Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Jon

Crippled features

Should I uncripple/add certain features   41 members have voted

  1. 1. Should I uncripple/add certain features

    • Yes
      30
    • No
      2
    • Maybe
      9

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

21 posts in this topic

With DllCall comes the ability to hack around most of the features that I "crippled". These being things like:

- AutoIt Icon appearing for a short while even when turned off at the start

- Hotkeys with no modifiers not allowed

- GetKeyState not implemented

The reason they were never put in is because I wanted to make sure AutoIt didn't get classed as a virus. This seems to happen once a month anyway, but at least we have an obvious community and history to back up the legitimate uses of AutoIt.

So vote away, and add a post if you feel the need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Take out the redundant ones that dllcall now covers and replace that example in the help file with a dllcall example.

I use many languages none of which are classified as a virus and are much more capable at creating them then autoit. Even so if you wanted to use Autoit to create a virus you could, you could also get past most AV currently detecting autoit as a virus if your determined enough. Just as one can bypass the crippling features already implemented.

I think this is especially important when there are legitamate things you want to have Autoit be able to do, but are limited in putting them in to prevent misuse, as well as crippling other features like hotkeyset, and various other things that can not be implemented because one crippling feature seems to influence the further development of another feature. Its infectous.

There never really was a way to protect Autoit in this way. I believe it was a very good effort though. Being both open source and the features now included, I don't see any way to get around blackhat potential if one really wants go in that direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a question... How often has autohotkey been classified as a virus/keylogger?


Who else would I be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my mind, or in general?...

:) If there's a difference, let's have answers to both of those options

Ignorance is strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is everyone so concerned with keyloggers... I don't see them as a problem at all. I think that you should implement any and all functions that you can into AutoIt to give it more flexibility. As of right now I have already written 3 or so files that have been classified as a virus with a simple BlockInput command. Therefore, I find it silly to be so afraid that someone is going to write a virus with AutoIt when it can already be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean by the antivirus companies.


Who else would I be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No limits. Gives us max flexibility. It is not your fault if someone use the power wrongly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with ezzetabi... Increasing AutoIt's power is a good thing... I would say that 99% of the users wouldn't use it for malicious purposes. But then again... It is kind of a language, and languages are the backbone of a malicious script. My main argument is that either way people will misuse it and harm computers, and you can't stop it by blocking a few small functions that could only help a small amount.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, even without those crippled functions, remain functions allow to anyone make script which will be classified as virus. File functions, registry functions, ini, processes, windows... virtually any function can be used for bad things. And right, with the DllCall limitations doesn't matter at all...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know very little about DllCall, so I believe there is no redundant functions etc. I would like to see the language remain in a basic form, without the need to visit MSDN for answers to insert my next line of code.

Uncripple it so the basic language can extend. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more the better...max functionality!

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh...I agree with CyberSlug, that tray icon gets sort of annoying :) But yea, I think you should give it some more power! It would be a lot better.


FootbaG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I just got one question though...If languages like C and C++ allow you to do this (I think, I don't own a cop, just what I heard...), then why isn't C or C++ classified as a virus?

See my point? There are other langauges that allow this, why not include it in this one?

But it's your choice, so you choose what you think is best =D :)


FootbaG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

#15 ·  Posted (edited)

Hey, I just got one question though...If languages like C and C++ allow you to do this (I think, I don't own a cop, just what I heard...), then why isn't C or C++ classified as a virus?

See my point? There are other langauges that allow this, why not include it in this one?

But it's your choice, so you choose what you think is best =D :)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Layer,

C++ is a programming language which you use to create your program source code. Only after you compile/link this source code you created a unique executable program. So your comment about C or C++ isn't valid.

AV companies try to find a unique "fingerprint" in programs identified as virus to recognize and remove them. The issue with AutoIt3 programs is that a big portions of all compiled Autoit3 programs is the same, so when a AV company "Think" they found a unique fingerprint, it could well be that they will identify all compiled autoit3 programs.

Edited by JdeB

Visit the SciTE4AutoIt3 Download page for the latest versions        Beta files                                                          Forum Rules
 
Live for the present,
Dream of the future,
Learn from the past.
  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C and C++ are not classified as virii because only few people can actually use them, while Autoit is simple. Also C and C++ is used by millions of people while Autoit only a few. And for Antivirus company where ignorance know no bounds it is easier says that EVERY autoit program is a virus than actually check. And this cannot be done with C/C++ programs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C and C++ are not classified as virii

That will never happen because

1. it's stupid to block a well known programming language.

2. Windows, Linux and many Microsoft applications are made with those languages.

3. As JdeB said:

C++ is a programming language which you use to create your program source code. Only after you compile/link this source code you created a unique executable program. So your comment about C or C++ isn't valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah ha, I see, thanks for the explanation :)


FootbaG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree .. remove the limits! I never felt quite comfortable being treated like an irresponsible hacker hooligan, needing someone to wipe my nose all the time.  :)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

.. I missed the poll opportunity when I replied above .. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That depends on how the user uses it.... there is always a way to create

"virus" or any program that may harm to others, just the matter it is a

long or short way.

To me, not all the AutoIT users are well-knowledge of all the functions and

commands available. Myself, I haven't touched on many functions yet, eg.

DllCall(), it would be tough for me if you force me to use DllCll() if I don't

even understand what the heck that is.

So, retain some other features that AutoIT has would make this program

so unique and powerful, as other program may not have this features at all.

I do use HotKeySet() a lots, as it is one of the easiest way to make it works,

if compares to DllCall() or other commands available, right ?

At last... it really depends on how users use it, it would not be your fault if

someone turns it into other things !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0