Posting .exe's, what do you think?

[greaterdeath]

Instead of cluttering the one thread this pertains to, made this one. No one needs to act like a tard wrangler if you want to discuss here.

On the upside, CC/Plugin devs can have closed source - maybe?

 

[Hawkiz]

i do have as much "respect" as i can for devs. on here, but i simply don't trust anyone that says "it's safe, a dev. scanned it" or tested it for that matter..
if i wasn't looking for it, and knowing what it was.. i simply wouldn't let it down on my pc

but it is true that people in general are quite offensive about .exe's - and yet, they still download adult movies from the webs :S!?


- interresting thread btw.. im gonna *shake my hands in a evil manner* while i read people's comments

 

[cm2003]

What's wrong with adult movies? It's pretty unlikely that you infect your PC with a .wmv- or .mpg-file

I don't really like the idea of having closed source plugins within HB. I also don't understand why sometimes they make exceptions like this helptool, which is a total nonsense to provide that as an exe-file. (I haven't tried it yet, so I might be wrong... But a kind of Tutorial could be a small webpage or whatever...)

The benefits of open source are extremely high to closed sources. At least for the community.
A good example is jMon. The plugin is opensource, however the entire webcode is 'closed'. It's not working anymore and didn't get any update on it since months. So a very nice plugin is dead...

A good example for open source is JGlideMon.
This plugin is working fine, however there was an issue with the mobile webinterface. As it's open source I was able to fix that issue and could provide it to the community.

Well you will know that anyway -_-

Im not afraid of viruses as I'm pretty safe, but I don't see any benefits for the community.

BUT I have to say, that I'm also not happy about the changes a few weeks ago...

 

[greaterdeath]

i do have as much "respect" as i can for devs. on here, but i simply don't trust anyone that says "it's safe, a dev. scanned it" or tested it for that matter..
if i wasn't looking for it, and knowing what it was.. i simply wouldn't let it down on my pc

but it is true that people in general are quite offensive about .exe's - and yet, they still download adult movies from the webs :S!?
- interresting thread btw.. im gonna *shake my hands in a evil manner* while i read people's comments

I don't dl things I don't trust either. Even if I rode the short bus I could still grasp that concept. The only reason its seems worth discussing is because of the recent push to make everything transparent and shareable. Then something comes along that doesn't even need to be in that format, and it stays, and people wonder why and wtf. I guess it just doesn't fall under the dev rules. Even so, it still doesn't explain what happened to sharing is caring.

 

[mastahg]

.net is pretty much open source...there's this amazing tool called reflector or isspy or something like that lets you 'decompile' .net assemblies and dlls back into source code. My two closed source CC's, vanguard & vagabond don't use any sort of obfuscation or obstruct reversing because if you really care that much then you have the skill to write your own CC.

 

[CodenameG]

its against forum rules, so just dont do it, if you need to do it, then talk to a mod and ask for permission, or it will just be taken down.

 

[Croga]

its against forum rules, so just dont do it, if you need to do it, then talk to a mod and ask for permission, or it will just be taken down.

Yet, as was stated before, most of the time the mod will give permission stating that it was checked and found to contain no malware.
That's all nice and dandy but no one will know if the original poster replaces the file with something that *does* contain malware. There's no vetting procedure after the first post meaning that we're all still in danger of being infected. Especially since stuff like keyloggers doesn't get blocked by any scanners.

I'd say: A total ban on anything that's not entirely open unless it's impossible to do without resorting to executables (like aRelog for example). And even then; lock the opening post so that the file can only be replaced by a mod after vetting.
Again the example of the "help" file; there's no reason to want to make this an executable. Everything in there can easily be achieved by a forum post (oh, wait, they're already there) or a PDF.

 

[CodenameG]

Yet, as was stated before, most of the time the mod will give permission stating that it was checked and found to contain no malware.
That's all nice and dandy but no one will know if the original poster replaces the file with something that *does* contain malware. There's no vetting procedure after the first post meaning that we're all still in danger of being infected. Especially since stuff like keyloggers doesn't get blocked by any scanners.

I'd say: A total ban on anything that's not entirely open unless it's impossible to do without resorting to executables (like aRelog for example). And even then; lock the opening post so that the file can only be replaced by a mod after vetting.
Again the example of the "help" file; there's no reason to want to make this an executable. Everything in there can easily be achieved by a forum post (oh, wait, they're already there) or a PDF.

arelog is an exception, its made by a trusted buddyteam developer, but yes in a perfect world no one would post EXE's.
however the rules are what they are, if we need to we will take another look at them, but right now people aren't posting enough for us to put a lot of time and worry into it, specially at this moment where there's other stuff going on.

 

[Tony]

if someone wants to post an exe or something he must contact with us first
what we can check is the what we have that time in our hands

so if you are afraid of using an exe or something,just dont use it or you can check it by yourshelf before using it


really i cant understand why a thread is needed for such a thing...