Sandboxie-Plus 1.0.20

Any info regarding this issue with links/PDF not opening in an already running sandboxed Chrome instance?
New info regarding the weird behavior: If Chrome isn't running in a sandbox already, open a 3rd party app (XnView or whatever has a "visit website" option) outside the sandbox, click on the "visit website", Chrome opens sandboxed (as it's configured as forced to run), then all subsequent attempts to open a link via 3rd party program (notepad++ instead of XnView) will result in a new tab opened as it should.

So it seems that opening Chrome via explorer to run sandboxed (either forced or via right click) and then trying to open links/PDF will fail to open a new tab, but if a 3rd party app launches Chrome (which wasn't running previously) then links/PDFs will open regularly in a new tab.

 

I have investigated the cpu usage of sbiesvc, and as far as i see its caused by the routine that checks the host inject dll status, as its triggered by sbiectrl.exe on every setting change.
Now that's already the case in the old sophos build so I'm not quite sure why it wasn't observed with it before.
Anyhow it will be fixed in the next build.

 

No invokes The exception Breakpoint because I have Chrome (default) sbox forced.


Just sharing.

 

Glad you found what's (possibly) causing the high cpu usage when making changes in settings. FWIW, I installed 5.55.18 a couple hours ago. The high CPU issue still happens with this version. But for my laptop, 5.55.18 is a better build than 5.55.20. How? The total memory that the computer uses with 5.55.18 is about 10% better than what it was with 5.55.20. Memory usage with this build is more up to par with what I am used to with the original Sandboxie. The computer is less stressful with this build.

David, I am not totally sure I understand what you mean in what I am quoting above. But let's be clear about something. CPU usage spikes or high CPU issues in the original Sandboxie never happened. The norm for CPU usage in the old SBIE was always 0. Whether you were using Sandboxie or not, CPU usage always stayed at 0 for Sandboxie processes.

What I can't understand is why other users have not reported this before.

For now, I ll stay on 5.55.18. But I ll update when you release the build with the fix.

Bo

 

I tested the last sophos build see here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPwjHDg9Ms0
and can not confirm that in fact it has the same sub optimal config handling and causes noticeable cpu load each time a single config value is changed.

 

What the hell, you have finally decided to switch to Sandboxie Classic?

BTW, can anyone test if they can install S-Protect inside the sandbox? It's a new ''safe banking'' browser introduced by some German company, I wanted to quickly check it out. I'm not using the latest Sandboxie version though.

https://www.chip.de/downloads/S-Protect-Sparkassen-Browser_184238728.html

 

Run Sandboxed -> [DefaultBox] default setting

Code:

S-Protect.exe (12500): SBIE2112 Object is not accessible: \Sessions\3\BaseNamedObjects\windows_shell_global_counters, call OpenSection (C0000022) access=00000006 initialized=1

1.0.20

 

I had to.

Bo

 

David, in your last reply you created a little bit of doubt in my mind. So, I just started my W7, I still have 5.33.6 on that computer, and was able to reproduce high cpu spikes when changing settings or creating a new sandbox. So, from my point of view, even though you said you found something, if you prefer to keep things the way they are, it won't bother me. Thank you.

Bo

 

Build 1.0.21 is out, it does not fixed the playback issue some users seam to have, but it adds a new powerful debug facility that can help pin down the problem: '''FuncSkipHook=FunctionName''' allows selectively to disable individual sandboxie hooker per function.

please try adding
FuncSkipHook=NtOpenSymbolicLinkObject
to your sandboxie ini and please report back if that improves the playback performance.
please note that this will break compatibility with mingw and possibly other things.

If it, as expected, helps than the next step will be to record trace logs in "monitor mode" with and without the setting, sort them booth by name save to two files and compare. using some compare tool, you can also post booth logs here and I compare them for you.

 

OK I see, so the old version stopped working correctly I guess. I have no doubt in my mind that the new versions of both Sandboxie Classic and Plus, which share the same engine, are pretty secure eventhough it might seem that David is changing quite some stuff underneath, so I have always understood your concerns.

BTW, I did have some problems on my desktop with upgrading Vivaldi, I had to completely reinstall Vivaldi. So for now I have stopped using Sandboxie as a realtime browser protection tool on both my desktop and laptop in order to avoid future problems.

 

Thanks for checking, so you couldn't install it either.

 

Nope, not on May 09, as I recall, with 1.0.20. I've slept since then.

 

Yes, that's what happened.

I will stay in Classic as I have no interest whatsoever in any new feature. I am currently in 5.55.21. FWIW, it is working great. I have no complains or issues. Feels and looks like old.reliable SBIE.

Bo

 

I also still use Sandboxie Classic, but eventually I like to switch to SBIE PLus, the GUI looks better but I also don't need the extra functions. But like I said, for now I have stopped using it as a realtime browser protection tool, because I ran into some trouble with Vivaldi. But I still use it the quickly check out apps.

 

If other people are using SBIE successfully with Vivaldi, I think you should try figuring out the cause of your issue.

In situations like yours, is always good to test using a new sandbox with default settings. And No restrictions. If I was using Vivaldi, even if I had no issues, I wouldn't restrict the Vivaldi sandbox (that is what I would do).

Bo

 

What you say is true Bo, but after many months of trying I still cannot get Thunderbird to run sandboxed on my system even though it is not a problem for others; and that includes uninstalling and reinstalling SB completely and using a default sandbox (which I assume @Rasheed187 has tried).

So I sympathise a lot as it is sometimes just not possible to find a cause - well beyond my competence anyway.

 

Lets call this post.....Helping Sandboxie help you.

Hi Henry. My attitude when a program becomes problematic with Sandboxie is to switch to something else. No hesitation whatsoever. I hardly ever have to switch because I use programs that historically have had excellent compatibility with SBIE. I think is a good practice to avoid trying to use complicated programs with SBIE. I do what I just wrote, like a principle. Using SBIE this way helps SBIE, and the user avoids headaches.

I think what I am writing here applies more to you with TB than Rasheed with Vivaldi. I mean, Vivaldi should work fine with SBIE. I know Edge does, so Vivaldi in Rasheeds computer probably should do also. I think he ought to try what I wrote I would do if I was using Vivaldi. In your case, you been going with this issue for months. I would forget about TB. TB is doing something that SBIE doesn't want to allow.

Bo

 

Sorry for the ot:
@Rasheed187 Just found that today about the "safe" bankingbrowser s-protect. For the none german speaker they found a lot of holes in it sadly.
https://www.heise.de/news/c-t-entde...n-Banking-Software-der-Sparkasse-7126688.html
Thanks David for all your work and dedication for sandboxie

 

Oh yea that think is a peace of ***** they just haired a random company without competency and throw money at them: https://www.borncity.com/blog/2022/...e-banking-browser-s-protect-ein-totalausfall/ sorry also german, but Mr. born is right that level of incompetency is embarrassing.
If I would have to guess I would say some one had a friend or relative at the right place in the bank that ordered that junk.

About programs not working with Sandboxie with full isolation its a good idea to try compartment mode its much more compatible and its still at least as secure as comodo's firewall so as long as you drop admin rights for that box its fine enough, in any case better than nothing.

 

@DavidXanatos
When i often time sugest use something more than usless AV which mostly miss half if not more malware/virus than laught or call me paranoid..

In not paranoid its brutal reality and they are just dumb as **** if they thing scan pc and delete virus after infection is solve Thiers problems..

Isolation / Restriction / Monitoring activity - these is real 3 kings for me of security which can real prevent/ limit to minimum infection, not scan and delete virus which is try to cure when can be to late.
and ofc always offline backup not matter which way/software of securit you will choice.

 

To clarify, I ran into problems on my Win 8.1 desktop when trying to update Vivald. It would not work, even if Vivaldi was installed outside the sandbox. I had to completely reinstall Vivaldi, it must be some kind of corruption issue on my system. But I don't want to encounter it again, so I decided to stop protecting Vivaldi for now.

But yes, after reinstall Vivaldi will run sandboxed, that's no problem. I didn't really understand this issue, since I always give Vivaldi direct access to the profile folder without any restrictions, but perhaps it became a mess when I made multiple profiles in Vivaldi. I'm not sure if Sandboxie is to blame, but it did somehow play a role.

Thanks, Vivaldi's translate function came in handy. From what I understood this S-Protect browser isn't as secure as thought. It doesn't work as advertised.