Sandboxie Acquired by Invincea

Discussion in 'sandboxing & virtualization' started by ad18, Dec 16, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
  2. Mr.X

    Mr.X Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2013
    Posts:
    4,792
    Location:
    .
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2014
  3. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    Hi Mr X, I was kind of hoping you or Dun post about it but...:)

    Bo
     
  4. dja2k

    dja2k Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Posts:
    2,120
    Location:
    South Texas, USA
    On 4.14 and 4.15.6 I get SBIE2205 Service not Implemented: LoadedModules. This is a new image as I didn't see this problem before, so don't know why. Anyone seen this on Win8.1 x64 and Chrome?

    dja2k
     
  5. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    Hi djack2k, I saw your post at the SBIE forum. I am not a Chrome user but I can tell you, message 2205 is the type of message that can be hidden and ignored if the application still works properly. In other words, if Chrome works fine despite getting the message, click Hide next time you get the message.

    http://www.sandboxie.com/index.php?SBIE2205

    Bo
     
  6. dja2k

    dja2k Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Posts:
    2,120
    Location:
    South Texas, USA
    Thanks but actually that won't work in this situation as Chrome isn't running in the background when I see that blocking dialog. If I hide it Chrome doesn't run anyways.

    Update:
    MS Update KB3013769 was the problem.

    dja2k
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2014
  7. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
  8. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    17,546
    Location:
    The Netherlands
  9. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    That should be so, purchasing a license its a great deal as it gives Sandboxie users the opportunity to get more from SBIE. Users that to this day have only sandboxed their browser, can now sandbox files and programs automatically. Files that run from the downloads folder or USB drives, etc, run sandboxed when they get executed as well.

    And being able to use multiple sandboxes at the same time makes sandboxing/isolation work better since the user can separate programs not only from the system but from other programs as well by using dedicated sandboxes, tailoring each sandbox according to the program or purpose for creating the sandbox. The license makes Sandboxie be what is all about.

    Bo
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2014
  10. Jarmo P

    Jarmo P Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Posts:
    1,207
    Lifetime license has nothing to do with get more of Sandboxie. I pay a yearly licence. When it was time for me to renew, lifetime license was then available. It is not a healthy way to support a program that needs updating all the time. But it is of course nice news for people that want to own a program. Just not my way.

    The way I see it, it is not too much for me to pay about 20€ a year, despite not being some guy with a lot. And it is the only security program I support yearly.
    AppGuard does not brake like SBIE and it is a lifetime license in a sense that there is no usage time limit. I'll probably buy a new version when Blueridge makes a version 5 of their software though.

    Both programs are in my opinion the best you can have.
     
  11. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    17,546
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    @ bo elam

    Yes, it's cool to get access to the extra features. Right now I have all my browsers (Opera 11 + 12 and Firefox) running in a separate sandbox. I have blocked access to important data. All apps have full access to the desktop, so all saved files end up on the "real" system, for convenience. I will probably also start to run other apps that are vulnerable to exploit attacks inside the sandbox.
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2014
  12. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    The license allows users to force programs to run sandboxed automatically, that way they get more from Sandboxie.

    The license allows users to use separate sandboxes for their programs and to use them at the same time, that way they get more from Sandboxie.

    The license allows users to force their USB drives, that way if the user inserts someoone else flash drive and malware runs, it runs sandboxed. That way they get more from Sandboxie.

    Bo
     
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2014
  13. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    Hi Rasheed, you should change Full access to Direct access. Full access gives access to all programs running in the sandbox, that includes downloaded programs. Direct access only gives access to programs that are installed by you outside the sandbox. Huge difference and its the proper way to do it.

    Bo
     
  14. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    17,546
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    I will check it out, but the plan is to not install other apps inside the dedicated sandboxes, so it shouldn't matter then, I suppose? Of course I have a separate sandbox for testing apps, but even then it's sometimes handy to give access to the real desktop.

    About the lifetime license, I do wonder why they came back on their decision, is it to generate more sales? Or perhaps they will offer more versions of SBIE, it will be interesting to see.
     
  15. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    You are supposing wrong. If you allow Full access to your Desktop, all programs that run in the sandbox will be permitted to bypass sandboxing, that includes malware that runs. By having access to the desktop, the malicious program can write files there. You are opening a big hole in Sandboxie by doing what you are doing.

    On the other hand, the Direct file access setting is designed for what you want to achieve, that's the setting that you should use. If you use it instead of Full access, only programs that are installed in the real system will have permission to bypass the sandboxing effect. So, if malware downloads in the sandbox, it wont have permission to write to the desktop, and you wont get infected. Change that setting, Rasheed.

    Bo
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2014
  16. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    17,546
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    @ bo elam

    OK I see, thanks for the tip. So you're mostly concerned about malware writing to the desktop. I never really thought of this, perhaps I should just disable both settings.
     
  17. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    Dont use Full access but Direct access is OK. No harm using that setting. And you ll get the convenience that you want.

    Bo
     
  18. deBoetie

    deBoetie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,832
    Location:
    UK
    @Rasheed, the other aspect I find about Direct Access is that it makes it easier to back up data from a known location (rather than from within a Sandboxie profile file area). So, for example, setting a media area as Direct access allows multiple content viewing and editing apps to manipulate the backed-up content, but everything is still running sandboxed.
     
  19. bjm_

    bjm_ Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Posts:
    4,453
    Location:
    .
    Lifetime License is the only option that makes sense. SBoxie does not require regular scheduled updates to be functioning optimally. User are running v3. I can't see subscription for any app that may only have an update twice / thrice a year. AV's yeah okay, as they must be constantly updated resident or cloud. But, stable apps that may get an enhancement or compatibility update twice / thrice a year. Granted, development has to funded.
    Lifetime was the norm. Until one app broke the norm. I'll support Lifetime before subscription. my two cents
     
  20. Mr.X

    Mr.X Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2013
    Posts:
    4,792
    Location:
    .
    Don't agree, not at all. Are you an active user of Sandboxie's forums? If so you will notice a lot of issues with Windows 8.1 and new/usual applications.
    I'd support annual subscription if it weren't for the two Lifetime Licenses already purchased...
     
  21. bjm_

    bjm_ Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Posts:
    4,453
    Location:
    .
    Have a Lifetime for 6 years. Run W8.x w SBoxie 4.14. So, far ignorant of any issues. On occasion I post to SBoxie. I'll have to drop by and see what's up. I'm running SBoxie in TTF with VS and ERP now. I've read your posts at SBoxie. Wondered when I would meet you. Hello :)
     
  22. Mr.X

    Mr.X Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2013
    Posts:
    4,792
    Location:
    .
    Oh nice to meet you too!!! :)
    I have had some issues running SBIE 4.15.6 / W8.1 x64 on some applications like Pidgin. Sometimes, randomly, I have had issues on FF, Chrome, Excel, etc.
    The point here is that we could say in general terms there are many people facing issues with their systems within SBIE. Hence, constant work from developers and programmers at Invincea is mandatory.
     
  23. sdmod

    sdmod Shadow Defender Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2010
    Posts:
    1,159
    I'm a supporter of lifetime ownership once bought and that is why I still use Sandboxie 3.46 on XP sp3 because in protest against the introduction of periodical online re-verification. I hate the rent/leaseware model of licencing and constant online probing and connection from companies. I want to own the software and I don't want to be owned by it.
    I have though, a lifetime licence for version 4 from Tzuk days, which I may now use if policies have changed to suit my requirements.
     
  24. bo elam

    bo elam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Posts:
    6,144
    Location:
    Nicaragua
    Hi bjm, Sandboxie requires constant maintenance. Compatibility between SBIE and other programs can break at any time due to an update, upgrade, new features implemented in programs that run sandboxed or programs that dont run sandboxed but interact with programs that are running sandboxed. Even a Windows update can break things down between Sandboxie and another program.We need the updates, bjm.:)

    Sandboxie lifetime licenses will be back soon.
    http://forums.sandboxie.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=19717&start=45#p105764

    Bo
     
  25. bjm_

    bjm_ Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Posts:
    4,453
    Location:
    .
    What ever way supports SBoxie. Tzuk set things up to protect Lifetime holders. We owe a debt to Tzuk. Invincea must feel as I do... that Lifetime is a viable way to support SBoxie.
    I never did get EMET to work ? By my count 4 updates in 2014. And how many users are still running 2012 / 2013.
    Invincea has economy of scale on it's side.
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2015
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.