-
NANY 2011 (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?board=299.0) Entry Information
| Application Name | JottiQ
As JottiQ has been picked up by more websites and sources than originally anticipated, v1.0.2 and later are basically let-us-be-nice-to-Jotti releases. Hopefully Jotti will not need to cut service completely any longer, but the unfortunate side-effect is that previous versions have been banned permanently.
Jotti's malware scan is undergoing changes... changes that JottiQ versions before v1.2.0 are not compatible with. :( Please update your JottiQ! |
| Version | v1.2.0 |
| Short Description | Jotti's malware scan (http://virusscan.jotti.org/) provides a great service. Yet, it is so cumbersome to use. This program changes that. |
| Supported OSes | Windows XP+, 32 and 64-bit |
| Web Page | Website (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/) |
| Download Link | - JottiQ v1.2.0 Installer (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20150324%20JottiQ%20(1.2.0).exe)
- JottiQ v1.2.0 .7z archive (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20150324%20JottiQ%20(1.2.0).7z)
(open directory of released versions (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/)) |
| System Requirements | - Windows XP+
- Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Client Profile (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=e5ad0459-cbcc-4b4f-97b6-fb17111cf544)
- 32-bit: Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 Redistributable Package (x86) (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?familyid=A7B7A05E-6DE6-4D3A-A423-37BF0912DB84)
- 64-bit: Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 Redistributable Package (x64) (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?familyid=BD512D9E-43C8-4655-81BF-9350143D5867)
|
| Version History | - 2010-12-19 JottiQ v0.9.2
- 2010-12-20 JottiQ v0.9.3
- 2010-12-25 JottiQ v0.9.5
- 2010-12-31 JottiQ v1.0.0
- 2011-01-01 JottiQ v1.0.1
- 2011-01-06 JottiQ v1.0.2
- 2011-01-29 JottiQ v1.0.3
- 2011-06-28 JottiQ v1.0.9 (beta, never publicly released)
- 2011-07-01 JottiQ v1.1.0
- 2011-07-12 JottiQ v1.1.1
- 2015-03-24 JottiQ v1.2.0
|
| Author | worstje |
| Screencast | - Official NANY 2011 JottiQ screencast (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=207854)
|
Description
Jotti's malware scan (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AExCApKMvM) provides a wonderful service for those among us who are conscious of the crap that tends to accompany the files they download or otherwise obtain. Sadly enough, it tends to quickly become a bother to use: you can only check a single file at a time and can't queue a number of files ahead of time. Not only that, but you also have to select the file inside of your browser which tends to open a dozen clicks away from the file you want to scan. And when you finally have the file uploaded, it will kindly tell you the file has been scanned before. Argh! Did you wait for it to upload just to hear THAT?
Last night, I got an idea: maybe I can improve this situation. I also emailed the author. And now it seems I received an email today that I have permission for this NANY app, and even some support from the author as I am the first one to start on such a project. And slowly, JottiQ was born. And it has grown to far more polished than I originally envisioned.
Features
- the last letter of the name is a Q. Earth-shattering stuff right there; hold the presses!
- pretty much everything [url=http://virusscan.jotti.org/]Jotti's malware scan (http://virusscan.jotti.org/) itself offers
- allows you to build a queue (duh) of files needing scanning
- uses Jotti's internal cache to speed up scans by avoiding the uploading of files that have already been scanned in the past
- lists scanners with detections at the top of their list in red
- if a file has only a few detections, a green bug (rather than a red one) shows you at a glance that it isn't a file one can immediately claim to be good or bad.
- allows you to open scan results in your browser
- rightclick files and click Scan with JottiQ
- upto three files can be scanned (processed) simultaneously.
- items that have been scanned and are deemed safe can automatically be removed from the queue.
the scanning of executables of running processes this feature was removed in v1.1.0- an About dialog thanking everything and anything
- support for forks, a.k.a. Alternate Data Streams
- proxy servers
- connectivity tester for connection troubleshooting purposes
Readme.txt
JottiQ
v1.2.0 (2015-03-24)
http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/
WHAT IS JOTTIQ?
---------------
JottiQ is a tool that makes it more convenient to use Jotti's malware scan,
which is an online service optimized for one-by-one scanning of files you do
not trust.
Its purpose is that of an investigative tool, for when you do not trust a file
you came across but your current security software seems to think it is as
harmless a file as they come. It is not meant to replace your virus scanner,
nor is it meant to scan the heaps and heaps of nasty things that float around
on your computer because you are too cheap/lazy/picky to get software that is
meant for that purpose.
JottiQ is meant for a _low number of files_ that you do not trust more-so than
the rest of your computer. And I, the author of JottiQ, feel you should never
trust your own computer to begin with. But that is a story for another day. :-)
For more information, see the official JottiQ (NANY 2011) topic:
https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=24663.0
WOOO, I LOVE THIS LADY BUG
--------------------------
That's awesome. Glad you enjoy it. Now, if you are one of those rare few who
insists on showing gratitude for a freeware application like this, I'd like you
to remember a few things before you go nuts with that wallet of yours.
- JottiQ would not exist without Jotti's malware scan. It is that simple.
- Jotti (the author of the malware scan) does not accept donations, and only
has a few minor ads up on his site. He wishes for the service to remain
free. At present, the service is basically kept afloat by several parties
who pay for some other services, and the free Jotti's malware scan service
basically survives as a consequence of those other sources of income.
Are you in a position to order any sort of extended services from Jotti?
If so, please consider what he may do for you(r company), and in the
process help out an awesome free service to continue its existence.
So you tell me - who do you really love? No lying!
If you insist on supporting JottiQ (this application, not the online malware
scanner) then I will begrudgingly accept any donations made through the system
DonationCoder.com has in place for such acts of gratitude. While you are there,
you might even find another application of your liking, or worse, thank their
creators in a similar way! :-)
(And if you mean you love the lady bug ICON, well... there is a Credits section
at the bottom of this document with a link to the author who created it.)
REQUIREMENTS
------------
Like so many applications nowadays, JottiQ does not stand merely on its own two
legs. In that way, it is much like a person, who stands by virtue of the local
cobbler to make the shoes, the tailor who makes the clothes, the supermarket
that allows us ignorance in the ways of the hunt. No, JottiQ is a sorry beast,
demanding the following of its environment in order for it to be a productive
member of the binary society that makes up a computer.
[ ] Windows XP or newer. Both 32-bit and 64-bit varieties are supported.
[X] Microsoft .NET Framework 4 Client Profile
This needs to be installed for JottiQ to work at all. If you already
have the far bigger all-in package of the .NET v4 Framework installed,
you should already have this.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=e5ad0459-cbcc-4b4f-97b6-fb17111cf544
[X] Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 Redistributable Package (x86)
This needs to be installed on both 32-bit AND 64-bit systems for the
file context menu to work as one would expect.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?familyid=A7B7A05E-6DE6-4D3A-A423-37BF0912DB84
[X] 64-bit: Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 Redistributable Package (x64)
This needs to be installed ONLY on 64-bit systems for the file context
menu to work as one would expect.
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?familyid=BD512D9E-43C8-4655-81BF-9350143D5867
(The installer will make sure that items marked with a [X] are met, and where
possible offer to install them for you as a part of the ride. In case you get
JottiQ through an archive only, it is your responsibility to make sure these
requirements are met.)
Do you have all those things, and JottiQ still lies around on your couch,
unwilling to go to work and rather act like a dead corpse? Leave a message at
the official JottiQ topic on DonationCoder.com and we may just find the magic
words to breathe life into this cutesy lady bug. :-)
VERSION HISTORY
---------------
v1.2.0 (2015-03-24)
Compatibility release. Jotti is undergoing some changes so we must too. :)
Upgrading is highly recommended; previous versions of JottiQ may break or
otherwise show reduced functionality as Jotti improves his service.
v1.1.1 (2011-07-12)
Any new version released suffers from a few hiccups, and v1.1.0 was no
different. Thankfully, all this release does is pat the proverbial belly.
Added: A setting that, if enabled, lessens the scrutiny given to the
remote server of Jotti's malware scan to determine its authenticity.
'Ignore certain SSL certificate errors' is only useful on a few
specific configurations, and should not be enabled unless you get an
error like the following in the Connectivity Test:
'The underlying connection was closed: Could not establish trust
relationship for the SSL/TLS secure channel.'
Changed: dcuhelper.exe was updated to v1.10.01 released on July 12, 2011.
v1.1.0 (2011-07-01)
Six months after the official release, it is time for a well-deserved
update. Sadly, there isn't much one can improve in a tool with a simple
purpose. However, I hope this new version will entertain.
Added: Forks support. Also known as 'Alternative Data Streams', these
are a well-hidden feature of the NTFS filesystem which provide for
equally well-hidden pseudo-files attached to existing files. Most
programs are unable to read them, no less act on them - which makes
this a feature that truly improves Jotti's malware scan.
Added: Proxy server support.
Added: Connectivity test for troubleshooting issues. Some beta-testers
for this version had problems with proxy server support, but it will
hopefully prove useful for all parties.
Added: A builtin 'whitelist' for forks. The feature is sometimes used
for legitimate reasons, and one of those affects nearly every file
downloaded. The whitelist exists for speeding up processing only;
security-minded (distrusting?) individuals are free to enable the
option that forces these whitelisted forks to appear in the queue.
Added: A 'whitelist fork by name' option. If the precise comparisons on
a possibly whitelisted fork prove troublesome, this enables one to
consider the fork safe by proxy of its name. This feature as a work-
around for 'Zone.Identifier' forks encoded in different formats than
I have been able to test with - so if one finds a 'Zone.Identifier'
fork that is not whitelisted, I request that this forks is saved to a
file and sent to me at: jottiq-whitelist (at) whitehat.dcmembers.com
so I may inspect it and if is found safe, add it to the whitelist in
the next version. TL;DR? Don't enable unless you know you need it.
Added: The queue context menu now offers an Actions sub-menu. These
contain actions that affect the selected objects (files and/or forks)
in the queue physically. There are currently two items in this menu:
- Delete Object(s): This either deletes the selected file(s)
permanently, or it removes the selected fork(s) from the file.
Do note that deleting a file also deletes its forks, but that
deleting a fork on a file leaves the latter intact. I remain of
the opinion that JottiQ is an investigative tool rather than a
cleaner, but... the peoples wishes are clear and forks are hard
to delete, so deleting files is a logical consequence.
- Save Fork As: This saves the contents of a fork to a file. This
does not work for ordinary files as it would be a mere 'Copy'
operation that may or may not bring expectations along with it;
instead it is to be used as an inspection utility for a resource
otherwise difficult to examine.
Added: An 'Add file(s)' feature is now available in the toolbar. It
completely slipped my attention in the 1.0.x versions, for which
my apologies. Rather late than never. :)
Removed: The 'Add Running Processes' functionality is no longer present.
It was determined to be an inappropriate feature that only delivered
half work, and to boot the reason why Jotti's malware scan suffers
such ungodly waiting times during the waking hours of the western
world ever since JottiQ's release.
Fixed: No more crash when down-sizing the amount of worker-threads.
Fixed: Legibility of items on right pane could suffer in certain colour
configurations; now it uses proper system colours where applicable.
Fixed: Zero-byte items were not being removed by the manual nor automatic
'Remove safe items' features.
Fixed: Deleting items from the queue while it was being processed no
longer makes the worker-thread go M.I.A. until it finishes its work
off the screen; it now terminates and moves on to the next item in
the list as soon as possible.
Changed: Uploading should be a little bit more efficient now.
Changed: Fancy progress bars that show upload progress are now in place
as opposed a boring textual description.
Changed: Redesigned the Settings window with clearly named sections and
recognizable icons in order to make JottiQ configuration more
accessible.
Changed: The instruction text in the main screen no longer suggests
one to 'start processing' when processing is already enabled.
KNOWN ISSUES
------------
1) The installer can only delete settings for the current user. This is not
something that I have any feasible way of changing, and in general all
programs suffer this issue at uninstallation time. Although I do welcome
any and all suggestions on the topic, I doubt this will change. (This
includes the shell context menu option, if it was installed per-user.)
2) The installer component 'Explorer Integration affects All Users' determines
the creation of the 'MachineInstallation' file. By default it is off,
allowing every user to determine the presence of a file context menu for
themselves (and also avoiding nasty UAC dialogs in the process.) Once
this file is present, one needs Administrator rights in order to turn the
file context menu on or off.
Given point 1), if you install to make JottiQ available to multiple users,
it is recommended to install with this setting turned on so that any
registry pollution stays at a minimum. (Unless of course you are willing
to manually turn off the file context menu for every single user
beforehand. Of course, the best option is to never uninstall JottiQ!)
4) You may be instructed to reboot by the uninstaller. Or by the installer
if/when you are upgrading JottiQ to a new version. This is most likely
because explorer still has the shell extension loaded, and killing
explorer the hard way and restarting it is a very user-unfriendly task.
As such postponing the deletion or replacement operation till reboot-time
is the user-friendliest alternative. This is unlikely to change in future
versions as it is a long-standing Windows issue for not having a feasible
method to tell Explorer to unload its shell extensions.
CREDITS
-------
JottiQ is the brainchild and creation of Jan Wester. Now with the formalities
out of the way, let's carry on to the credits that actually count.
The list below is a rough and partial listing of the various credits that are
given in the 'About JottiQ' dialog. For the full list, with all links in all
their ease and glory, have a look there.
Thanks to...
* Jotti for Jotti's malware scan and going out of his way to support this
application after I contacted him with the idea I had @
http://virusscan.jotti.org/
* Vladi for the awesome lady bug icon @
http://www.rw-designer.com/user/vlasta
http://www.rw-designer.com/icon-detail/4513
* Ath for his work on the official JottiQ installer @
http://tonaday.blogspot.com/
* Raymond Chen for his awesome blog @
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/
* Lukas von Hohnhorst who gave me permission to use his magnifying glass @
http://lukasiniho.deviantart.com/art/Magnifying-Glass-128330627
* DonationCoder.com as a whole @
https://www.donationcoder.com/
* Mark James for his excellent Silk Icon Set @
http://www.famfamfam.com/lab/icons/silk/
* Fat Cow Webhosting for their wonderful Farm-Fresh Web Icons @
http://www.fatcow.com/free-icons
* Smaller Animals Software for their CtxMenu example that saved me oodles of
time rather than having to spend time to figure out all details on my own @
http://www.smalleranimals.com/ctxmenu.htm
* stackoverflow.com for solving those issues I have before I have them @
http://stackoverflow.com/
Screencast
Usage
Installation
Either download the installer and do as it says, or get the .7z archive and extract that to some place of your liking. In the latter case, make sure you meet the Requirements as lined out in the Readme.txt.
Using the Application
Start the application. Make sure you agree with the privacy agreement. From then on forth, just drag and drop files onto JottiQ to have them scanned. (Make sure processing is turned on - the lightbulb must be on!) Additionally, some settings are hidden away in the Settings window (wrench icon, or press F6). Among them is a way to have JottiQ appear in the file context menu so you don't have to drag and drop stuff unnecessarily.
Uninstallation
In case you used the installer, go where all uninstallers hide (Control Panel, then Program Features/Add and Remove Programs/whatever name your OS gives to it) and select JottiQ in there. Or, if you extracted the archive, you can simply delete the files. Make sure you deselect the file context menu option first so no junk stays behind in your registry. See the Known Issues section in the readme for some additional gotchas for you neat&clean freaks.
Screenshot
(http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/screenshots/JottiQ_v100_1.png)
(http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/screenshots/JottiQ_v100_2.png)
(http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/screenshots/JottiQ_v100_3.png)
(http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/screenshots/JottiQ_v100_4.png)
-
Beta Testers
-
picking the proper thing, letting the site process it, and rinse and repeat
Sounds like an online dishwasher service ;)
-
Okay, I'm a happy hat right now. (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/esmileys/gen3/1Small/char067.gif) After tons of 'wtf' and 'what were they smoking', I am starting to see a tiny little bit of progress on this project. (Word to the wise: learning a new programming language and a new framework at the same time is pretty much asking for trouble.)
I am happy enough to make the biggest divulgion this ultra-secretive project has seen to date... a sneak-preview, if you wish. :Thmbsup:
It's gonna be a whole mind-blowing, brain-eating, insanely popular preview, I tell you. It's going to be a letter!
And since I don't like to do things just a little, I'm going to reveal the last letter, since hell, who cares about the first letter anyway?
SomethingSomethingSomethingSomethingQ
Consider everything about that letter a hint of what is to come. :D
I need to lie down now; all of this excitement isn't good for me...
-
SomethingSomethingSomethingSomethingQ
Consider everything about that letter a hint of what is to come. :D
-worstje
Q? You want us to line up for this?
-
Totally. What's an application if there's no order? If people just rush to the front, fight for the first spot, and so forth?
.. okay, that _would_ be fun. But I'm all serious and stuff about this. Haven't you noticed?
-
If people just rush to the front, fight for the first spot, and so forth?-worstje
But… aren't you creating a free for all program?
But I'm all serious and stuff about this. Haven't you noticed?
I'm beginning to think that your given name must be Ernest.
Anyway, the excitement is mounting :Thmbsup:
-
If people just rush to the front, fight for the first spot, and so forth?-worstje
But… aren't you creating a free for all program?
-cranioscopical
Yeah, but my free-for-all is the kind where everyone gets to profit, as opposed to the one with the biggest fists. ;)
-
But… aren't you creating a free for all program?
-cranioscopical
Yeah, but my free-for-all is the kind where everyone gets to profit, as opposed to the one with the biggest fists. ;)
-worstje
Yet, as the tension mounts, we anticipate software with clout!
Wait a minute, I'm getting an uneasy feeling. SomethingSomethingSomethingSomethingQ…
It's not… it can't be… tell me that it isn't… FARRQ
-
I officially deny all involvement with any such project. If such a thing were to be true, and I am not saying it is true, then it would be a very wise move in stark contrast to all my past actions. Instead I deem it more rewarding in the long haul to keep expectations down while working them up at the same time. (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/esmileys/gen3/1Small/char067.gif)
-
Okay, so I deem the time ripe to lift the fog of immaturity, to banish the constant curiousity and satisfy it with a screenshot.
Yes yes. A whole screenshot. An image says more than a thousand letters Q ever would.
Enjoy... muhahaha. :)
Disclaimer: any impressions you may get of the posted image may very well be incorrect. The looks of the final product may vary. Please consult your doctor in case of seizures. I am not liable for any harm that may come to you, capiche?
-
Oo! Is it a "modesty curtain" for shy applications? You open "modesty curtain" and it simply applies the Windows Aero Glass effect in a resizable rectangle which you can drag over your app. If so, great idea! :D
- Oshyan
-
Oo! Is it a "modesty curtain" for shy applications? You open "modesty curtain" and it simply applies the Windows Aero Glass effect in a resizable rectangle which you can drag over your app. If so, great idea! :D
-JavaJones
Fuzzy logic!
-
Mmm, fuzzy logic. :-*
On that note... work has been expedient for me. So expedient that I was going to offer up a public beta for release by tomorrow, and then mouser changed my mind. All of you can blame him for the lack of a beta. ;)
Now... for the real reason.
The real reason the beta is not going public is because the server API I am programming against is still a bit open for abuse, and my app is similarly able to abuse the crap out of it as I proved 20 minutes ago when I got it to throw out 'internal errors'. At least I didn't take down the entire website by sheer accident. :)
Anyhow, I am in a good mood. What does that mean? If work tomorrow goes anywhere according to plan, I might do a very limited beta. The person that is able to make me smile in the posts to come after this one... and is going to make a pledge to keep to my super-imposed secretive agenda will get to do a one-person sneak-peek beta preview and laugh with me at the rest of the unenlightened. ;)
-
At least I didn't take down the entire website by sheer accident. :)
-worstje
So JavaJones was right.
Is it a "modesty curtain" for shy applications?
It almost was curtains for you!
-
And now it is curtains time... curtains OPENING time. I hereby promote my mystery project to the Teaser stage of being.
The name... *drumroll*... JottiQ.
Ok, that's horrible. So what does it do? Well, the first screenshot pretty much explains that bit:
(http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/screenshots/mystery_project4.png)
So, it is basically a tool to make easier use of Jotti's malware scan (http://virusscan.jotti.org/).
...
...
...
Ok, fine. The main interface also gets a screenshot:
(http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/screenshots/mystery_project3.png)
Test builds really will be out soon I hope, January 1st at the latest. :D
Special thanks go out to vlastimil for the awesome lady bug icon.
-
whoa! nice!!!
-
Very cool. Looking forward to this one.
-
Ooo that looks darn useful. Nice one!
- Oshyan
-
My hat's off to you!
-
Looks great, worstje. :)
-
Okay, I need some input for the file context menu as I cannot decide on the file context menu text. (You get that when rightclicking a file. For example, Scan with YourScanner.)
Things I've thought of so far...
- Add to JottiQ
- Send to JottiQ
- Scan with JottiQ I am a bit less fond of this one since the action itself doesn't actually cause it to start scanning unless the app is configured that way.
- Queue for scan
Likewise, I've tried to think whether it might be better to just put Jotti, Jotti Queue, queue and whatever other alternatives you can think of for the word JottiQ above.
I'd love your suggestions, everyone. :)
-
Queue in Jotti for virus scanning
Send to Jotti for virus scanning
-
Add to JottiQ(ueue)
:P
-
Queue in Jotti for virus scanning
Send to Jotti for virus scanning
-mouser
That's way too long. It'd make it by far the longest item in my menu. Menu items have to be concise.. to the point... whatever the word is.
Add to JottiQ(ueue)
:P
-skwire
Heh. Tempting, but I think it'd start to bug you after clicking it a few times.
The name aside, we've got Queue, Send and Add as our verbs in question. Always nice to know I've got a reason to doubt and overthink. :)
-
"Scan with JottiQ" is a tiny bit inaccurate as you say, but i still think it may be the best option.
-
How about -
JottiQ Scan
To me, the quickest and most effective context menus tell me the app first, because then I immediately remember what they're going to do for me.
-
How about -
JottiQ Scan
To me, the quickest and most effective context menus tell me the app first, because then I immediately remember what they're going to do for me.
-timns
Hmm, that's an idea, but I am not so sure how fond I am of it. As it is, it stands out a huge deal due to the bright red lady bug besides it.
Give me a few minutes to get rid of the fact I've got two lady-bugs in my menus, and I'll show you what it looks like in my current tests. :)
-
I never look at the icons - they are sort of 'off to the left' of where my eye naturally falls when I pop a context menu. But that's just me...
-
(http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/screenshots/mystery_project5.png)
This menu shows why I dislike MBAM so much: it stretches the menu so much wider than it usually would just because it wants its stupid company name in there. I don't care who wrote the damn program!
-
Add to JottiQ Add > JottiQ
Send to JottiQ Send > JottiQ
Scan with JottiQ Scan now > JottiQ
Queue for scan > JottiQ scan queue
-
wow! this looks nice.. :)
i wonder if you were inspired by this request (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=22989.0).
-
Nope, not inspired by that one. I had my own inspiration after going through the entire upload-haggling process for the 100th time. However, I am quite glad that I am not the only one who felt a tool like JottiQ might be useful though. :)
-
that's good to hear. i'm sure that this tool will come in handy for those who can't stand the web interface, which includes myself.. :)
-
Still working on this little gem... my putting a beta up keeps getting postponed out of perfectionistic tendencies. :)
Right now I am implementing enabling/disabling the shell extension through the Settings dialog, which works fine so far... except that I have a problem remaining.
I can't figure out how to properly support user-account specific stuff, so I am doing the context thing for the entire system. Maybe I will fix that at some future point if there's a lot of call for that, but for now it just seems like a huge pile of complications waiting to happen. I can do either current-user or entire machine, but can't just yet figure out the way to mix them yet. Perhaps it is a matter that will help clarify itself once I start on the installer, which is next on my TODO list I think.
Or maybe I'll upload a beta first after all. Hmm.
-
Guess what the cat dragged in? (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/esmileys/gen3/1Small/char067.gif)
Yup, it is a beta that goes by the name of JottiQ v0.9.2!
Download JottiQ v0.9.2 (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20101219%20JottiQ%20(0.9.2).7z)
If you want to test, by all means - there's plenty to test and I expect a lot of bugs. :)
Readme.txt
JottiQ
v0.9.2 (2010-12-19)
REQUEST TO TESTERS:
Please test _everything_! Things I need tested in order of priority:
XP 32-bit
Vista 32-bit
Vista 64-bit
Seven 32-bit
The part I think needs most testing above all is everything to do with
the file context menus, as those are probably a total mess (esp. on XP.)
For more information, see the official JottiQ (NANY 2011) topic:
https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=24663.0
VERSION HISTORY
---------------
v0.9.2 (2010-11-15)
First public beta.
So many features were added that any list is going to prove pointless.
Nevertheless, here it goes:
Added: Settings window with plenty of settings
Added: IDropTarget support. (Infinite amount of dropped files.)
Added: JQcm.dll for both 32 and 64-bit. Handles the file context menus.
Added: Lots of pretty icons. Especially the lady bug.
Added: Better handling of multiple selections in queue.
Added: Support for Jotti's server-side rate-limiting.
Added: Context menus for files in the queue.
Added: Shortcuts for easy keyboard access.
Added: Privacy Policy Agreement requirement (one time only).
Added: About box.
0.7.1 alpha 1 (2010-12-01)
Initial (screenshot-only) release.
Too many bugs, too ugly for words, so not really worth mentioning.
(I blurred the very first screenshot with a good reason, yo.)
KNOWN ISSUES
------------
1) There is no installer just yet.
2) Shell extension registration is always for the 'Local Machine'.
If I figure out a proper way to support both 'Current User' and
'Local Machine', both in JottiQ and the installer that is yet to be
written, I will implement it. Currently, I find 'Local Machine' the more
useful of the two, thus that is the only option currently available.
3) JottiQ has not been tested on anything other than Windows 7. Especially
testing on Windows XP systems is required, as I expect at least the icon
of the file context menus to break on there. Microsoft has made a mess
out of the images-on-menu-items thing. (I do very little OS testing in
the hope that some stuff just works as I expect it to in regards to
the file context menu stuff, so please test on WXP 32-bit systems!)
4) The configuration file has an obscene name and is hidden in a stupid place.
And I have no clue how to change it, since .NET comes up with that rather
idiotic path all by itself, and thus far I haven't found a good way to
influence it yet. It should be something under
AppData\Local Settings\Gholam_Inc.\XXXXX
If anyone can explain to me how to get rid of that disaster, I would
appreciate it. Right now, version upgrades won't remember settings, and
I would really prefer to have them remember it without me going through
endless hoops to fix that stuff. Seriously, who puts hashes in directory
names with settings in them? Argh!
(No, I am not planning to use .MSIs for my deployment as it is pure hell
once you work with the hell that is 32-bit and 64-bit context menu
extensions, and I don't have that patience nor time.)
CREDITS
-------
Thanks to...
* Jotti for Jotti's malware scan and going out of his way to support this
application after I contacted him with the idea I had @
http://virusscan.jotti.org/
* Vladi for the awesome lady bug icon @
http://www.rw-designer.com/user/vlasta
http://www.rw-designer.com/icon-detail/4513
* Raymond Chen for his awesome blog @
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/
* Lukas von Hohnhorst who gave me permission to use his magnifying glass @
http://lukasiniho.deviantart.com/art/Magnifying-Glass-128330627
* DonationCoder.com as a whole @
https://www.donationcoder.com/
* Mark James for his excellent Silk Icon Set @
http://www.famfamfam.com/lab/icons/silk/
* Smaller Animals Software for their CtxMenu example that saved me oodles of
time rather than having to spend time to figure out all details on my own @
http://www.smalleranimals.com/ctxmenu.htm
* stackoverflow.com for solving those issues I have before I have them @
http://stackoverflow.com/
-
holy hell we have a question mark problem on the forum on the new server.
i've fixed it by reverting back to ISO-8859-1 from utf8, which solves the question mark problem but restores the problem with some post titles with odd characters.
-
Looks like you fixed it mouser. :)
-
holy hell we have a question mark problem on the forum on the new server.
-mouser
Are we having fun yet? ;D
-
If you want to test, by all means
-worstje
XP 32 SP3
Accepted the Jotti terms (font doesn't fit well on the buttons on my machine, btw) and had the following.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
-
Add to JottiQ(ueue)
Actually, I quite like it...
-
If you want to test, by all means
-worstje
XP 32 SP3
Accepted the Jotti terms (font doesn't fit well on the buttons on my machine, btw) and had the following.
(see attachment in previous post (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=24663.msg227580#msg227580))
-cranioscopical
Okay, now that is a bummer. I'll have to look into that. Gotta dig out my XP laptop for it again, but I sadly have no debugging environment on there so figuring out the issue is going to be tricky. You've got .NET Framework v4 installed?
Any other XP users who can confirm that crash?
-
Add to JottiQ(ueue)
Actually, I quite like it...
-kyrathaba
Duly noted, thank you for your input. :) I'll give the name of the item some more considerations before I release the final v1.0.0 version. (Although with my luck, I'd reach 1.1 pretty soon after.)
-
I got same as Cranioscopical on win Xp Pro.
-
Okay, that v0.9.2 release indeed deserved this (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/esmileys/gen3/1Small/char067.gif) icon. (On XP anyway.)
So instead, I offer you v.0.9.3 which should at least not crash anymore.
Download JottiQ v0.9.3 (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20101220%20JottiQ%20(0.9.3).7z)
There is still plenty of stuff to test and I expect a lot of bugs. :)
Readme.txt (excerpt)
v0.9.3 (2010-12-20)
Second public beta. Let's try this again.
Fixed: Windows XP always crashes. WPF has a nasty bug involving high-
resolution icons on XP, and that gave a possible crash at two
different points. Strangely enough, the About box was never affected.
For now, the fix is not to show these images; default behaviour
differs between XP and Vista+ making for a fortunate accident that
still keeps the window icon looking like a lady bug.
Fixed: Windows XP had the most ugly visuals ever. I've tried to patch
them up a little. Side-effect is that on Vista+, the background
colours aren't as white and pristine anymore, which is how the
standard window colouring seems to have developed over time. Still,
at most it gives the 'dated' impression you'd find in many windows
throughout the operating system.
Fixed: Several dialogs shows a lady bug on XP despite being dialogs that
aren't intended to have a lady bug. Big woop, fixed now.
Fixed: Clarified the message given when unable to make changes to the
file context menu configuration so it won't confuse as many people.
...
KNOWN ISSUES
------------
1) There is no installer just yet.
2) Shell extension registration is always for the 'Local Machine'.
If I figure out a proper way to support both 'Current User' and
'Local Machine', both in JottiQ and the installer that is yet to be
written, I will implement it. Currently, I find 'Local Machine' the more
useful of the two, thus that is the only option currently available.
UPDATE: the UAC shield icon is totally wrong on XP and clipped, and the
actual elevation is also a totally different whoop-ass experience.
It _works_, but it is nowhere as user-friendly as it is on Vista+.
3) JottiQ has not been tested on anything other than Windows 7. Especially
testing on Windows XP systems is required, as I expect at least the icon
of the file context menus to break on there. (UPDATE: it breaks!)
Microsoft has made a mess out of the images-on-menu-items thing. (I do
very little OS testing in the hope that some stuff just works as I expect
it to in regards to the file context menu stuff, so please test on WXP
32-bit systems!)
4) The configuration file has an obscene name and is hidden in a stupid place.
And I have no clue how to change it, since .NET comes up with that rather
idiotic path all by itself, and thus far I haven't found a good way to
influence it yet. It should be something under
AppData\Local Settings\Gholam_Inc.\XXXXX
If anyone can explain to me how to get rid of that disaster, I would
appreciate it. Right now, version upgrades won't remember settings, and
I would really prefer to have them remember it without me going through
endless hoops to fix that stuff. Seriously, who puts hashes in directory
names with settings in them? Argh!
(No, I am not planning to use .MSIs for my deployment as it is pure hell
once you work with the hell that is 32-bit and 64-bit context menu
extensions, and I don't have that patience nor time.)
-
Working here on Xp Pro !!!
NICE :up: :up: :up:
Very cool app.
NOTES:
Trying to enable context menu crashed the app after the windows dialog was shown.
Suggestion:
Maybe move the file-related buttons to the bottom, under the grid?
Maybe add a right-click option to search for the filename in browser to help people learn more? maybe on a favorite process info site?
-
Worked very well.. throttled itself and updated results perfectly as they became available. Very nice.
The Jotti.org people should be excited about this :up:
-
Trying to enable context menu crashed the app after the windows dialog was shown.
-mouser
After what Windows dialog was shown? I have tried (WXP Pro SP3) to install the context menu extension, then add a file through the context menu extension, and then remove it, and I saw no crash. Can you be a bit more specific as to what you did?
Suggestion:
Maybe move the file-related buttons to the bottom, under the grid?
Maybe add a right-click option to search for the filename in browser to help people learn more? maybe on a favorite process info site?
-mouser
I had the interface at the bottom originally, but I found it confusing as it wasn't where people looked. Admittedly, I haven't tried putting stuff both at the top and at the bottom, but I felt that a single bar at the top would probably be enough. If the file-specific stuff all went at the bottom, the top one would only have the 'Process Queue', 'Settings' and 'About' things, and imo those aren't as important at all.
-
Well the logic being:
1. Not all buttons now have room if the window isnt really large.
2. It makes sense to me to isolate the buttons that work on a specific selected file from the generic buttons, and putting those file-related buttons at the bottom of the list makes sense to me.
Couldnt get the crash to occur again.. the dialog that showed was the "Run As" dialog where i could give it permission to run as administrator. It doesn't crash any more, but doesn't seem to install any context menu extension even when i give it permission. Not that this bothers me as i love to drag+drop files anyway instead of right-clicking.
-
Hrm. On XP, I noted you really need to run it as the Administrator for it to work. I used to have a 'success' popup originally, but right now it only popups when it fails in some manner (assuming the thing isn't completely canceled to begin with), which seems to make more sense.
And yeah, I know all buttons don't have room. That's why I pretty much moved the most infrequently used items to the far back. I originally considered using an ordinary menu, but I was rather charmed with the way this allowed me to keep the menu items to the left side and leave the full vertical height available for all the virus scan results, of which there tends to be a lot.
To boot, all items have a shortcut attached (hover over the menu button to see it), and they are also available in the right-click popup menu if they are item specific. Them not showing.. I am not sure how much of a problem it truly is.
What I have been considering more-so though is to perhaps remove the labels for the move up/down and delete commands, and very maybe put them back in for the more specific actions. Or perhaps shuffle them around a little. (I was really unhappy with the stuff-at-bottom idea when I toyed with it for a few hours, hence my hesitation on committing to that idea.)
-
remove the labels for the move up/down and delete commands
that would work.
-
Couldnt get the crash to occur again.. the dialog that showed was the "Run As" dialog where i could give it permission to run as administrator. It doesn't crash any more, but doesn't seem to install any context menu extension even when i give it permission. Not that this bothers me as i love to drag+drop files anyway instead of right-clicking.
-mouser
Works for me here.
XP Pro Sp3.
Had to log-in as Admin, as instructed.
#1 shows results with (inset) context menu item for a) explorer, b) True Launch Bar
#2 shows items in queue
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
-
Yeah, I need to dig into the Explorer menu item code. It was hell getting alpha transparency to work properly for Vista, and I am not sure if I can be bummed figuring out the proper way to do it on XP (I read it involves ownerdrawing and all that jazz). Instead I might pick a non alpha-version of the icon for the XP variety.
Also, hrm... do you run with any sort of special settings, Cranioscopircal? I can't help but notice how Uploaded: gets clipped a little and everything in general seems to be a bit bigger, and I wonder how I can prevent that from happening.
-
Also, hrm... do you run with any sort of special settings, Cranioscopircal? I can't help but notice how Uploaded: gets clipped a little and everything in general seems to be a bit bigger, and I wonder how I can prevent that from happening.
-worstje
No more than setting the properties I want through the XP Display Properties/Settings/Advanced Properties (I use the WindowsXP style).
As I mentioned, in the intial dialogue box the fonts are a tad to large for the buttons. Virtually all else that I have handles this. I can't tell you why though :(
Here it is running under a vanilla account:
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
-
Just a warning regarding a bug in JottiQ v0.9.2 as well as v0.9.3: I accidentally left some debugging code in. This causes any files that have been previously uploaded to Jotti to always display the results for the same virus infected file which is not the file in you have selected. (The scan result in question possesses a particular oddity needing me to hardcode it to test the usecase properly... and which I then forgot to remove after confirming it was handled properly. :-[)
-
It is long overdue to another release. Thus, I offer you v.0.9.5 as a token of my merry christmas spirit. (And I hate Christmas; go figure. :))
Download JottiQ v0.9.5 (7z archive) (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20101225%20JottiQ%20(0.9.5).7z) (304 kB)
Download JottiQ v0.9.5 (Setup) (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20101225%20JottiQ%20(0.9.5).exe) (1039 kB)
Test away. The installer is a bit of an experiment, and I don't think I whipped it completely into listening to me just yet, but it should get the job done. It's a bit of a fat-arse too, so I apologize for that. I am not sure what I can do to change that though.
After christmas, I intend to focus on the UI and texts and such that I asked peoples opinions on before. I just haven't gotten around to incorporating those details yet. :)
The ReadMe says stuff about right-clicking and elevating and stuff.. but I forgot to adjust the ReadMe after I had to take that stuff out for now because it had some flaws I noticed at the last minute. The current version seems to always want to elevate because I have an admin account, but maybe someone has a really limited user account they can test with for me.)
Readme.txt (excerpts once more)
JottiQ
v0.9.5 (2010-12-25)
REQUEST TO TESTERS:
Please test _everything_! Things I need tested in order of priority:
- THE INSTALLER, on all of the below OSes.
- XP 64-bit
- Vista 32-bit
- Vista 64-bit
- Seven 32-bit
For more information, see the official JottiQ (NANY 2011) topic:
https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=24663.0
VERSION HISTORY
---------------
v0.9.5 (2010-12-25)
It's a special christmas beta-release! Ho ho ho! Merry christmas to all!
Added: Support for Current-User and All-Users installations for the
shell context menu. In essence, this means UAC will no longer be
needed if you install it for your user only. This determination is
made based on the existence of a 'MachineInstallation' file in the
directory the executable is located.
Added: An actual installer! When double-clicked, it performs an
installation that affects your user only. However, if you take the
opportunity to right-click and select 'Run as Administrator', it
will do an installation where it affects all users on your machine.
(And when I write 'it affects', I refer to the shell extension, as
all other application settings are per-user.) A plain .7z archive
will continue to exist for those who like it, however.
Fixed: Shell extension failed to register if it was in a path with
spaces inside of it. Now it works.
Fixed: Windows XP no longer has a butt-ugly clipped shield image when
it needs to elevate to install.
Fixed: Various texts and the likes should no longer be cut off when
running at more interesting configurations involving bigger fonts.
Added: Mnemonics were added to the Settings screen to improve keyboard
accessibility.
Fixed: Changing the shell extensions installed state no longer rushes
through the affair; it now waits for actions to complete so the
Installer doesn't vomit during the Uninstall.
Semi-Fixed: At one point during my own testing on my XP machine, JottiQ
crashed after I clicked a link in the Privacy Agreement screen. I
suspect it involves Firefox demanding an upgrade before continuing;
but I have not been able to reproduce it. So from now on, it should
fail gracefully and spit out an error. If anyone sees this error,
I would be very interested in finding out what it is and whether it
is a common error that needs further looking-into.
v0.9.4 (2010-12-21)
Secret internal beta release.
Fixed: Big booboo involving cached files always returning the same
(very likely unrelated) file results.
Fixed: Windows XP now properly shows the fancy lady bug icon in the
file context menu.
...
KNOWN ISSUES
------------
1) The installer can only delete settings for the current user. This is not
something that I have any feasible way of changing, although I do welcome
any and all suggestions on the topic. This includes the shell context
menu option.
2) The (un)installer does not detect if JottiQ is currently running and offer
offer to close it first. Hopefully will fix at some point in the future.
3) The installer component 'Explorer Integration affects All Users' determines
the creation of the 'MachineInstallation' file. By default it is off,
allowing every user to determine the presence of a file context menu for
themselves (and also avoiding nasty UAC dialogs in the process.) Once
this file is present, one needs Administrator rights in order to turn the
file context menu on or off.
Given point 1), if you install to make JottiQ available to multiple users,
it is recommended to install with this setting turned on so that any
registry pollution stays at a minimum. (Unless of course you are willing
to manually turn off the file context menu for every single user
beforehand.)
4) The uninstaller may tell you to reboot. This is because explorer probably
still has the shell extension in use, and killing explorer and restarting
it is a very user-unfriendly task. As such, postponing the deletion till
reboot time is the user-friendliest alternative.
-
Setup works perfectly for me.. installed it and shell extension -- queuing items via shell extension worked perfectly even when dialog was already on screen.
Shell extension works here on WinXp Pro x64.
-
Would be nice to have an "Uninstall" entry in the start menu group; it's easy to do.
you can find sample, including a dll to let your inno setup close app if its running at install/uninstall time here:
https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=24786.0
-
i still dont like the fact that the menu is not going to be fully visible for people without big screens.
changing some of the menu icons+labels to just small icons would fix.
or as i suggested earlier moving the per-item ones to bottom.
also, i think a right-click for an item and choosing "perform a google search for this filename" would also be nice.
-
Would be nice to have an "Uninstall" entry in the start menu group.
-mouser
I gave this a long hard thought actually. Most applications nowadays do not do that anymore. It seems kinda pointless - if you want to 'start' an app, you likely don't want to remove it. I know that back in the day, I personally got annoyed as hell when I misclicked and it went 'want to go uninstall?'
Were I to compare an uninstall to a stupid Readme, I think the latter would get more (intentional) attention than the uninstaller ever would. But maybe I'm just an oddball in that regard.
/me is still annoyed by the by about the fact that shell extensions can't be properly told to be unloaded to explorer.exe. :-(
-
i still dont like the fact that the menu is not going to be fully visible for people without big screens.
changing some of the menu icons+labels to just small icons would fix.
or as i suggested earlier moving the per-item ones to bottom.
-mouser
After christmas, I intend to focus on the UI and texts and such that I asked peoples opinions on before. I just haven't gotten around to incorporating those details yet. :)
-worstje
also, i think a right-click for an item and choosing "perform a google search for this filename" would also be nice.
-mouser
I'll give it a long hard thought. I like the idea - just not sure I like the implied consequences. Why google, why not bing? Make it configurable? Why not add multiple search engines? Why not directly index into some virus/security related sites?
Maybe I am overthinking it, but as you write above: the UI isn't fully visible atm, and I need to remove some labels and re-organize as it is. If I add features, I have to wonder about more things. And drastic UI changes aren't up for grabs simply due to the deadline at this point, so I am focusing on small and really managable and low-impact stuff right now. The sort of feature that has a cascade of other feature requests following almost as a direct consequence... it's the kind of slippery slope that are all over the streets outside my house already. :D
-
I'll give it a long hard thought. I like the idea - just not sure I like the implied consequences. Why google, why not bing? Make it configurable? Why not add multiple search engines? Why not directly index into some virus/security related sites?
any of these solutions would be fine -- no reason to use google. im just suggesting that a common thing someone will want to do is search web for filename and it would be nice to make that easy.
-
Hey i just thought of a really cool request idea:
What about a Specials Menu
With a menu item to: Queue ALL running process files.
That seems like a really cool unique and useful feature.
-
Nice idea. Not sure how to implement it though, as .NET gives such relatively low-tech things little importance, and as might be imagined, I don't have 24/4 to work on it the coming few days. I gotta scramble as-is to get JottiQ ready for its final NANY v1.0.0 release.
-
worstje, to fix number 2 on your Known Issues list, have a look at AppMutex (http://www.jrsoftware.org/ishelp/topic_setup_appmutex.htm) in the fine Inno Setup helpfile. There's also the CheckForMutexes (http://www.jrsoftware.org/ishelp/topic_isxfunc_checkformutexes.htm) support function, might you want to check it from some Code.
And here (http://bytes.com/topic/c-sharp/answers/251366-check-whether-application-running) is a way to create it in C# (for if you didn't know).
(Edit: had a fight with the Code bbtag)
-
Just tested JottiQ 0.9.5 on Vista 32 bit.
Guess Vista doesn't like the shell extension, because it's not showing in the context menu of Explorer, or at least not for the files I tried it with. I'll do an uninstall/reinstall to see if I accidentally unchecked that option. [...] And that didn't help a bit, neither when checking the 'Explorer Integration affects All Users' option, so that might need a fix. Vista's UAC is turned off, btw.
This worked fine on 2 of my Win7 x64 setups, one with UAC in it's default setting and one with UAC turned off.
-
Also tested JottiQ 0.9.5 on WinXP 32 bit, but it has the same issue with the context menu as Vista 32 bit has, so it's most likely that that little bugger (the shellextension that is) doesn't behave as it should.
The advantage is that it doesn't want to reboot after a successful uninstall :D
-
Nice idea. Not sure how to implement it though, as .NET gives such relatively low-tech things little importance, and as might be imagined, I don't have 24/4 to work on it the coming few days. I gotta scramble as-is to get JottiQ ready for its final NANY v1.0.0 release.
I can't remember the exact namespace now, but I've easily implemented detection of all running processes in past projects - just a few lines of code. Must be easily found on search engines, or I wouldn't have been able to do it ;)
-
worstje, to fix number 2 on your Known Issues list, have a look at AppMutex (http://www.jrsoftware.org/ishelp/topic_setup_appmutex.htm) in the fine Inno Setup helpfile. There's also the CheckForMutexes (http://www.jrsoftware.org/ishelp/topic_isxfunc_checkformutexes.htm) support function, might you want to check it from some Code.
And here (http://bytes.com/topic/c-sharp/answers/251366-check-whether-application-running) is a way to create it in C# (for if you didn't know).
-Ath
Yeah I know of it. I already use OpenThreadWaitHandle or something along that name (Winapi: CreateEvent) for my single-instance functionality, but it doesn't appear as if Inno supports checking for such a thing... which is a rather annoying thing, I might say. I might have to add a mutex too, but then I'll have '3' things meant for single instance stuff: Mutex, CreateEvent and the COM IDropTarget local-server I use to handle the shell extension.
Just tested JottiQ 0.9.5 on Vista 32 bit.
Guess Vista doesn't like the shell extension, because it's not showing in the context menu of Explorer, or at least not for the files I tried it with. I'll do an uninstall/reinstall to see if I accidentally unchecked that option. [...] And that didn't help a bit, neither when checking the 'Explorer Integration affects All Users' option, so that might need a fix. Vista's UAC is turned off, btw.
This worked fine on 2 of my Win7 x64 setups, one with UAC in it's default setting and one with UAC turned off.
-Ath
Finally, a Vista user! I've been trying like crazy to have someone test on Vista. :) I am surprised it does not work on Vista - it works on XP, it works on 7, you'd expect it to deal fine with the halfway point. Is it the 32-bit or 64-bit variety, or had you got the ability to try on both OSes?
If you run JottiQ and use the Settings window to enable/disable the shell extension, does it add a shield to the OK button? (Or when clicking OK ask for elevation for that matter.) If it does, you are using it for the entire machine. For now though, let's avoid any and all UAC issues and focus on the 'explorer integration affects all users' setting being turned OFF as it is by default. (If you simply extract the .7z archive, that is the 'mode' you end up using.)
Assuming you can't get the shell extension to activate through the Settings screen either, open up a dosbox, browse to the JottiQ directory, and type:
regsvr32.exe JQcm32.dll
(If you've got 64-bit, you'll want to do the same for the other dll file as well.) It will pop up that it succeeded, or it will throw an error in your face. If it does the latter, I'd be very interested in the error in question.
Also tested JottiQ 0.9.5 on WinXP 32 bit, but it has the same issue with the context menu as Vista 32 bit has, so it's most likely that that little bugger (the shellextension that is) doesn't behave as it should.
The advantage is that it doesn't want to reboot after a successful uninstall :D
-Ath
The shell extension _should_ work on XP. :( I've tested it to death myself. Can you explain what you did exactly? Maybe something else went wrong somehow.
I can't remember the exact namespace now, but I've easily implemented detection of all running processes in past projects - just a few lines of code. Must be easily found on search engines, or I wouldn't have been able to do it ;)
-kyrathaba
I'll look into it then; if it is as simple as you say it is worth digging into. Some things I expected to be simple as pie ended up taking full days though, so you can see why I am hesitant in committing to the idea.
-
Hm, tested on Vista (x86) again, but still no joy with the context menu. Even the regsvr32 jqcm32.dll doesn;'t work: 'Can't load module JQcm32.dll' (but then in Dutch: "Kan module 'JQcm32.dll" niet laden.").
One peculiarity maybe: The Win7 x64 systems I tested JottiQ on, both have VS2010 installed, and on both WinXP and Vista I didn't have even .NET 4.0 installed until it wouldn't load JottiQ so I had to install that using Windows Update. I installed the plain 4.0 Client Profile thing, but it might still be missing the VC++ runtime (as you mentioned in a PM).
Also trying to enable this feature from the settings menu doesn't give a shielded OK button and doesn't enable the context menu entry, but seeing that regsvr32 fails explains that I guess.
On the 'single instance' issues, Inno Setup does natively support checking for a Mutex, and with a small add-on dll, can also check for a process name or windows title. Maybe that's enough?
I'll dig up the code to add .NET 4.0 and VC++ runtime to the installer today and post or link it here.
-
Ah yeah, that must be it. It needs the VC runtime and .NET framework v4. I am pretty sure I compiled for the Client Profile, although I might be wrong, and will check it at some point later. I don't compile my things statically out of performance considerations. Just to have the links here:
- 32-bit: Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 Redistributable Package (x86) (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?familyid=A7B7A05E-6DE6-4D3A-A423-37BF0912DB84&displaylang=en)
- 64-bit: Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 Redistributable Package (x64) (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?familyid=BD512D9E-43C8-4655-81BF-9350143D5867&displaylang=en)
-
Thanks for the links, I'm working on the Inno Setup detection, download and install part right now.
-
That's awesome, thank you for the assist. :Thmbsup:
-
Just re-registered the DLL after installing VC++2010 using my test-installer, and it ran just fine. I now have a contextmenu item in Explorer. Would you want to use languages besides English in the installer? (the script I started with has German beside English, and it can be removed or expanded to some extra languages (nl?), but it would take some extra work, but I don't mind, just tell me your preference(s))
In the meantime also tested the 'Enable/Disable context menu option from settings', and that works just fine, both to Enable and Disable.
If you can provide me with your Inno script I'll add the snippets to enable the Download and Install.
Further testing in Server 2003 x86 and Server 2008R2 (x64) after this post and a cup of coffee :D
-
Ath, if you come to IRC, we can talk there. I think it'll talk a bit more easily in regards to the setup stuff and such. :)
-
Just tested a few more platforms (though not requested, but I have them hanging around in VMWare)
Windows Server 2003 R2 32 bit: After installing all prerequisites it all works fine, but there is no Icon displayed in the context menu. But that's a W2K3 setting, AFAIK.
Windows Server 2008 R2 64 bit: Same prerequisited, and the Icon is shown as expected.
-
Just tested a few more platforms (though not requested, but I have them hanging around in VMWare)
Windows Server 2003 R2 32 bit: After installing all prerequisites it all works fine, but there is no Icon displayed in the context menu. But that's a W2K3 setting, AFAIK.
Windows Server 2008 R2 64 bit: Same prerequisited, and the Icon is shown as expected.
-Ath
Awesome, thank you for the tests. I didn't expect to have someone test it at so many OSes. :)
As you already know (but I think it is nice to share with the rest of DC) I have fixed the issue regarding the icon on the post-XP, pre-Vista Windows varieties.
-
Now also tested on Vista x64 (in close cooperation with worstje), and we concluded that both the x86 and x64 VC++ 2010 redistributable packages need to be installed on a x64 OS to get this thing up and running. The new installer just takes care of that, and also installs the .NET 4.0 Client Profile, if no .NET 4.0 runtime is found. It's downloaded fresh from the MS servers during installation, and automatically includes the proper language pack for your OS, for as far as we could see.
Now worstje is ironing out the last wrinkles, so we won't have to wait much longer for the official release :Thmbsup:
-
With 2 hours and 50 minutes left according to the clock on my corner of this giant egg, I present the official v1.0.0 release of JottiQ.
- JottiQ v1.0.0 Installer (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20101231%20JottiQ%20(1.0.0).exe)
- JottiQ v1.0.0 .7z archive (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20101231%20JottiQ%20(1.0.0).7z)
Readme.txt and all the other good stuff can be found in the topic start (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=24663.0).
The best wishes for 2011 everyone, and have a Happy New Year DonationCoder! :)
-
nany deadline is midnight CST:
http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/cst.html
-
Well, that's when I'll be asleep, so this will have to do. :-\
-
nany deadline is midnight CST:
http://www.timeanddate.com/library/abbreviations/timezones/na/cst.html
-mouser
Next year we must get a countdown ticker... ;)
-
Next year we must get a countdown ticker...
Definitely!!
I tried to synch-up my laptop clock, but I find a 2-3 second discrepancy between the www.datetime.com website, and time.windows.com ...
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ]
-
Just installed it, and it has really gotten better! The extra features just make the difference, and the UI improved by applying 'Less is more' :Thmbsup:.
And thanks for the credits 8) it was a nice job to do.
-
Just installed it, and it has really gotten better! The extra features just make the difference, and the UI improved by applying 'Less is more' :Thmbsup:.-Ath
Yeah, the aim was to polish and apply the final touches. :)
And thanks for the credits 8) it was a nice job to do.-Ath
No, thank you for your work. It is very much appreciated. :)
-
If blinded by polishing I think you will find that program is begging to be announced on security forums once you are done, like Wilders for example.
I just stumbled over program so have no other input - other than perhaps you should have a confirmation box for the "Adds the executables of currently running processes to the queue" Is a hefty task for Jotti and much "Avaiting processing" ;) Cool feature though but should probably not be used without real intentions. No way to stop it once it sets off. Can delete individual entries I guess but a big task anyway - a "Are you sure?" box would be fine.
Good competition for VirusTotal :D
-
This is definitely one of my favorite NANY entries this year.. really awesome. :up:
-
If blinded by polishing I think you will find that program is begging to be announced on security forums once you are done, like Wilders for example.
-Bamse
If anything, I think Jotti's malware scan itself deserves the bigger praise. I only made the outside shell. :)
I just stumbled over program so have no other input - other than perhaps you should have a confirmation box for the "Adds the executables of currently running processes to the queue" Is a hefty task for Jotti and much "Avaiting processing" ;) Cool feature though but should probably not be used without real intentions. No way to stop it once it sets off. Can delete individual entries I guess but a big task anyway - a "Are you sure?" box would be fine.
-Bamse
Duly noted. I didn't originally intend to add the processes feature in the first place - I am afraid it will detract from its primary purpose to investigate specific objects. The more easily one adds things, the more likely one is to throw his/her entire PC over the internet. (Slow as a process as the throttling might make it, it is still a form of abuse that is very easy to achieve.)
Once I am done bugfixing the current release and aiming towards a v1.1 or thereabouts, I'll look into adding a progress window. I intended to add it at one point, but the delay wasn't all that noticeable to me originally. Not enough to make me feel the urge to throw a dialog up, anyhow. :)
Good competition for VirusTotal :D
-Bamse
I do not know VirusTotal at all, so I can't really comment. However, you did remind me of something else I feel needs mentioning.
The ability to add processes is severely limited in its current form. It only adds processes you have access to inspect, and far less than you might expect if you are for example used to using Process Explorer. It doesn't add the svchost.exe, nor lsass.exe, nor other things running as a service or otherwisely out of JottiQ's reach. (I intend to find out why though - PE seems to have no issues divining the executable of a process without needing to be elevated.)
To boot, one needs to remember that JottiQ _only_ adds the executable of the process, and that a process can be malicious even if its executable is completely harmless. svchost.exe is a good example of that - it is a Windows component that runs services, and those can very well be malicious in nature.
All in all, thank you for posting. I am glad someone else sees the purpose and usefulness of JottiQ. :)
-
This is definitely one of my favorite NANY entries this year.. really awesome. :up:
-mouser
And you, stop it. One of these days you're going to make me blush in front of all of DoCo and its visitors. :-[
-
I don't know if Virustotal was the first of this type of service but it is the most popular. Does the same as Jotti but in a more slick packing. Also has upload tools http://www.virustotal.com/advanced.html I think yours will have more direct appeal to usage being a real application.
If you throw your self at security forums at some point be sure to mention dependencies, auto-download during installation. Harmless details like that can make some people go crazy in a non-productive way ;)
-
I don't know if Virustotal was the first of this type of service but it is the most popular. Does the same as Jotti but in a more slick packing. Also has upload tools http://www.virustotal.com/advanced.html I think yours will have more direct appeal to usage being a real application.
-Bamse
Whether or not VirusTotal was the first, I wouldn't know. According to Wikipedia it was launched in 2004. I know from personal use (and the footer on Jotti's malware scan) that Jotti also goes back to that same year. Either way, who cares who was first - it is good that other people thought of the usefulness of such a service, and even better that people have an active community such as the one VirusTotal seems to have.
If you throw your self at security forums at some point be sure to mention dependencies, auto-download during installation. Harmless details like that can make some people go crazy in a non-productive way ;)
-Bamse
This matter has been given plenty of attention in the Readme file. Or do you mean that the installer installs those dependencies without asking the user? I haven't tested the installer into cruciating detail myself - Ath was kind enough to offer his services and I gladly accepted that offer. If you confirm this, I'll let him know (or he might read) that asking the user might be preferable.
However, as far as I am personally concerned people can use the installer-less .7z archive. It will work just fine assuming said dependencies are installed.
Also, I am not sure if I will do much in the way of advertising JottiQ. The way I see it, a good product/application will sell itself, especially so when it is free. If you feel JottiQ deserves sharing with others, by all means go ahead - if JottiQ helps people I am more than satisfied.
-
I was hinting that if you make a thread on X security forum it is not enough to have a perfect readme.txt. There are people who might freak out seeing installation doing visual c++ or .net downloads. Just how a few noisy people roll. On a very bad day you can get a "stay clear of this" label. No reason to such "marketing" risk so if you mention dependencies in post problem is not lack of info. Actually it is a nice feature program does not just crash, stall, refuse to install because of lacking parts. Many will have trouble finding them at MS site.
I think program downloaded or updated some visual stuff on my Vista 64bit, no problems with that.
I noticed Ghacks wrote about Quick Cliq yesterday with reference to this N.A.N.Y thing so marketing for a good free product probably do happen automatically ;) Security forums are of course obvious targets for mass spreading or testing for that matter.
-
Also, I am not sure if I will do much in the way of advertising JottiQ. The way I see it, a good product/application will sell itself, especially so when it is free.
the unfortunate reality of this world is that you sometimes have to be the one to spread the word a little about your own software. this is a program that deserves to be discovered by people so i think it's worth doing. hopefully the nany event will get it some exposure, HOWEVER having a web page and a pad file for it would definitely help and be a step in the right direction. let us know if you want some DC web space.
-
HOWEVER having a web page and a pad file for it would definitely help and be a step in the right direction. let us know if you want some DC web space.
-mouser
I already have the DC webspace - where did you think the downloads are hosted? :D I just totally lack the time to do anything with it. Between real life, Cautomaton and JottiQ, there's barely enough of me to keep things together. ;)
Look into it however, I will. I think you said something about a tiny cms system some other members use for a similar purpose, happen to have an easy link handy to the one you had in mind?
-
Website Baker (http://www.websitebaker2.org/en/home.php) is used by several DC people on their DC web spaces, and works well.
See also this (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=7499.0) thread.
-
I'll look into it, thank you. :)
-
Hey! 1.0.1 is out!
After listening patiently to a couple of trifling issues of mine and then being so accomodating as to eliminate them, worstje has released version 1.0.1 of JottiQ. :Thmbsup:
Watch the first post in this topic (https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=24663.msg224741#msg224741) for its appearance.
-
JottiQ v1.0.1 is brought to all of you by nobody other than our resident babblemouth cranioscopical. :)
The opening post has been updated to match, by the by.
-
...auto-download during installation. Harmless details like that can make some people go crazy in a non-productive way ;)
-Bamse
As unfortunate as that (user)behavior may be, the JottiQ installer really throws a big Yes/No messagebox, listing all prerequisites and their sizes, at the user if (any of) the pre-reqs need to be downloaded and installed.
It might be a good practice to pre-announce that with the download-link (but not offer any links), so a really paranoid user can download these pre-reqs himself from the source he wants/trusts. :up:
This installer downloads the proper web-installers from Microsoft and installs the frameworks, including their proper language-packs, as and if required by the OS at hand. 8)
Undesirable workaround hidden here...
If it gets really problematic, I could add a feature to select something like changing the Yes/No to Yes/No/Cancel, to either Yes:download & install, No:skip the pre-reqs & continue or Cancel:halt the complete installer, but that could lead to a non-working installation of JottiQ (or anything else that uses the script-parts I used) and would not really be desirable, IMHO.
-
If there is a proper messagebox, it is completely fine by me. I am against installing if the requirements are not installed - while with a .7z archive it is okay for stuff to break if people deny such a thing, people expect that if an installer completes the application will work. Thus, offering an option that would result in a non-working installation is lunacy by my book. :)
-
Okay, I doubt the many people for which this is meant will read this, but it needs mentioning in case very slow results haven't made it obvious yet.
Just today, JottiQ has more than doubled the ALL-TIME HIGH queue of the internal scanning engine of Jotti's malware scan. Jotti has been running that since 2004. And obviously, this cannot stay this way, as it is way beyond his resources to manage.
I am currently in discussion with the man on ways to try and alleviate the problems, as I suspect they might be caused for a good part by the fact that NANY is a popular event with lots of people trying new applications. There is already rate-limiting present for an extent, but so far I have the impression Jotti believes this is not enough to handle the situation if it keeps on going.
Thus, possible ways he and/or I may respond are by adding load indicators to the JottiQ interface, automatic shutdown of Queue processing once stuff gets too crazy for him serverside, or as a final resort a full shutdown of JottiQ servicing so the service can remain for the diehards who would like to use the web interface.
So please, play nice with Jotti's server, especially till I get a new version out tomorrow. It's a free service, he wants to keep it that way, and I would truly hate for JottiQ to become a victim of its own success.
-
Hm, maybe somebody has some cpu-cycles on a linux host to spare, to relieve the load of the Jotti service? But then that Jotti service must be (made) capable of off-loading work to others ofcourse.
@worstje, does JottiQ add information about itself during the upload? In that case Jotti could put the requests on a lower priority (though that's not nice to the JottiQ users) but at least a temporary solution. And maybe you can now persuade him into accepting donations, so he can actually afford to buy more hardware...
An idea for improvement on the Jotti side (didn't see a forum over there) or maybe a JottiQ Quick Win (if not implemented yet...):
The 'Hash search' feature could be used on each entry, before a file is uploaded, because a database lookup should be much faster then 20 AV scanners to run across a file.
-
There's a fair few options open to Jotti. JottiQ has a unique API key it uses which at worst can be blocked all together, and the user agent that is sent includes the JottiQ version so that in case I make a huge blooper bug, he can block that specific version without affecting other versions.
Also, I need to clear something up that I've been meaning to clear up in the next release since I misunderstood Jotti at some point along my numerous emails. (I think we've sent over 100 emails at this point.) The service started out as a hobby project, but it hasn't been like that for a long time. There's a few parties that want some special features and they make up for some funding to keep the service running.
Sadly, as I was writing this reply, I got an email that at this time the load has skyrocketed some more to approximately 500% of its usual load. And sadly, the story regarding that remains the same: it is too much at this time to support. As such, Jotti has ceased service to JottiQ at present, hopefully to be reopened in upcoming days.
Jotti will monitor the usage and do several tests across the next few days to see if the demand will lessen. Personally, I am rather fearful JottiQ has garnered a bit too much attention for itself at present. Sites in Brazil, France, Poland and an english one have all done articles on JottiQ thus far, and somehow I expect it only to get worse. (Unless any more reviewers dump JottiQ because the service has now been shut down... hmm, if other methods to alleviate the pressure fail that might be the best I can hope for.)
-
I surmise that the developer of Jotti will recognize the increased usefulness his program can provide in conjunction with JottiQ, and will likely be willing to work something out with you that will throttle the load. It just may take time.
-
Hm, bummer :(
Or to quote an older Dutch ad pay-off "Het waren 2 geweldige dagen" (It where 2 fabulous days) :-*
I get a feeling this grew indeed a bit bigger than anyone, mostly Jotti IMHO, could have imagined, so he will probably have to restructure his service (or fix bugs in the Hash search, as that doesn't really seem to work), or get a bigger sponsor :D
Lest just pray he gets his act together, and JottiQ can provide it's useful service to the public again :Thmbsup:
The current errormessage of 'Jotti only supports files upto 0,00 B.' just says it all, I guess, maybe a next version of JottiQ should say 'Service temporarily unavailable' or something in that order? (But it shouldn't be needed I hope)
-
I hope so. It is mostly up to him - he is a busy person and I have zero access/say in his actual matters. I offered up a few alternatives for things I can change but right now it is just a matter of NANY 2011 catching the highlights and tons of people trying out JottiQ.
JottiQ was always meant for a bit of a poweruser in my eyes, to check over those few files your own AV package considered to be OK yet you still didn't trust. In case Jotti and in a lesser amount me are not able to find a satisfactory solution, I hope JottiQ simply falls out of favor... but well, let's just say I hope for the best but am secretly preparing for the worst case scenario.
-
Or you can rename JottiQ to VirusTotalQ, that would make a nice (and probably quick) NANY2012 pledge :P
-
I surmise that the developer of Jotti will recognize the increased usefulness his program can provide in conjunction with JottiQ, and will likely be willing to work something out with you that will throttle the load.
I expect and hope so too.
One thing JottiQ could do is insert a delay between uploading files, and a check of the jotti server status that increases that delay when the server is busy.
This really seems like a simple and full solution to the problem, even if its not ideal in the sense of making people wait longer than they should have to wait if the jotti service was a bit more sophisticated.
-
Or to quote an older Dutch ad pay-off "Het waren 2 geweldige dagen" (It where 2 fabulous days) :-*
-Ath
More than fabulous if you ask me. :)
I get a feeling this grew indeed a bit bigger than anyone, mostly Jotti IMHO, could have imagined, so he will probably have to restructure his service (or fix bugs in the Hash search, as that doesn't really seem to work), or get a bigger sponsor :D
Lest just pray he gets his act together, and JottiQ can provide it's useful service to the public again :Thmbsup:
-Ath
I am not sure if the hash service is broken at present. For as far I can tell, he totally disabled the entire API at present, or at least for JottiQ's API credentials. I don't blame him - it's the simplest solution.
The current errormessage of 'Jotti only supports files upto 0,00 B.' just says it all, I guess, maybe a next version of JottiQ should say 'Service temporarily unavailable' or something in that order? (But it shouldn't be needed I hope)
-Ath
It is ironic but true. The 0 bytes thing is what happens when the maximum file size cannot be retrieved, and in this case, it gives a strangely suitable message.
Or you can rename JottiQ to VirusTotalQ, that would make a nice (and probably quick) NANY2012 pledge :P
-Ath
I have considered such a thing, actually. Supporting both services in one app might be nice, but I'd have to check up on VirusTotal, their requirements and all that other jazz. That and it would imply a fairly big huge architectural change.
-
One thing JottiQ could do is insert a delay between uploading files, and a check of the jotti server status that increases that delay when the server is busy.
This really seems like a simple and full solution to the problem, even if its not ideal in the sense of making people wait longer than they should have to wait if the jotti service was a bit more sophisticated.
-mouser
There already is throttling. The problem isn't in people uploading a lot of stuff, it is in many people uploading stuff. Delays and all that sort won't change that. Suppose 500 people scan a single file. They all get allowed through. And that is what is clogging Jotti like mad right now. Everyone is downloading JottiQ, and everyone is throwing multiple files at it so by the time one file finally gets done the same person adds something new (although that should have gotten throttled by now.)
-
Well im not sure i buy the logic.
You are right that 500 people using JottiQ can result in 500 uploads to the service at a time, which if Jotti is not prepared for, could result in a heavy load on the server.
Now a pre-check for server status and a delay of N seconds before uploading when server is busy will definitely help.
BUT, even without checking the server status, the point is that it will make a HUGE additional difference in load if you delay between multiple file uploads, since most people using JottiQ will be queuing more than one file.
So it's all fine and well to say that adding a delay won't 100% solve every problem -- it is the case that delays will have a HUGE effect on lowering the load on the server.
I suggest a delay of something like max(uploads/2,10)*(0.5+serverload) (where serverload is from 0 to 1 based on server's reported serverload)
Adding the delay is something you have control over and could add really easily, and it would eliminate most of the problem and abuse.
-
Anything the delay can do is something Jotti can already do, and probably already does. JottiQ needs to get a token from the server in order to do anything for a particular 'file'. Said throttling is the delay you are aiming at that Jotti has FULL control over. If JottiQ doesn't get that token, it can do nothing.
I intend to add stuff to somehow involve the general server load, but again the ideal way is for the throttling to come from Jotti's side where possible. He has most control and insight into those things. His service can be at 100% load and not need to deny anyone. It is his internal queue of files people have uploaded that need scanning that is growing waay out of its intended capacity to the point where even the relatively quiet moments aren't providing enough space for him to minimize said internal queue to managable levels.
-
fair enough, jotti COULD ask your program to delay if he writes that code -- but if he can't get himself to write that in time, it still might be something you could do now to solve the problem.
-
JottiQ v1.0.2 is finally out. It is not the sort of release I would have preferred to make, but it is a necessity. :)
- JottiQ v1.0.2 Installer (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20110106%20JottiQ%20(1.0.2).exe)
- JottiQ v1.0.2 .7z archive (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20110106%20JottiQ%20(1.0.2).7z)
Changes in this version:
v1.0.2 (2011-01-06)
JottiQ-got-too-popular-for-its-own-good release. At the highest point
before Jotti's malware scan was forced to cease servicing JottiQ, the old
all-time record for its scanning load had been beaten by over 500%.
Added: Update check. It should have been implemented pre v1.0.0, but a
lot of issues came up and it simply didn't happen. Have a look inside
the 'About JottiQ' dialog. Future versions might add automation for
this sort of checking. This supports the DCUpdater application.
Added: A very heavy-handed approach to try and lighten the load on the
servers. If the server passes a certain point, all non-cached files
will not be uploaded and throw up an error. This way Jotti will
hopefully no longer be forced to cease servicing JottiQ. In future
versions, once JottiQ loses its spotlight, I will look into merely
saving the actual file uploads for last in the case Jotti's malware
scan is overloaded so one will not have to reset items to get stuff
to scan once it quiets down a bit.
Added: An actual link to the website and the discussion thread on
DonationCoder. Forgetting to link to your own site is a bit of a
stupid mistake to make.
Added: Internet shortcuts. (Rather too many links than too little!)
Added: Detection for withdrawn service from Jotti, and possible actions
the user can take to alleviate the issue.
Changed: Upgrading versions will require the 'Privacy Agreement' to be
accepted once more.
Changed: Users that put an unreasonably high load on Jotti's servers will
from now on be reminded they are quite the inconsiderate users.
I would rather not start truly limiting users as it will hurt the
intended use-cases of the application as well, but if in the versions
and months to come such soft reminders prove to not be enough, I will
have to resort to limiting functionality in all sorts of ways.
Changed: The older changelog (version history) entries have been split
off into their own Changelog.txt file. This way the Readme will be a
bit more accessible to users again.
-
it might be nice to show in the status or result window when a file cache was used instead of having to upload the whole file.
could be interesting to user and also useful in explaining why a file was so fast to be scanned.
-
I have been trying to hide the entire cache/non-cache thing for as much as possible. Once you start drawing a lot of attention to it, people will be all like 'oh my, I definitely need to re-scan since it might be a stale result'. There already is a second opinion feature for those users who truly need it, but in practice, it is really not necessary. The website itself also offers cached results even though you always upload the file in that case. Why? Because it is only rarely that you really need the file scanned again. The biggest issue is with 0-day viruses/worms and the sort which happened a lot in the days of the big viral email crap. Don't forget that JottiQ is not meant to be a first layer-of-defense - it is meant to be investigative in nature.
Also, while the item is processing you can keep an eye on the status message and/or icon in the queue to see what logical path is being taken. Uploading is very obvious, as are the 'file is queued' and 'intermediate results' bits.
-
It's really nice that Jotti opened the service again for JottiQ, congrats! :Thmbsup:
Now for all users to follow the presented guidelines on the intended-use-pattern...
-
So far, I think it helps greatly that v1.0.2 hasn't had much attention, and that v1.0.1 was getting most of its downloads from some major review sites with tons of users that all tried the app out at the same time. Sadly, v1.0.1 and prior had to be completely banned as a consequence.
At least from now on, JottiQ has an update-check, and it will be able to just error out once Jotti's general load becomes too heavy. It isn't an ideal solution, but given the timespan available to us it was among the best we could figure out. If all goes well over the next few months, I might be able to relax some things or Jotti might be able to get some more capacity. Time will have to tell.
-
At any rate, even if neither of those things two things happens (and I think, personally, that one or the other -- perhaps both -- will), you've provided a very useful program for many people. Congrats!
-
Do you mind providing the portable version in .ZIP format? Not everyone can open .7z.
-
7-zip (http://7-zip.org) is a free download for Windows and Linux (but JottiQ still isn't going to work on Linux with Mono because of the WPF requirement)
-
JottiQ just got a long writeup with pictures at dottech.org:
http://dottech.org/freeware-reviews/21190
-
Do you mind providing the portable version in .ZIP format? Not everyone can open .7z.
-Ashraf
I'll consider it once I wake up a bit more. The way I see it, .zip has been around since the 90ies, and while it is a good format, there's way better alternatives available already. I have not removed the requirement for the VC++ 2010 Redistributables because of efficiency and because as time passes, everyone should have those on their system. My logic is the same with the .7z format: everyone ought to get an archiver able to extract it nowadays.
Perhaps such 'progressive' thinking of mine is the wrong thing to use here, but if I don't try to push a better format a bit, who will? Big companies certainly won't as they have companies, users won't because older formats work fine for them, and so forth. It is a little thing to get a new archiver as even the builtin Windows support for .zip is the crappiest and slowest thing I've seen.
JottiQ just got a long writeup with pictures at dottech.org:
http://dottech.org/freeware-reviews/21190
-mouser
Awesome, I'll go read it now. :D
-
Ok, so I admit it is addictive to look at the referers and notice all the articles and other nooks and crannies that link to JottiQ. And I noticed that a lot of them are foreign, non-english going through the effort of using and reviewing JottiQ. So I wonder.. maybe I should change that?
Let me know what you think. (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/pages/posts/jottiq-are-translations-needed-9.php)
Thanks. :)
-
Thanks for a nice frontend.
My two cents: I hadn't seen mention of the drag-drop part, so I just assumed there was an "add files"-button somewhere in the UI. One of the few enabled buttons was the "add running processes" so I assumed that was for adding files to queue and clicked it. That sparked 10+ scans which I hadn't planned on. Just saying - in case number of scans is still an issue - the current UI might lead to unneccesary scans.
Amusing that the only running process where a detection was reported was from Screenshotcaptor ;)
-
Thank you for your reply, ccondrup. I am glad you enjoy JottiQ! :)
That is indeed something that needs looking at. I intended to add one of those at some point, but I rarely use such 'internal' selection dialogs myself and with the drag/drop, commandline and shell extension supported, it somehow felt as if I had covered all my bases.
-
I think it would be wise when user presses "add running processes" to pop up a yes/no messagebox that tells user what is about to happen :)
-
That entire function needs an overhaul anyway. It is slow, misses files, and to boot tends to be misleading since people expect a good result to mean the process is fine. Which it isn't; rundll32.exe shell32_.dll,TakeOverMyPCAsRunDLL is a commandline of a running process that would be quite nasty yet rundll32.exe is 100% safe.
As I already wrote in a forum thread at Wilders Security, I am quite tempted to remove the function as a whole since it does not properly fit the 'usage domain' for which JottiQ was written.
-
I agree, remove the function. If there is a way to *selectively* upload running processes (and ideally, to automatically disallow upload of Windows system files that won't give relevant results anyway, e.g. rundll32.exe), that would be a better way to handle the feature. But modern Task Manager has the ability to "find source file" for any given running EXE and they can then use JottiQ that way, as it was intended.
- Oshyan
-
Greetings
XP Pro 32 bit, SP3
I installed JottiQ v1.0.2.22338
Since I do have the latest .Net Framework v4 only C++ 2010 redist. was downloaded
The installation went smoothly, but when I'm starting the Application nothing happening except the hourglass, which appears for a second.
There is no GUI and JottiQ is not listed among the running processes.
I then tried a portable version with the same negative result.
Any ideas?
Thank you in advance
-
Hello jCat, welcome to DonationCoder! :)
Thanks for trying out JottiQ. As for your problem.. I am unsure what is causing the problem as I haven't heard of this issue before.
When starting up, JottiQ checks for an already running instance and if it finds it activates that old instance and kills the new one, but that shouldn't trigger here at all. So I am rather confused at this time. You never saw the window asking you to agree to some terms regarding privacy etc, right?
Did you per chance get a crash message or something noted in your event log? I think that's where program crashes get logged if XP doesn't explicitly tell you. You can find it in Control Panel -> Administrative Tools -> Event Viewer, and then on the left Windows Logs -> Application.
Otherwise, if you come to IRC (#donationcoder @ irc.efnet.org, or try the chat link at the top of these forums), perhaps we can talk a bit more directly which might help to narrow down the problem. In the worst case I can try to send you some debug builds to see if it might narrow it down some, as it is obviously something quite unique to your situation. :)
-
Did you per chance get a crash message or something noted in your event log?-worstje
Thanks for the reply worstje
Sure - my fault. Should've done that in the 1st place. Below is quite a message :)
Regards
Source: .NET Runtime
Type Error EventID 1026
Application: JottiQ.exe
Framework Version: v4.0.30319
Description: The process was terminated due to an unhandled exception.
Exception Info: System.IO.FileFormatException
Stack:
at System.Windows.Window.ShowDialog()
at JottiQ.App.AppStartup(System.Object, System.Windows.StartupEventArgs)
at System.Windows.Application.OnStartup(System.Windows.StartupEventArgs)
at System.Windows.Application.<.ctor>b__1(System.Object)
at System.Windows.Threading.ExceptionWrapper.InternalRealCall(System.Delegate, System.Object, Int32)
at MS.Internal.Threading.ExceptionFilterHelper.TryCatchWhen(System.Object, System.Delegate, System.Object, Int32, System.Delegate)
at System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherOperation.InvokeImpl()
at System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherOperation.InvokeInSecurityContext(System.Object)
at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.runTryCode(System.Object)
at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.RuntimeHelpers.ExecuteCodeWithGuaranteedCleanup(TryCode, CleanupCode, System.Object)
at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.RunInternal(System.Threading.ExecutionContext, System.Threading.ContextCallback, System.Object)
at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.Run(System.Threading.ExecutionContext, System.Threading.ContextCallback, System.Object, Boolean)
at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.Run(System.Threading.ExecutionContext, System.Threading.ContextCallback, System.Object)
at System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherOperation.Invoke()
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.ProcessQueue()
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.WndProcHook(IntPtr, Int32, IntPtr, IntPtr, Boolean ByRef)
at MS.Win32.HwndWrapper.WndProc(IntPtr, Int32, IntPtr, IntPtr, Boolean ByRef)
at MS.Win32.HwndSubclass.DispatcherCallbackOperation(System.Object)
at System.Windows.Threading.ExceptionWrapper.InternalRealCall(System.Delegate, System.Object, Int32)
at MS.Internal.Threading.ExceptionFilterHelper.TryCatchWhen(System.Object, System.Delegate, System.Object, Int32, System.Delegate)
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.InvokeImpl(System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherPriority, System.TimeSpan, System.Delegate, System.Object, Int32)
at MS.Win32.HwndSubclass.SubclassWndProc(IntPtr, Int32, IntPtr, IntPtr)
at MS.Win32.UnsafeNativeMethods.DispatchMessage(System.Windows.Interop.MSG ByRef)
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.PushFrameImpl(System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherFrame)
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.PushFrame(System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherFrame)
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.Run()
at System.Windows.Application.RunDispatcher(System.Object)
at System.Windows.Application.RunInternal(System.Windows.Window)
at System.Windows.Application.Run(System.Windows.Window)
at JottiQ.App.Main()
For more information, see Help and Support Center at http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/events.asp
-
That's indeed quite the message. And it baffles me even more-so than your original report. :-\
For as far I can tell (but it is a bit vague) it seems to imply that when I try to show a dialog it read a file of which the format borked everything to high hell. Which is amusing as I do not read any external files except for stuff passed, and especially not in the privacy-agreement window I suspect it refers to. .NET has the craziest bugs for me to work around I tell you. :(
Can you tell me anything about your Language/Regional settings? Some things I read on the web suggest it might somehow involve character sets and whatnot, and tbh I am grasping a bit at straws at present. (Although I won't rest till I find the bugger.)
Edit: Can you come to the chat per chance? I might have a build or two I'd like to run by you to see what happens if you have the time.
Edit2: Do you per chance have a font called Deja Vu Sans Mono installed? Or other Bitstream fonts? They cause these errors in some other WPF applications, and it is said removing them fixes it for those. (Hardly a good solution, but at this point it seems to be a WPF/Microsoft thing that I don't think I can work around, although I'll look into the matter if this does prove to be the issue.)
Edit3: It seems to come along with Open Office. This discussion (http://forums.silverlight.net/forums/t/176008.aspx) seems to have information on how to figure out what font causes it (if it isn't the Deja Vu one) and work around it. Sadly, it does not tell how to 'fix' it for me, which is a bit much of a bugger.
-
Can you tell me anything about your Language/Regional settings? Some things I read on the web suggest it might somehow involve character sets and whatnot, and tbh I am grasping a bit at straws at present. (Although I won't rest till I find the bugger.)
Edit: Can you come to the chat per chance? I might have a build or two I'd like to run by you to see what happens if you have the time.
Edit2: Do you per chance have a font called Deja Vu Sans Mono installed? Or other Bitstream fonts? They cause these errors in some other WPF applications, and it is said removing them fixes it for those. (Hardly a good solution, but at this point it seems to be a WPF/Microsoft thing that I don't think I can work around, although I'll look into the matter if this does prove to be the issue.)
-worstje
This is English version set to English Australian.
At the same time I do use second language(rather 2).
Therefore "...language to match the language version for non_Unicode..." is set to Russian in order to display menus & texts properly in some weirdly written Applications.
That was never a problem for Aps using different versions of .NET Framework.
Moreover, I do have at least 2 Apps currently which specifically rely on .net v4 and they are working.
As for Deja Vu - the viewer is installed, and respectively several DJ fonts including Sans Mono
Well I may try to use chat but not today (already night :) )
Thanks for the responses
Regards
-
The fact you confirm that you have Deja Vu makes me suspect that one is indeed the culprit here and I doubt visiting IRC will be needed at this time as we narrowed it down a bit. I am not sure when I can find time to work on this issue as I am heading to have a busy saturday, maybe even busy sunday depending on the state of affairs. To boot, once I get down to working on it, I am not fully sure I will be able to reproduce the error and/or find a way to work around it.
Could you zip up all the DJ fonts that you have and attach them to a post? Alternatively, if that's not possible, you could also email them to jottiq-support [located at] whitehat.dcmembers.com. (Fix the parts in square brackets with the appropriate sign first, of course.)
That way I have a set of testing files that are known to have the issue as I suspect newer releases of these fonts have this issue fixed. And while I can just tell people to upgrade/delete the fonts because I can't reproduce it, I'd much rather deliver a proper fix. Expression Blend could fix/work around it, so hopefully so can I. :)
Thank you very much for the bug report, jCat. I appreciate it! :)
-
Thank you very much for the bug report, jCat. I appreciate it!
-worstje
And thank you very much for providing an exemplary, civil response that furthers good opinions of DC in general and your good self in particular!
-
I am not sure when I can find time to work on this issue -worstje
Don't worry, worstje. Take your time
Thank you very much for the bug report, jCat. I appreciate it! :)-worstje
My pleasure. Don't mention it.
Could you zip up all the DJ fonts that you have and attach them to a post?-worstje
Files are archived. Will try to attach or will e-mail in case some size limit is set here. The file is almost 2MB
In addition I tested JottiQ start after temporarily removing all DJ fonts and got the same result/Error, so the problem is somewhere deeper
My regards
-
Hmm, removing them temporarily didn't help? :( Got any other Bitstream fonts installed? Maybe it is something with stuff from that vendor.
Edit: I have tried to reproduce the issue with the fonts you included on both W7 and a XP SP3 pc, and had no success. So it is indeed not these fonts, or it is a wholly different issue. Is there any chance you can spend a bit of time removing fonts from your Fonts folder to try and figure out which is causing it? (Of course, back them up somewhere else!)
If you can figure out which one is causing it and attach it (try using the Procmon tool that link I posted earlier talked about), then hopefully I'll be able to reproduce the issue with said font. After that, if we end up excluding font-issiues as a complete possibility, we might be able to figure out what else could be causing this. Sadly, the stuff Windows logged on your PC isn't too helpful in itself. :(
-
Just found about JottiQ.
Thanks for the very nice tool worstje! :Thmbsup:
-
GHacks review: http://www.ghacks.net/2011/01/19/jottiq-upload-files-to-online-malware-scanner-jotti/ (http://www.ghacks.net/2011/01/19/jottiq-upload-files-to-online-malware-scanner-jotti/)
Well done! :Thmbsup:
-
written up in cybernetnews along with some other nany apps, but check the headline:
http://cybernetnews.com/online-antivirus-scanner/
"JottiQ Antivirus Scanner is the Shining Point of NANY 2011"
-
I'm starting to feel all embarrased with all the attention, y'know! :-[ But I am really thankful for it never the less :-*, and hope people will find the tool useful for all sorts of things. :)
-
Hi worstje,
Sorry for the delay ... I found some time only today and ran ProcMon
I didn't fing anything "bad" related to fonts, but to my surprise there are many (I mean a lot! of) "Buffer Overflow" Errors.
I saved reports in <>.XML and native <>.PML formats. The files are 69MB and 95MB respectively
I'll try to attach the latter archived ~5MB , but if that fails you can tell where to upload in case you need whole report.
In addition attached are just few examples of those Error entries and respective exports from the Registry (suffixes ".txt" were deliberately added to the ".reg" extension)
Cheers!
-
Hi worstje,
I stumbled upon a small JottiQ-bug: I can make JottiQ crash by opening/closing the About box several times.
I'm running the latest version on my laptop running Windows XP SP3.
Kind regards and keep up the good work
-
I stumbled upon a small JottiQ-bug: I can make JottiQ crash by opening/closing the About box several times.
I'm running the latest version on my laptop running Windows XP SP3.-zzynx
Confirmed. It crashes for me on the second time showing the About box.
-
Guess not many use Vista 64bit so should say I cannot provoke crashes on that OS.
-
Hi worstje,
Sorry for the delay ... I found some time only today and ran ProcMon
I didn't fing anything "bad" related to fonts, but to my surprise there are many (I mean a lot! of) "Buffer Overflow" Errors.
I saved reports in <>.XML and native <>.PML formats. The files are 69MB and 95MB respectively
I'll try to attach the latter archived ~5MB , but if that fails you can tell where to upload in case you need whole report.
In addition attached are just few examples of those Error entries and respective exports from the Registry (suffixes ".txt" were deliberately added to the ".reg" extension)
Cheers!
-jCat
Thanks, I'll go dig into those! :) Buffer overflows do sound surprising as (last I knew) the code it crashed in wasn't mine, and I tend to be rather careful where buffers are concerned.
Hi worstje,
I stumbled upon a small JottiQ-bug: I can make JottiQ crash by opening/closing the About box several times.
I'm running the latest version on my laptop running Windows XP SP3.
Kind regards and keep up the good work
-zzynx
Hmm, I can't reproduce it on W7 64-bit either. I've opened the About box like 50 times in a row just now and could not repeat it. Skwire, do you use WXP SP3 as well? I'll give it a test-run later. I suspect the icon stuff is causing these crashes again, although I am pretty sure I hard-coded that stuff. Hmm.
Is there anyone who can reproduce the crash who can give me the stack trace and such as it ends up in the Windows Event log? I gave pointers to the exact place to find it up there when trying to deal with that other crashy behaviour.
-
Ok, I dug into the stuff jCat gave me but can't really find anything that is wrong. The buffer overflows are apparently pretty normal - Windows causes them tons, and it is mostly a side-effect of its internal workings as some blogs of Mark Russinovich (http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2005/06/04/buffer-overflows-in-regmon-traces.aspx) explained to me. I did some further digging into the guts of the .NET framework, and while I can't find the cause just yet most signs seem to point towards it indeed being a font issue. 9/10 references to (=uses of) that FileFormatException are in code that deals with fonts. I'll try to keep looking tho - for now I'm gonna see if I can find my laptop somewhat at all. :)
-
I might have joyous news for all... or a huge disappointment. :tellme:
The attached file should fix the About box crash, and very hopefully it also fixes jCat's crash upon starting. I am very interested in hearing how it works out for all people with problems (especially jCat as I cannot reproduce his particular usecase). To test it just replace your JottiQ.exe with the one inside the archive and run as usual.
If this test build fixes the issues, I will likely soon release an official v1.0.3 with one or two more minor tweaks but no changes feature-wise. There's plans for new features, but they are being saved up for a v1.1.0.
-
The attached file should fix the About box crash
-worstje
And it does for me… XP SP3.
I saw about about 30 times.
Still functions in other ways also — who ever doubted that?
:Thmbsup:
-
Seems to be fixed here as well. :up:
-
The host I'm using is Windows XP SP3 (fully patched as of 01/21/2010) running as a guest on a Citrix XenServer (5.6.0) - I'm not sure if anyone else is running JottiQ on a VM but this is the only place I can safely conduct my malware analysis in my environment
Anyhow - I installed using the installer (20110106 JottiQ (1.0.2).exe) and double checked the correct .NET and C re-distributables were installed properly
My issue is, as soon as I try to open JottiQ (from Start-Menu or otherwise) it crashes and Windows wants to send a crash report to Microsoft
This is the message I get:
JottiQ has encountered a problem and needs to close. We are sorry for the inconvenience.
Here's the gist of the crash report:
EventType : clr20r3 P1 : jottiq.exe P2 : 1.0.2.22338 P3 : 4d25a674
P4 : presentationcore P5 : 4.0.0.0 P6 : 4ba1f865 P7 : 44dd
P8 : 47 P9 : system.io.fileformatexception
Any ideas what could be causing this? Really hopping to use JottiQ
-
pr1m35, it sounds like you might suffer the same issue jCat reported a few days ago. If you look on the previous page, only a few hours ago I posted a 1.0.3 test-build that might solve the issue. Can you test that one and report whether it fixes the issue?
In the case it does not fix the issue, can you per chance check your Event log, Application tab, and paste the stack trace? Hopefully yours is going to be a bit more useful that jCat, regardless of them being the actual same thing.
-
written up on the ilovefreesoftware site:
http://www.ilovefreesoftware.com/21/windows/security/antivirus/jottiq-desktop-client-for-jotti-online-virus-scanner.html
-
Thanks for the link. :)
What really excited me is the option to scan running processes.-ILoveFreeSoftware
I have a feeling that is a common opinion, yet it is the buggiest feature there is in JottiQ to the point I'm thinking of removing it. JottiQ v1.1.0 might end up losing me a lot of users if I end up going that route. :D
-
Hi worstje,
I'm posting delayed reply ... again :(
As a reminder, I don't have any system messages as described by pr1m35 in Reply #151 ... All is silent here
No, unfortunately 1.0.3 test-build didn't solve a problem here. Same stack of .Net Framework Events
Well, you may compare with the previous one
Application: JottiQ.exe
Framework Version: v4.0.30319
Description: The process was terminated due to an unhandled exception.
Exception Info: System.IO.FileFormatException
Stack:
at System.Windows.Window.ShowDialog()
at JottiQ.App.AppStartup(System.Object, System.Windows.StartupEventArgs)
at System.Windows.Application.OnStartup(System.Windows.StartupEventArgs)
at System.Windows.Application.<.ctor>b__1(System.Object)
at System.Windows.Threading.ExceptionWrapper.InternalRealCall(System.Delegate, System.Object, Int32)
at MS.Internal.Threading.ExceptionFilterHelper.TryCatchWhen(System.Object, System.Delegate, System.Object, Int32, System.Delegate)
at System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherOperation.InvokeImpl()
at System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherOperation.InvokeInSecurityContext(System.Object)
at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.runTryCode(System.Object)
at System.Runtime.CompilerServices.RuntimeHelpers.ExecuteCodeWithGuaranteedCleanup(TryCode, CleanupCode, System.Object)
at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.RunInternal(System.Threading.ExecutionContext, System.Threading.ContextCallback, System.Object)
at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.Run(System.Threading.ExecutionContext, System.Threading.ContextCallback, System.Object, Boolean)
at System.Threading.ExecutionContext.Run(System.Threading.ExecutionContext, System.Threading.ContextCallback, System.Object)
at System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherOperation.Invoke()
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.ProcessQueue()
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.WndProcHook(IntPtr, Int32, IntPtr, IntPtr, Boolean ByRef)
at MS.Win32.HwndWrapper.WndProc(IntPtr, Int32, IntPtr, IntPtr, Boolean ByRef)
at MS.Win32.HwndSubclass.DispatcherCallbackOperation(System.Object)
at System.Windows.Threading.ExceptionWrapper.InternalRealCall(System.Delegate, System.Object, Int32)
at MS.Internal.Threading.ExceptionFilterHelper.TryCatchWhen(System.Object, System.Delegate, System.Object, Int32, System.Delegate)
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.InvokeImpl(System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherPriority, System.TimeSpan, System.Delegate, System.Object, Int32)
at MS.Win32.HwndSubclass.SubclassWndProc(IntPtr, Int32, IntPtr, IntPtr)
at MS.Win32.UnsafeNativeMethods.DispatchMessage(System.Windows.Interop.MSG ByRef)
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.PushFrameImpl(System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherFrame)
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.PushFrame(System.Windows.Threading.DispatcherFrame)
at System.Windows.Threading.Dispatcher.Run()
at System.Windows.Application.RunDispatcher(System.Object)
at System.Windows.Application.RunInternal(System.Windows.Window)
at System.Windows.Application.Run(System.Windows.Window)
at JottiQ.App.Main()
Regards
p.s. currently I cannot read PM received from you - "due to server problem" as this site stated
-
Yeah I heard from p1m35 that it didn't solve the issue for him either earlier today. :(
Sadly, the stuff happens inside .NET, and as long as I can't reproduce it or have access to a system to try and reproduce the issue on it is very damn annoying to try and figure the bug out.
Try this build. It will either 'fix' it because I removed some code just now out of desperation, or it will throw out some (hopefully extra-nice errors) to help me try and find the problem. Or it will throw out the exact same stracktrace.
-
Try this build. It will either 'fix' it because I removed some code just now out of desperation, or it will throw out some (hopefully extra-nice errors) to help me try and find the problem. Or it will throw out the exact same stracktrace.-worstje link=topic=24663.msg233759#msg233759
:up:
Very quick reply after a very brief testing of the latest 1.0.3 build 42939
Got all initial ... & further screens ... scanned 3 files queued... no .Net Errors logged
1st impression - great! :Thmbsup:
Well done! I'll try to post anything that can be find either a lil bug(s) ...hope not ;) or the Wish List entries if any
Best regards! Cheers!
-
Well, that is just a great bucket of poppycock. >:( I hate you, .NET framework.
Would either you or p1m35 be willing to run another testbuild? The code I removed, while not essential, is nice-to-have and present in about 5 other places where it apparently causes no crashes at all for you, and that confuses the hell outta me. I'd hate to release another version while I don't understand why this fixed it: by my logic it should still crash for you on the main screen, settings screen or the about box, and apparently it does not.
Another test build - the final one I'll ask you to test, promise. :)
-
Well, that is just a great bucket of poppycock. >:( I hate you, .NET framework.-worstje
hahaha! Oh dear ! :tellme:
True! Don't ask. I am a programmer myself.
The idea behind .Net is fine. I do not agree with people who are saying that they are not willing to use this or that Software just because they are compelled to download xxx MB of Framework - that is just stupid!
At the same time the implementation of the thing with many versions & bugs & incompatibilities and so on & so forth - is just an insanity by the company that promotes Object Oriented Design
It seems that "Small & Soft" doesn't have enough resources or something ;D
... digressing ...I have many stories about the Framework(s) & suffering & fixing ...
...I don't understand why this fixed it: by my logic it should still crash for you on the main screen, settings screen or the about box, and apparently it does not.-worstje
Cannot tell about the "About Box", since until the latest test release I could not get anything & now I am having everything :)
Another test build - the final one I'll ask you to test, promise. :) -worstje
The test will be downloaded & performed. There is no need to "promise the last one".
Anytime; any other build, man, as soon as I have time
Cheers!
-
adding to the above post
Attached is a combined output of 2 debug messages that you asked for
Other than that the Application is running fine after confirming both
Moreover, interestingly enough - after rebooting and running the App. this morning I did not receive any of those messages
Cheers!
-
Thank you jCat! This was exactly the information that I was looking for. :) Now, rather than remove that code for all XP users, I can just run it and ignore any errors that happen, which I prefer by far over any of the other alternatives.
I have no clue why it stopped causing those messages, although my best bet is that your Windows Imaging Component got updated. It's basically a part of Windows that can read and decode tons of images - except most applications don't use it and instead use something else. (I wonder why, with all the bloody bugs that's in that thing...)
Once mouser finishes his prodding and poking with dcuhelper.exe, JottiQ v1.0.3 will be released. :-\
-
Right before January ends, a bugfix release of everyones favorite lady-bug. :)
Lots of thanks to jCat who helped to test all those test builds I worked up to try and find the elusive issue that was crashing JottiQ for him and pr1m35. (Any of the dcuhelper.exe updates I alluded to above will have to wait as those are going to take a while to finish up and they're not all that essential to have at all.)
- JottiQ v1.0.3 Installer (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20110129%20JottiQ%20(1.0.3).exe)
- JottiQ v1.0.3 .7z archive (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20110129%20JottiQ%20(1.0.3).7z)
If there is anything else you want to know, check the first post in this topic or see the website (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/pages/software/jottiq.php).
v1.0.3 (2011-01-29)
JottiQ v1.0.2 still had a few weird bugs left. Hereby they shall be thought
of as relics of the old past, of times gone by and much, much more...
Added: Update check is now automatically done every few days when JottiQ
is started. The automatic checking behaviour can be disabled in the
Settings window.
Fixed: Opening the 'About JottiQ' for a second time will no longer crash
JottiQ on Windows XP. It was a weird bug, but not as weird as...
Fixed: Starting JottiQ on some installations of Windows XP would cause an
instant crash. This was a pain to track down, but it has now been
utterly vanquished. Many thanks to jCat for the help in tracking down
what was causing this nasty issue.
-
nice :up:
-
I would like to request a feature in JottiQ. Please add internet connection through proxy with authentication. :-*
-
Welcome to DonationCoder, sujay85!
I have been told by someone (I think early on in this thread) that it already works with proxy stuff. I believe JottiQ adopts the Internet Explorer proxy information, or whatever .NET uses. If setting it there does not work, I will look into it - but again, I could swear someone already informed me JottiQ should work through proxies. I remember being relieved about it working straight away without needing to put any special effort in. :D
(I know very little of proxies and am not really in a position to test such stuff either; perhaps your configured proxy does not allow encrypted https 'ssl' connections?)
-
I could swear someone already informed me JottiQ should work through proxies.
-worstje
That was me, when testing JottiQ on several platforms 8)
But the devil is in the details, as usual, I have a proxy that doesn't require authentication, and sujay85 is asking for proxy with authentication... but AFAICS that's not supported by configurable using the standard Windows Internet settings :nono2:
-
Dare I ask how one is supposed to browse the internet with such a proxy? If IE can't do authenticating proxies properly, you can't open any pages either right? Or am I missing something silly?
Either way, I will look into the matter when I have a bit of free time. :)
-
AFAIK, these proxies present a page when using http(s) from a browser. And most other apps should know how to pass an authenticating proxy, so it seems... :tellme:
-
Maybe this blogpost (http://www.ehow.com/how_5939586_change-username-password-ie-6.html) helps? It basically means you don't have to do anything, worstje :up:
-
sujay85, please give Ath's explanation a try. :) I am most curious to see how that'll work out. Whether or not it works, please post your results so alternative options can be considered for implementation.
-
Hi, sorry for the late reply. Actually I haven't tried installing it there. I will try and post back... thanks...:)
-
I am hereby confirming that Jottiq does not work with Proxy with authentication.
-
Does Internet Explorer (most other browsers have other mechanisms for auth.proxies!) present you a proxy-login-page when you start browsing, or is it automagically providing the proper credentials to the proxy?
-
Congrats! JottiQ just got written up on MakeUseOf.
[ You are not allowed to view attachments ] (http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/jottiq-scan-suspicious-files-multiple-antivirus-apps-time/)
http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/jottiq-scan-suspicious-files-multiple-antivirus-apps-time/
-
Sweet. :) Thanks for the link, app103! I used to keep a close eye on articles for a while, but since Gothi[c] went a-magicking with awstats I've not really been able to keep an eye on fresh referers.
With regards to the proxy thing - I'll bring out a test build later today that hopefully solves your problem, sujay85. I lack the environment to properly test all of this (authenticated) proxy stuff, so I hope we'll have a few willing testers for whom 1.0.3 does not work properly.
-
very nice :up:
-
Does Internet Explorer (most other browsers have other mechanisms for auth.proxies!) present you a proxy-login-page when you start browsing, or is it automagically providing the proper credentials to the proxy?
-Ath
Yes browsers show proxy login pop-up after opening.
-
With regards to the proxy thing - I'll bring out a test build later today that hopefully solves your problem, sujay85. I lack the environment to properly test all of this (authenticated) proxy stuff, so I hope we'll have a few willing testers for whom 1.0.3 does not work properly.
-worstje
No problem. i will let you know whether that will work or not. FYI till now no other such tools like virustotal uploader/novirusthanks uploader does this authentication. If you can solve this it will be the first of its kind...;)
-
You mention something of a popup and such. Is it some builtin Internet Explorer thing, or does it show for all browsers? Could you share a screenshot?
I think the solution I have in mind code-wise does not support popping up any dialogs, so it might not fix your issue and I've had to look at something else.
-
You mention something of a popup and such. Is it some builtin Internet Explorer thing, or does it show for all browsers? Could you share a screenshot?
I think the solution I have in mind code-wise does not support popping up any dialogs, so it might not fix your issue and I've had to look at something else.
-worstje
Hi,
All browsers show that dialogue/pop-up box. Give me some time, I will post the screenshots on Monday..:)
I know nothing about coding, but you may not use that pop-up box rather set that setting permanently like in the following screenie (this one is in Bullguard AV)
http://i.imgur.com/ZlE7S.jpg
-
I am hesitant to use a separate screen as it would very likely mean I'd have to get down into proxy nitty gritty. If at all possible, I want to use existing (builtin) Windows settings as that is how users would probably expect it to work.
Apologies for not getting around to coding that test build I promised. I just haven't gotten around to it, but it is most definitely on my list of things to do. :)
-
I am hesitant to use a separate screen as it would very likely mean I'd have to get down into proxy nitty gritty. If at all possible, I want to use existing (builtin) Windows settings as that is how users would probably expect it to work.
Apologies for not getting around to coding that test build I promised. I just haven't gotten around to it, but it is most definitely on my list of things to do. :)
-worstje
No Problem take your time..:)
-
worstje:
The standard procedure with authenticating proxies and other authenticating services, is to set up the credentials in your connection object, and then make the connection. The connection stuff then either automatically performs the authentication or fires an event (.NET kinda standard behavior) that you implement and return the proper credential information.
It's quite useless (iow nearly impossible) to try and catch the login page fired at browsers, as that's often a javascript page, you will have great difficulty executing in your application (JottiQ in this case)
-
Right. I'm with you so far, and I actually looked into that stuff already. But if there's standard facilities to authenticating proxies, there should probably be some sort of Windows-wide data repository for that stuff I can (ab)use? If a system has a proxy configured it would be silly to make a user configure it separately for JottiQ.
Too many settings are a bad thing by my book, so if I can avoid any sort of data entry that is JottiQ specific that would make me happy.
-
If the authentication for browsers is a webpage, then I assume it could be using cookies to store any previous used credentials, but that should be provided by the proxy, and is probably not re-usable by other applications.
Most other apps I use (Avast, Eclipse, and other stuff) have in their network page a proxy setting that facilitate optionally setting the authentication parameters, next to the proxy address, so I'm afraid that there's not much hope for a common solution. You could re-use the parameters of any of the other apps to provide these to the proxy, but what common app to choose?
It wonders me (too) that Windows Internet settings page doesn't have an option to define this.
-
As promised I have attached the screenies. :up:
-
That are the default 'Login credentials' pages of these browsers, so I'm afraid that JottiQ is going to need it's specific proxy authentication settings page :(
-
Okay thank you. Seems I am indeed stuck doing things that way. :) Ath, when I get around to it, I hope there's no issue if I ask you to test? I seem to recall you had a rather diverse (software) environment to test with, and you seem to know the subject quite well to boot.
-
Well, I've been behind a proxy (here, at home) for over 14 years now, and that was just because my ISDN connection could be turned of and off by the proxy software, and I sticked with it because all my e-mail configurations would have to be changed again and again. And for the extra security ofcourse, as there's also a firewall on that machine.
Not sure if I can configure it to do the authentication without messing things up big time, here, but I'll try, just for fun, or set up something in VMWare 8) Will probably end up sometime next week, though (assuming you're ready before the weekend), got a busy weekend ahead.
-
Heh, take your time. I am not in a rush with this one myself. :)
-
Version 1.1.0 is out, six months after the initial release. Woo hoo, yay, hurray and all that cheerful babble.
- JottiQ v1.1.0 Installer (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20110701%20JottiQ%20(1.1.0).exe)
- JottiQ v1.1.0 .7z archive (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20110701%20JottiQ%20(1.1.0).7z)
If there is anything else you want to know, check the first post in this topic or see the website (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/pages/software/jottiq.php). Or simply ask in this topic; I'll be glad to answer any questions there may be.
The JottiQ website still needs a day or two to get polished with regards to this release; I haven't managed to update it as much as I planned to for this release and at this moment, information regarding the new release and its features is decidedly lacking on there.
v1.1.0 (2011-07-01)
Six months after the official release, it is time for a well-deserved
update. Sadly, there isn't much one can improve in a tool with a simple
purpose. However, I hope this new version will entertain.
Added: Forks support. Also known as 'Alternative Data Streams', these
are a well-hidden feature of the NTFS filesystem which provide for
equally well-hidden pseudo-files attached to existing files. Most
programs are unable to read them, no less act on them - which makes
this a feature that truly improves Jotti's malware scan.
Added: Proxy server support.
Added: Connectivity test for troubleshooting issues. Some beta-testers
for this version had problems with proxy server support, but it will
hopefully prove useful for all parties.
Added: A builtin 'whitelist' for forks. The feature is sometimes used
for legitimate reasons, and one of those affects nearly every file
downloaded. The whitelist exists for speeding up processing only;
security-minded (distrusting?) individuals are free to enable the
option that forces these whitelisted forks to appear in the queue.
Added: A 'whitelist fork by name' option. If the precise comparisons on
a possibly whitelisted fork prove troublesome, this enables one to
consider the fork safe by proxy of its name. This feature as a work-
around for 'Zone.Identifier' forks encoded in different formats than
I have been able to test with - so if one finds a 'Zone.Identifier'
fork that is not whitelisted, I request that this forks is saved to a
file and sent to me at: jottiq-whitelist (at) whitehat.dcmembers.com
so I may inspect it and if is found safe, add it to the whitelist in
the next version. TL;DR? Don't enable unless you know you need it.
Added: The queue context menu now offers an Actions sub-menu. These
contain actions that affect the selected objects (files and/or forks)
in the queue physically. There are currently two items in this menu:
- Delete Object(s): This either deletes the selected file(s)
permanently, or it removes the selected fork(s) from the file.
Do note that deleting a file also deletes its forks, but that
deleting a fork on a file leaves the latter intact. I remain of
the opinion that JottiQ is an investigative tool rather than a
cleaner, but... the peoples wishes are clear and forks are hard
to delete, so deleting files is a logical consequence.
- Save Fork As: This saves the contents of a fork to a file. This
does not work for ordinary files as it would be a mere 'Copy'
operation that may or may not bring expectations along with it;
instead it is to be used as an inspection utility for a resource
otherwise difficult to examine.
Added: An 'Add file(s)' feature is now available in the toolbar. It
completely slipped my attention in the 1.0.x versions, for which
my apologies. Rather late than never. :)
Removed: The 'Add Running Processes' functionality is no longer present.
It was determined to be an inappropriate feature that only delivered
half work, and to boot the reason why Jotti's malware scan suffers
such ungodly waiting times during the waking hours of the western
world ever since JottiQ's release.
Fixed: No more crash when down-sizing the amount of worker-threads.
Fixed: Legibility of items on right pane could suffer in certain colour
configurations; now it uses proper system colours where applicable.
Fixed: Zero-byte items were not being removed by the manual nor automatic
'Remove safe items' features.
Fixed: Deleting items from the queue while it was being processed no
longer makes the worker-thread go M.I.A. until it finishes its work
off the screen; it now terminates and moves on to the next item in
the list as soon as possible.
Changed: Uploading should be a little bit more efficient now.
Changed: Fancy progress bars that show upload progress are now in place
as opposed a boring textual description.
Changed: Redesigned the Settings window with clearly named sections and
recognizable icons in order to make JottiQ configuration more
accessible.
Changed: The instruction text in the main screen no longer suggests
one to 'start processing' when processing is already enabled.
-
:up: :up: :up:
-
Version 1.1.1 is now out. No bugs were fixed; but a setting was added to play nice with domains and group policies that mess up the SSL certificate validation of Jotti's malware scan. While Internet Explorer would give you a warning and the option to ignore and continue on your own risk, the .NET framework is quite a bit tougher and more unforgiving in that regard. Thanks go to sujay85 to put up with the small dozen private messages I exchanged with him over the past two weeks, and the test builds that were created as a result. :)
- JottiQ v1.1.1 Installer (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20110712%20JottiQ%20(1.1.1).exe)
- JottiQ v1.1.1 .7z archive (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20110712%20JottiQ%20(1.1.1).7z)
If there is anything else you want to know, check the first post in this topic or see the website (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/pages/software/jottiq.php). Or simply ask in this topic; I'll be glad to answer any questions there may be.
v1.1.1 (2011-07-12)
Any new version released suffers from a few hiccups, and v1.1.0 was no
different. Thankfully, all this release does is pat the proverbial belly.
Added: A setting that, if enabled, lessens the scrutiny given to the
remote server of Jotti's malware scan to determine its authenticity.
'Ignore certain SSL certificate errors' is only useful on a few
specific configurations, and should not be enabled unless you get an
error like the following in the Connectivity Test:
'The underlying connection was closed: Could not establish trust
relationship for the SSL/TLS secure channel.'
Changed: dcuhelper.exe was updated to v1.10.01 released on July 12, 2011.
-
Ohh!!! thanks for the update. I failed to notice days in the past two days. :P Great job worstje... :Thmbsup: :Thmbsup:
-
Hi..
Not sure whether i should post here ,but im running windows 7 64 bit ,and just installed jottiq (latest) ,but getting an error that i cant fathom.When i try to drag load an item into jottiiq to scan i get an error.Can anyone help?
Thanks
ellison
EDIT......SORRY GUYS .MY ERROR.IT WAS MY FIREWALL BLOCKING IT.ALL OK NOW :Thmbsup:
-
Any news on a possible release ? Just asking.. :-[ I love to see updates coming :-*
-
Sujay, today is your lucky day, although it isn't really... :o
Version 1.2.0 is now out. Sadly though, this release adds nothing new; it only prevents breakage in the nearby future. Because upgrading really matters to keep JottiQ working, I decided to engage in some psychological warfare and bump up the minor version to v1.2.0 rather than going with a more sensible v1.1.2. :Thmbsup:
Jotti is in the process of revitalizing his service with new features, amongst which is the ability to deal with the load JottiQ threw at it during its release. (That last thing has been implemented for a while I believe; I haven't seen a server-side queue in ages!) Some of his upcoming changes however are not compatible with JottiQ (broken scan results link, anti-virus images moving and such), so an update is required for continued functioning. :)
- JottiQ v1.2.0 Installer (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20150324%20JottiQ%20(1.2.0).exe)
- JottiQ v1.2.0 .7z archive (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/jottiq/files/20150324%20JottiQ%20(1.2.0).7z)
I do hope to get back into JottiQ development again. I still have some plans for it. But for now, I am going to wait and see to what degree Jotti's upcoming changes affect things. Some of the features I'd love to implement require a little bit of help from him, and he understandably needs to focus on his current efforts first.
If there is anything else you want to know, check the first post in this topic or see the website (http://whitehat.dcmembers.com/pages/software/jottiq.php). Or simply ask in this topic; I'll be glad to answer any questions there may be.
v1.2.0 (2015-03-24)
Compatibility release. Jotti is undergoing some changes so we must too. :)
Upgrading is highly recommended; previous versions of JottiQ may break or
otherwise show reduced functionality as Jotti improves his service.
Edit: It seems the DCMembers server has some issues at present, so I can't actually update the website right now. But I hopefully will be able to do so soon!
-
JottiQ v1.2.0 Installer
JottiQ v1.2.0 .7z archive
-worstje
I'm getting 404 error on both links.
-
JottiQ v1.2.0 Installer
JottiQ v1.2.0 .7z archive
-worstje
I'm getting 404 error on both links.
-qupear
I am not the author of this tool. However with that said for now you may get it from the page @ https://www.dcmembers.com/whitehat/jottiq/
Thanks. :)