review & ACK - a bad or
malicious commit to the service could compromise the system security
about as badly as a bad commit inside openvpn. I am aware that this
is a totally annoying process, especially if the code author has to
wait for months for an ACK to a trivial change - but hopefully a
somewhat larger active developer base can improve on this.
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [email protected]
fax: +49-89-35655025 [email protected]
