Mark as released, bug found in SDK

.NET obfuscator and automated error reporting

Moderators: Luke Jefferson, Alex.Davies, melvyn.harbour

Mark as released, bug found in SDK

Postby AntoineC » Fri Oct 29, 2010 4:49 pm

When releasing an application, we do the following:
- Build application
- Run SmartAssembly (command line method)
- Authenticode sign the obfuscated application
- Mark as released the signed obfuscated application.

Can Authenticode signing interfere with the Mark As Released step (Mark as released fail)?

Second question:
Is there a way to get a list of build marked as released? Such as:
MyApplication build 1.0.789.4561 Oct 28, 2010
MyApplication build 1.0.999.4561 Oct 29, 2010
etc.

Thanks,

Antoine
Last edited by AntoineC on Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
AntoineC
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 4:50 pm

Answer to my own question 2!

Postby AntoineC » Fri Oct 29, 2010 6:14 pm

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
AntoineC
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 4:50 pm

Postby Brian Donahue » Mon Nov 01, 2010 3:30 pm

Hi Antoine,

You can sign the SA-protected assembly using Authenticode. This has been used in the past with version 4 so I can't see a reason why it would be a problem in the latest version.
Brian Donahue
 
Posts: 6669
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:48 am

Postby Brian Donahue » Mon Nov 01, 2010 3:45 pm

Note: I have logged the SDK issue as SA-592. Thanks for pointing that out.
Brian Donahue
 
Posts: 6669
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 10:48 am

Postby AntoineC » Tue Nov 02, 2010 1:49 pm

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
AntoineC
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 4:50 pm


Return to SmartAssembly 5

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests