Re[2]: Authenticode (Digital Signatures) for plugins
Hello Alexey, Monday, December 17, 2007, 19:10:12, you wrote: >>So, since The Bat plugin IS the dll, it CANT be linked with this >>option anyway! Another settings (NX_COMPAT, DYNAMIC_BASE) are well and >>easy can be used on MSVS Thank you for pointing that out! -- Best regards, Maxim Masiutinmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Authenticode (Digital Signatures) for plugins
Hello Marek, Wednesday, September 05, 2007, 22:15:29, you wrote: >>this sounds OK for me, I am asking early because we can discuss it here. I >>am not against certificates, but development of some useful plugins was >>cancelled already and I do not see aby reason they should open development >>to implement certificates and pay for them, if they provided them free of >>charge. I see it from development's POV, even I am not developer ;-) Ritlabs may sign the abandoned plugins with its own certificate if we will get a permission from the developer of plugin. -- Best regards, Maxim Masiutinmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Authenticode (Digital Signatures) for plugins
Hello George, Wednesday, September 05, 2007, 21:11:24, you wrote: >>I concur. Development of freeware plugins faces imminent danger if developers >>have to pay. And there is more. Even if a developer choses to pay from his >>pocket, his plugin may uses a third party dll that is not signed! You see the >>problems? I don't think that use of "signed only plugins" worth it. During the whole history of The Bat! development there is almost no problems with antivirus and macros plugins. The most problematic are anti-spam plugins. They are the most frequent source of "access violation" and other exceptions, mostly at startup and mail check, and the users are claiming that this is the problem of The Bat! For the technical support, it is hard to figure out whether the user has a plugin. Implementing digital signatures for anti-spam plugins will make obsolete old plugins which are the source of access voiolations and "endless loops". -- Best regards, Maxim Masiutinmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Authenticode (Digital Signatures) for plugins
Hello Marek, Tuesday, September 04, 2007, 21:58:53, you wrote: >>as Vitaly told me, certificate costs 200$ per year, if is this correct, do >>You expect, developers will implement it? I know that certificates are expensive, but it worth its price. -- Best regards, Maxim Masiutinmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Authenticode (Digital Signatures) for plugins
Hello Peter, Tuesday, September 04, 2007, 20:36:18, you wrote: >>Would you mind to inform the author of the antispamsniper plugin too? >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] We have contacted them already at http://antispamsniper.com/forum/viewtopic.php -- Best regards, Maxim Masiutinmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Authenticode (Digital Signatures) for plugins
Hello Marek, Sunday, September 02, 2007, 0:08:55, you wrote: >>which next version of TB will require this? We don't know, but we plan to implement this in November 2007. -- Best regards, Maxim Masiutinmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
