How do I lock the summary part of an EXE I made so no one else can change the author, title, comments, and so on?
Edit EXE Summary
Miscellaneous Forums/General Discussion/Edit EXE Summary There is absolutely no way to do it.
Of course there is. You and I just don't know how to do it. Don't be so ignorant. The compiled B3D EXE's are locked.
..I do that by not typing that info between " " signs, but instead of that using small function for encription and basically setting up those info from crypted file..
But what do I do about the error that comes up every time I run the EXE that says something about "are you sure you want to run this program"..."couldn't find author"..."potential hazard"...blah blah.
But what do I do about the error that comes up every time I run the EXE that says something about "are you sure you want to run this program"..."couldn't find author"..."potential hazard"...blah blah.
Turn off UAC. "Don't be so ignorant"
That wasn't necessary. Let's behave like adults, eh?So how exactly do you encrypt exe information. I'm curious now, and I can't figure it from the hints so far.
Let's behave like adults, eh?
THAT was unnecessary.
There is absolutely no way to do it.
Thats ignorance. If you don't know how don't say it can't be done. You don't know everything.
The reason I believe it isn't possible is because the summary information isn't held in your exe. It's part of the file system and must be readable by the system, so any schemes you come up with to lock or encrypt it must be supported by the OS/file system. I never said I knew everything, and genuinely want to know the answer if it's possible. So what have you come up with?
By the way, thinking you can sell XOR encryption for 15 bucks is also ignorance. Having the audacity to market such a system ripped off from someone else's code is the icing on the cake.
By the way, thinking you can sell XOR encryption for 15 bucks is also ignorance. Having the audacity to market such a system ripped off from someone else's code is the icing on the cake.
sigh... keep it civil, children.
I'm done with this stupid site.
I'm done with this stupid site.
oh dear!
In all fairness, the only person that picked a fight in this thread Ked, was yourself.
Nobody has said anything out of place, maybe tomorrow you might try getting out of bed from the other side! ;)
Dabz
Quick! Somebody fetch the Tampax(tm)!
@GfK... I laughed that hard I nearly choked on inhaled ciggie smoke, ya tinker! :)
Back on topic, I thought all that information was saved inside an exe file as a resource... Where Windows extracts infomation from the .exe file (Like an icon) and shows it in the folder view.
As Nomen luni rightly points out, unless the OS knows how to extract then decrypt this resource, its a non starter.
I may be wrong, or a numb member of 'a stupid site', but thats how I see it from here.
Dabz
Back on topic, I thought all that information was saved inside an exe file as a resource... Where Windows extracts infomation from the .exe file (Like an icon) and shows it in the folder view.
As Nomen luni rightly points out, unless the OS knows how to extract then decrypt this resource, its a non starter.
I may be wrong, or a numb member of 'a stupid site', but thats how I see it from here.
Dabz
Yes, that's resource, use ResHacker to open an exe and you can see version information.
It's possible to lock it and make it still viewable by Windows, use PE Cryptors like PECompact/ExeCrypt, the version information is still there but unable to be modified.
BTW, you can implement CRC check if you want, in some cases it's not required to modify those info coz there's no affect on execution.
It's possible to lock it and make it still viewable by Windows, use PE Cryptors like PECompact/ExeCrypt, the version information is still there but unable to be modified.
BTW, you can implement CRC check if you want, in some cases it's not required to modify those info coz there's no affect on execution.
@Kanati... sorry Dad! ; )
@Dabz... thanks.
@Ked... You got my back up with what I felt was an unfair comment, so I responded. I usually manage to hold my tongue in these events, but I caved. It's only banter on a website at the end of the day, and doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Besides, looks like you may be right anyway, from what Yoko said.
For interest, I made to copies of an exe with different comments. They were binary identical, so it's def not stored in the exe. I guess ResHacker can open the relevant associated files.
@Dabz... thanks.
@Ked... You got my back up with what I felt was an unfair comment, so I responded. I usually manage to hold my tongue in these events, but I caved. It's only banter on a website at the end of the day, and doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Besides, looks like you may be right anyway, from what Yoko said.
For interest, I made to copies of an exe with different comments. They were binary identical, so it's def not stored in the exe. I guess ResHacker can open the relevant associated files.
@GfK: I don't appreciate that but I did find it slightly funny. Slightly.
@Nomen luni: I wasn't really having the best day when I first started this post because of BlitzPlus doing horrible things to my LAN Messenger. Sorry about the comments I made about your response to my question.
@Nomen luni: I wasn't really having the best day when I first started this post because of BlitzPlus doing horrible things to my LAN Messenger. Sorry about the comments I made about your response to my question.
>exe with different comments
Related information are stored in registry, only identify/version/language section are stored in EXE.
(For example, try to open an MS EXE/DLL, like mfc42.dll or something)
Related information are stored in registry, only identify/version/language section are stored in EXE.
(For example, try to open an MS EXE/DLL, like mfc42.dll or something)
Ked, no worries my initial response was perhaps a bit kurt, looking back on it.
Interesting stuff, Yoko. I will take a look.
Interesting stuff, Yoko. I will take a look.
Group hug? ;)
Dabz
Dabz