For last two updates of Glass (XE19.* and XE20*), whenever I load my Glass app onto a device it seems to get auto-deleted after a few hours. Has anyone else noticed this behavior and have a workaround to prevent it?
This question seems to indicate that if your apk has the same package name as one that is going through the review process, that it may be removed. Use a package name that is different or go through the review and whitelist process.
Update: The whitelist process allows you to permit a select group of people to be able to access the apks as you update them while they are being reviewed. You should be able to ask the review team about this once the process is underway.
Related
I want to package programs into an MSI and create Scheduled Tasks (i.e. run on Boot/Startup).
I'm trying solutions available on the market such as Advanced Installer and EMCO MSI Packager, but I get the same error in both:
Verify that you have sufficient privileges to start system services
This means my account does not have the "Login as a service" privilege. However, looking up solutions, you'll find that Advanced Installer offers little help.
Basically, they suggest either (1) hardcoding user credentials, which is obviously unviable or (2) creating a new user with the required privileges, also unviable.
I've created tasks before in plain C++ and it was very easy, a simple
system("schtasks [args]")
Was enough to create tasks, and as long as the program was running after a UAC prompt was accepted, the tasks were successfully created.
So what exactly is the aforementioned error, and how can I fix it, preferably with a solution from the market (it is cleaner than having to manually make a setup.exe, ask for privileges, manually make tasks).
Edit: Any answers that provide some clarity on creating Scheduled Tasks that automatically run elevated (i.e. have access to Program Files, etc) are greatly appreciated.
Edit 2: Setting user to LocalService did not work.
Verify that you have sufficient privileges to start system services is a red herring. It's a generic error message from MSI saying it couldn't start the service. There's a bakers dozen reasons (that I've answered on here: Error 1920 service failed to start. Verify that you have sufficient privileges to start system services )
Here's a couple tips:
DLLs going to Win SXS and GAC don't happen until after StartServices because of a design limitation in MSI. Try installing but not starting the service. Then after it's installed try to start it. If it works, it could be that.
You could be missing files. You can try to run the exe from a command prompt while it's hung and see if it says anything is missing.
The application could be crashing on startup.
I offer free 1 hour consulting sessions. If you can share the files with me I could look at it with you. Look me up if you are interested.
I created a OAuth 2 client Id in Google Cloud Platform(GCP) in our production application. However this was only for internal use, so I removed it and tried to add it again in our development GCP project.
However when trying to add it, it says
Save failed
Requested entity already exists
Tracking number: xxx
What am I doing wrong? Do I need to do some extra steps to completely remove the OAuth 2 client id? I removed them around a month ago already, so it really should be gone by now.
It seems after 1 month the problem has automatically resolved itself. I assume it just soft deletes when you press delete, and then hard deletes one month later. Pretty annoying system.
You can also remove the entire project to get rid of unwanted ghost clients, but obviously you then lose all configuration.
The end result:
After publishing an item, all versions will be visible in the WEB DB, instead of the default behaviour of only having the latest item version.
I'm using Sitecore 8.2.170407
After reading this article, I tried to do several things:
Remove both RemoveOtherVersions and PublishTestingVersions processors by doing a <patch:delete />. That did not work
Add my own patch file, which inherits Sitecore.Publishing.Pipelines.PublishVersion.Processors.RemoveOtherVersions and hides/overrides the base Process method. The new method will do nothing.
Image of patch class and Image of patch config
That didn't work either.
Tried removing the whole <publishVersion> pipeline, but that gave an exception when trying to publish an item.
I've not been able to find a solutions anywhere else. I know a similar question has been asked here, but that was in Sitecore 6
Have any of you been in the same situation before? How did you solve the issue?
If you need more information, please let me know.
Thanks in advance
You can't.
The linked answer you provide is still valid. Sitecore "web" database (any database which is a publishing target) stores one and only one version. To modify this, you're going to need to reinvent your own publishing process.
Based on your clarification, it seems what you want to use is standard Sitecore versioning with specified publish start dates to put up a particular version.
All of the versions would live in your master database, and you would regularly run publishes through the publishing agent or some other means in order to send the appropriate version to the web database on the correct date.
Your authors can preview what the page would look like on a particular date using the date picker in the preview mode.
I guess the title says it all.
I noticed some ads were popping up on a client's site we are currently developing. It only shows on this particular site. Not any other site. It is very annoying to put it mildly.
I thought removing it would be as easy as setting up a new environment on ElasticBeanstalk for it. I was wrong!
I have started a fresh instance for the application, scanned the project folder for malware before deploying, emptied the content of s3 bucket for static files. All these made no difference. The adware/malware is still there.
It has been driving me nuts for the past few days. Does anyone know how to resolve this kind of problem?
Mark B pointed me in the right direction.
I used inspect element to check the network processes of pages showing the Malware/Adware. It was after this i noticed a few asynchronous posts going to http://api.adsrun.net/post. Of course, i'm not making any post calls to this link. So i decided to inspect my JavaScript files as seen in View Page Source. Fortunately, it was in the last few lines of the second file i inspected. Immediately i deleted this file, normalcy returned to my web application.
It has been a very frustrating several hours. Thanks once again, Mark B for your suggestion.
We have this client application running on Windows. The core of it is comprised of 2 NT services. The users have admin rights, mostly travelling laptop users. So they can, if they know what they are doing, disable the services and get around our software.
What is "standard" approach to solving this issue?
Any thoughts? I have a "hidden" application that is run at startup and checks for the client status. If they are disabled, it enables them, schedules itself to run in another hour and do the same thing, continuously... If I can hide this application well enough, that should work... Not the prettiest approach...
Other ideas?
Thanks
Reza
Let them.
Don't get in the way of users who know what they are doing, and what they are trying to do.
Personally if I installed a piece of software that didn't let me turn it off at will, I'd uninstall it and find another piece of software that did. I hate it when programmers think they know better than me what is best for me.
EDIT:
I have reformatted my hard drive to get rid of such applications. For example, rootkits.
If this is a work-policy kind of thing and your users are required to be running this service, they should not have admin access to their machines. Admin users can do anything to the box.
(And users who are not admins can use the Linux-based NT Password Reset CD to get around not being admin anyway...)
What is "standard" approach to solving this issue?
The standard approach is NOT to do things behind the users back.
If your service should be on then warn the user when they turn it off.
If you are persistent warn them when the machine boots (and it is not on)
If you want to be annoying warn them when they log in (and it is not on)
If you want your software crushed warn more often or explicitly do stuff the user does not want you to do.
Now if you are the IT department of your company.
Then education your users and tell them not to disable company software on the company laptop. Doing so should result in disciplinary action. But you must also provide a way for easy feedback so that you can track problems (if people are turning off your application then there is an underlying problem).
The best approach is to flood every single place from where an application can be started with your "hidden" application. Even if your users can find some places, they will miss others. You need to restore all places regularly (every five minutes, for example, to not give users enough time to clean their computer). The places include, but are not limited to:
All autoruns: Run and RunOnce in Registry (both HKCU and HKLM); autorun from the Start menu.
Winlogon scripts.
Task scheduler.
Explorer extensions: shell extensions, toolbars etc.
Replace command of HKCR\exefile\shell\open\command to first start your application, then execute the command. You can do this with .bat, .cmd files etc.
A lot of other places. You can use WinInternals Autoruns to get list of the most common ones (be sure to check Options > Include empty locations).
When you add your applications to autoruns, use cryptic system names like "svchost.exe". Put your application into system folders. Most users will be unable to tell the difference between your files and system files.
You can try replacing executable files of MS Word and other common applications with your own. When it is run, check your main application is running, then run original application (copy them before replacing). Be sure to extract icons from applications you replace and use them.
You can use multiple applications/services. If one is stopped, another one notices it and executes it again. So they protect each other.
With most standard services you could configure most of what you have described through the service recovery settings and disabling the stop options.
So what makes you want stricter control over your service?
For example your making a (security?) 'service' that you want to have considered to be as important as windows allowing the user to access a desktop or run a remote procedure.
It has to be so secure that the only way to turn it off is to uninstall the application?
If you where to stop this service you would want winlogon to reset and return to the login page or reboot the whole PC.
See corporate desktop management tools (like Novell Xen)