I've recalled using little 'filesystems' before that basically provided an interface to something else. For example, I believe there was a GMail filesystem that created an entry in My Computer and could be used like any other drive on your local computer. How can I go about implementing something like this in C++?
Thank you!
Try Dokan. It's like FUSE, except for Windows. I think there are certain limitations to namespace extensions, like they cannot be accessed from the command line, but I'm really not sure as of now.
Writing an actual file-system involves writing a driver; which means kernel-mode code (scary stuff) and paying for getting the IFS DDK. (edit: looks like they don't charge for it anymore)
What you probably want is a “namespace extension”.
Try this: The Complete Idiot's Guide to Writing Namespace Extensions - CodeProject
This may be a starting point to extending NTFS in the way that the GMail filesystem used to do: Windows NT reparse points.
The GMail Filesystem is just the name given; it is not any filesystem as such. It is just a namespace extension for Windows Explorer that links with the GMail account of yours!
I dont know exactly what you are trying to do, but in anyway, I believe, the following link will be of some use to you:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc188741.aspx
Just as a reference: virtual drives can be created using our Callback File System product, which is a supported, documented and maintained solution.
I was thinking of this too, perhaps some example code ? (email me if i forget plz ;p doin sdk now)
I'm thinking of a similar filesystem that would plug in as a driver and allow dynamic 'soft raid' on larger files mostly by putting them on more than one disk, perhaps some compression options and 'smart' filters to toggle usage in high disk space low usage and other situations more effectively, with status controls and indicators as a normalish program too
Seems like I would load the driver kit,
then i want the file writing event, and am mostly replacing fopen and similar functions automatically as an intermediate driver with a little windows network driver experience
I also heard good things about developing on a virtual machine for less crashing and more debugging
Also perhaps more metainfo on some or all files, including files in special folders with options too, including maybe both fast and simple (obfuscated and/or symmetic key) encryption options on folder, specified, all, letter, etc, or whatever, or the slower version and maybe integrated and optional (also profitable) online cvs-like diff style backups that mostly target changes to hot files for online backup at intervals and prices, mostly perhaps with matching keyboard events and might even be useful as simply a keylogging online backup service that is reasonably secure too
while avoiding common files like windows files or the normal stuff in the 'programs' directory that can be copied easily with pirate tools, unlike all of your documents.
Related
I'm building a barebones Notepad-styled project (console-based, does not have a GUI as of now) and I'd like to track, display (and later use it in some ways) the number of times the console application has been launched. I don't know if this helps, but I'm building my console application on Windows 10, but I'd like it to run on Windows 7+ as well as on Linux distros such as Ubuntu and the like.
I prefer not storing the details in a file and then subsequently reading from it to maintain count. Please suggest a way or any other resource that details how to do this.
I'd put a strikethrough on my quote above, but SO doesn't have it apparently.
Note that this is my first time building such a project so I may not be familiar with advanced stuff... So, when you're answering please try to explain as is required for a not-so-experienced software developer.
Thanks & Have a great one!
Edit: It seems that the general advice is to use text files to protect portability and to account for the fact that if down-the-line, I need to store some extra info, the text file will come in super handy. In light of this, I'll focus my efforts on the text file.
Thanks to all for keeping my efforts from de-railing!
I prefer not storing the details in a file
In the comments, you wrote that the reason is security and you consider using a file as "over-kill" in this case.
Security can be solved easily - just encrypt the file. You can use a library like this to get it done.
In addition, since you are writing and reading to/from the file only once each time the application is opened/closed, and the file should take only small number of bytes to store such data, I think it's the right, portable solution.
If you still don't want to use a file, you can use windows registry to store the data, but this solution is not portable
I've not done much coding for Windows lately, and I find myself sitting at Visual Studio right now, making a small program for Windows 7 in C++. I need some configuration data to be read/written.
In the old days, (being a Borland kind of guy) I'd just use a TIniFile and keep the .ini beside my exe Obviously this is just not the done thing any more. The MS docs tell me that Get/WritePrivateProfileString are for compatibility only, and I doubt that I'd get away with writing to Program Files these days. Gosh I feel old.
I'd like the resulting file to be easily editable - open in notepad sort of thing, and easily findable. This is a small app, I don't want to have to write a setup screen when I can just edit the config file.
So, what is the modern way of doing this?
Often people use XML files for storing preferences, but they are often overkill (and they aren't actually all that readable for humans).
If your needs would be easily satisfied with an INI file, you may want to use Boost.Program_options using the configuration file parser backend, which actually writes INI-like files without going through deprecated (and slow!) APIs, while exposing a nice C++ interface.
The key thing to get right is where to write such configuration file. The right place is usually a subdirectory (named e.g. as your application) of the user's application data directory; please, please, please, don't harcode its path in your executable, I've seen enough broken apps failing to understand that the user profile may not be in c:\Documents and settings\Username.
Instead, you can retrieve the application data path using the SHGetFolderPath function with CSIDL_APPDATA (or SHGetKnownFolderPath with FOLDERID_RoamingAppData if you don't mind to lose the compatibility with pre-Vista Windows versions, or even just expanding the %APPDATA% environment variable).
In this way, each user will be able to store its preferences and you won't get any security-related errors when writing your preferences.
This is my opinion (which I think most of the answers you get will be opinion), but it seems that the standard way of doing things these days is to store config files like these in C:\Users\<Username>. Moreover, it is generally good to not clutter this directory itself, but to use a subdirectory for the purpose of storing your application's data, such as C:\Users\<Username>\AppData\Roaming\<YourApplicationName>. It might be overkill for a single config file, but that will give you the opportunity to have all of your application data in one place, should you add even more.
I would like to create a virtual drive for windows. I'm not looking to map a drive or something like that, I'm looking to map it to my DLL functions or something of that sort.
How can I get this accomplished?
I read that I would have to develop a device driver, or a shell extension?
I have a lot of experience with C++ and C#. Where do I get started?
I want to make it as simple as possible at first, how much time do I think it would take me? And what's the simplest way to do it, so that I could build my prototype.
My motivation is to pipe a file into an application, that currently only reads files from the file system. I'm only interested in pumping 1 file, so I think that a whole virtual drive would be an overkill, as well as writing kernel mode code.
If you want to build it from scratch then yes, you have to build a driver. However, it would be much easier for you to use a proxy driver like Dokan, and create the file system in user mode.
Take a look at the Wikipedia article on IFS, there are links to other useful tools at the bottom of the page.
I don't know what it worth, and it's not open source, but I've found this. It's a "fuse" like for windows
I'm trying to write a chat client for a popular network. The original client is proprietary, and is about 15 GB larger than I would like. (To be fair, others call it a game.)
There is absolutely no documentation available for the protocol on the internet, and most search results only come back with the client's scripting interface. I can understand that, since used in the wrong way, it could lead to ruining other people's experience.
I've downloaded the source code of a couple of alternative servers, including the one I want to connect to, but those
contain no documentation other than install instructions
are poorly commented (I did a superficial browsing)
are HUGE (the src folder of the target server contains 12 MB worth of .cpp and .h files), and grep didn't find anything related
I've also tried searching their forums and contacting the maintainers of the server, but so far, no luck.
Packet sniffing isn't likely to help, as the protocol relies heavily on encryption.
At this point, all my hope is my ability to chew through an ungodly amount of code. How do I start?
Edit: A related question.
If your original code is encrypted with some well known library like OpenSSL or Ctypto++ it might be useful to write your wrapper for the main entry points of these libraries, then delagating the call to the actual library. If you make such substitution and build the project successfully, you will be able to trace everything which goes out in the plain text way.
If your project is not using third party encryption libs, hopefully it is still possible to substitute the encryption routines with some wrappers which trace their input and then delegate encryption to the actual code.
Your bet is that usually enctyption is implemented in separate, relatively small number of source files so that should be easier for you to track input/output in these files.
Good luck!
I'd say
find the command that is used to send data through the socket (the call depends on the network library)
find references of this command and unroll from there. If you can modify-recompile the server code, it might help.
On the way, you will be able to log decrypted (or, more likely, not yet encrypted) network activity.
IMO, the best answer is to read the source code of the alternative server. Try using a good C++ IDE to help you. It will make a lot of difference.
It is likely that the protocol related material you need to understand will be limited to a subset of the files. These will contain references to network sockets and things. Start from there and work outwards as far as you need to.
A viable approach is to tackle this as a crypto challenge. That makes it easy, because you control so much.
For instance, you can use a current client to send a known message to the server, and then check server memory for that string. Once you've found out in which object the string ends, it also becomes possible to trace its ancestry through the code. Set a breakpoint on any non-const method of the object, and find the stacktraces. This gives you a live view of how messages arrive at the server, and a list of core functions essential to message processing. You can next find related functions (caller/callee of the functions on your list).
I am thinking i might want to port a lib to read a DVD filesystem. I am not talking about movies but datadisc. Theres existing code for me to do raw reads from the disc. I need code that request this data and allow me to browse files on the disc. What lib can i use for this?
-edit- NOTE: I am using an OSless hardware. Ppl seem to miss that but Alnitak caught it and gave me a great answer :)
You need libudf which is part of GNU libcdio.
If you want to browse files, why not let your operating system do the heavy lifting? Given that a modern OS will already have everything it needs to mount filesystems from DVDs -- and that there will be numerous people already using and debugging this code, as opposed to a smaller and more focused userbase for a userspace library such as libdvdread -- it seems silly not to leverage them.
Why not just use the same I/O libs you'd use to read files from a hard disk?