I think I asked a similar question previously, but I can no longer find the
post. My company is trying to use the .Net framework with some unhelpful
customers. Some refuse to install the .Net framework, and others lock down
security to the point where there is no point in having it installed. These
are large, security sensitive customers who for some reason think .Net is
insecure. They want to be able to deploy my app on a network for non-admin
access.
Anyway, I have two questions. One, can the .Net framework be deployed to a
machine embedded without 'installing' it to the machine? Something in the
spirit of isolated-COM or side-by-side deployment? Basically, I could just
deploy the .Net framework for my app (not the dotnetfx redistributable). This
would be the best solution.
If this is not possible, I investigated hosting the .Net runtime. I've
looked at implementing my own HostSecurityManager. My question is, is there
anyway I can completely override the Enterpise/Machine/User CAS settings if I
am hosting the runtime? For example, the Enterprise may have the entire
framework locked down. Since my app is unmanaged, can't I somehow at least
give the managed parts of my app the same access to the machine that I have
in unmanaged code?
What I want to do is possible with unmanaged code. And I know it is possible
in some ways with managed code, but I am working against unfriendly IT
departments, so the normal solutions will not work.
Thanks.
Vijay - 11 May 2007 04:50 GMT
You could install .net framework on an VM image (Virtual Machine) and users
could remotely login to this machine and use the app. By the way, if you
compare .net security to windows security, it's pretty much clear which is
more secure in the long run. If not a technical issue, this is probably a
matter of educating and training customers.
HTH
Jonathan Chambers - 11 May 2007 14:06 GMT
I am educating, but it may take time. As for the VM image, this is not an
option as the application is performance sensitive.
Thanks,
Jonathan
Stelrad Kypski - 12 May 2007 12:19 GMT
http://www.remotesoft.com/linker/index.html
dunno of anything else. the guy behind it is interviewed here
http://www.dotnetrocks.com/default.aspx?showNum=0194
hths
>I am educating, but it may take time. As for the VM image, this is not an
> option as the application is performance sensitive.
>
> Thanks,
> Jonathan
Ben Voigt - 14 May 2007 19:35 GMT
> You could install .net framework on an VM image (Virtual Machine) and
> users
> could remotely login to this machine and use the app. By the way, if you
> compare .net security to windows security, it's pretty much clear which is
> more secure in the long run. If not a technical issue, this is probably a
I hope you mean that Windows security is more secure? Because no platform
is more secure than the blocks it is built on.
> matter of educating and training customers.
>
> HTH
Laura T. - 17 May 2007 14:27 GMT
AFAIK, there is no known pure (100% managed) .NET exploits around.
That makes me ask the question "What do you trust then?".
SQL has exploits, Oracle has exploits, DB/2, Windows too (!), XBox... Even
Java has some.
Maybe only mainframes are out of the list, for now.
And they use those products?
Anyway.. just my curiosity.
For your problem.
You might get away of enterprise policy if everything goes well with
HostSecurityManager by mapping custom zones:
http://blogs.msdn.com/shawnfa/archive/2006/05/18/598210.aspx
I'm not an expert of caspol by any means, so I cannot say if it will do or
is enough, but maybe the link can give some pointers.
>I think I asked a similar question previously, but I can no longer find the
> post. My company is trying to use the .Net framework with some unhelpful
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>
> Thanks.