Sandboxie Plus (Sbie fork)

Discussion in 'Sandboxie (SBIE Open Source) Plus & Classic' started by DavidXanatos, Apr 9, 2020.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Peter 123

    Peter 123 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2009
    Posts:
    461
    Location:
    Austria
    As I use Sandboxie almost exclusively for security reasons (while for application testing/virtualization I use Shadow Defender), your sentence which I emphasized in bold letters is of highest importance for me. So in case that you will decide to publish a portable version please don't forget to mention such a warning next to it. This could help to avoid that amateurs like me download and use the "wrong" (for their needs) version. ;)
     
  2. DavidXanatos

    DavidXanatos Developer

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Posts:
    1,265
    Location:
    Viena
    I know, ideally I would give the Virtualization Tool a new name so as not to implicate any protection at all, suggestions welcome.
     
  3. DavidXanatos

    DavidXanatos Developer

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Posts:
    1,265
    Location:
    Viena
    Can we retry the 16x16 version I think it would be really good to improve upon the icon and I like the concept here
     
  4. algol1

    algol1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2020
    Posts:
    178
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    I totally concur with that suggestion.

    So @DavidXanatos

    For me, too, Sbie will always stay a valuable security-wall against malware taking over my system via an insecure browser.

    I'm using Opera for its richness of features. The downside to this is they constantly are "doctoring" around with the browser. Nearly every 2 month they are going to release some half-baked new update that will severely cripple some of the old features.

    I WILL NEVER TRUST their sandboxing-mechanisms to be "bullet-proof" and to keeping me really safe from internet-viruses.

    So PLEASE never consider to sacrifice robust Sbie-security-elements for different features - or, should the desire for such elements grow, to SPLIT Sbie-Plus again into two versions, at least one of which will never compromise its security-centered approach and to unmistakably tell us in advance if and when such a new version with watered-down protection-capability should arrive.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2020
  5. algol1

    algol1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2020
    Posts:
    178
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Well, at least some protection against catastrophic alterations of the present system would be highly desirable, even for any Virtualization Tool.

    But I concur 100% that the name Sandboxie should always relate to a tool/version with zero to very minimal protection compromises.
     
  6. algol1

    algol1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2020
    Posts:
    178
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Please, no "dinosaurs" or other "funny toons" here. Keep it as close to the very characteristic original and just add some distinct plus-mark to avoid any confusion!
     
  7. algol1

    algol1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2020
    Posts:
    178
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    By the way, I've just checked my tray icon - and the suspicion is that it is 24x24 pixels but certainly larger than 16x16. As I've read somewhere the true icon-size also depends on the DPI-settings. The content of Sandboxie installation-files seems to start at 32x32-versions of the traditional icon.
     
  8. algol1

    algol1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2020
    Posts:
    178
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Ok, just checked the whole Sandboxie-Folder again with Nir-Sofer icon-extractor. I explicitly found the tray-icons in there as part of SbieCtrl.exe.
    Extractor says they are 32x32_bit in either 256_col or 32bit_color_depth.

    Just saying. No 16x16_bit icon found in there.
     
  9. Special

    Special Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2016
    Posts:
    454
    Location:
    .
    Edit your post instead of mass spamming...
     
  10. DavidXanatos

    DavidXanatos Developer

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Posts:
    1,265
    Location:
    Viena
    @algol1 thats what the MSFT Documentation says:

    And on a normal system with no ugly DPI scaling the icon used is 16x16 if it doesn't have it than it scales down whatever it got.
    The best result is ofcause a native 16x16 as if 32x32 can be scaled down and still look good depends very much on the icon design.
     
  11. algol1

    algol1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2020
    Posts:
    178
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Well, you are the expert and who am I to dissent.

    But I think on systems later than Win_XP 16x16-icons are obsolete, regardless of DPI-setting, and I must have read that somewhere.

    But see for yourself. I've used 2 different icon-tools, including that of Nir-Sofer, which can scan all the icons contained in a program or even folder. And the result is that currently SbieCtrl contains the tray-icons used - and they are 32x32 in 256_col or in 32bit_color_depth, no 16x16-icons currently found in there.

    Hasn't Win_XP-support been dropped as of recently? Because later than XP I think 16x16-icons are really obsolete. But I might be wrong.[/user]
     
  12. DavidXanatos

    DavidXanatos Developer

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Posts:
    1,265
    Location:
    Viena
    You are wrong all windows versions including 10 are using 16x16 or an icon as long as the scaling is 100
    and if the suplyed icon is 32x32 it will be just scaled down.
    as it seams the sbie icon looks good when scaled by the system, thats unfortunately not the case for most icons, when scaled to 16x16 thay look owfull as thay have to many details that get lost.
     
  13. MGhell

    MGhell Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Posts:
    34
    I agree with that. I wouldn't sacrifice security for features.

    Maybe the Plus version could be made portable while the "classic" 5.xx versions could be maintained with driver. Or maintain two versions of the 5.xx branch...if that's not too confusing....

    @david: Just installed 5.43.7 and it's working flawlessly! Sent you a thank you via Paypal :)

     
  14. DavidXanatos

    DavidXanatos Developer

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Posts:
    1,265
    Location:
    Viena
    The plus build will provide the full feature set including driver and optimal security if the user so chooses.
    Even with the classic build you can OpenFilePath=* or similar things so compromising security for the sake of compatibility.

    The important thing is to indicate to the user if unsafe settings have been selected, the old UI does not do that.
    The plus UI will be more security aware and indicate which box has what configurations.

    The driver less mode of operation I don't know if I'll provide it in the plus build as an option or only in a separate tool.
     
  15. Brummelchen

    Brummelchen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Posts:
    4,140
    holy moly! i guess you never had in mind that old and exploitable browsers can send anything out without the need to write back.
     
  16. algol1

    algol1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2020
    Posts:
    178
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Ok, if you say so, sorry for objecting. Only thing is - where the hell is any such 16x16-tray-icon then in the current release of Sbie?

    Icon-files often contain a whole series of resolutions, from 16x16 up to 256x256. But for instance the whole current "SandboxieInstall64-v5_43_6.exe"-installer-package only contains 16x16-icons for "INITWAIT", "INITWAIT2", & "TRAYICON_DELETE", whereas the actual, commonly used Tray-icons "TRAYICON_FULL" & "TRAYICON_EMPTY" !_only exist in 32x32-variants_! and the main-desktop-icon "Start.exe" has them all, from 32x32 up to 256x256, yet still - no 16x16 there.
     
  17. algol1

    algol1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2020
    Posts:
    178
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Au contraire mon frère! I always had that in mind! Actually, this is exactly why I would like to insist on an uncompromised, maximum security Sandboxie.;)

    And I'm very thankful to @DavidXanatos that he seemingly sees things in a similar way, while offspring-versions with a different purpose may have their merits - if unmistakably no longer offered as an intrusion-protection-tool.
     
  18. DavidXanatos

    DavidXanatos Developer

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Posts:
    1,265
    Location:
    Viena
    Windows takes the 32x32 icon and scales it down to 16x16 on systems with normal 100% scaling
     
  19. algol1

    algol1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2020
    Posts:
    178
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    What is it about Windows, though? I have just peeped into your native, current (non-experimental) "SandboxieInstall64-v5_43_6.exe"-installer-package. BEFORE it could be handled or altered by the OS. Just the ready-made, downloaded installer. And those alleged 16x16-tray-icons are simply not contained in there. They are for sure 32x32. Again - just saying.

    Edit: Oh, sorry, I misunderstood that. Well, if Windows scales it down, then the optics may be a problem. But I can assure you that almost no-one whom I know of would use 100% DPI-scaling these days. Certainly I don't! I'm using 4k and Full-HD-displays here (like most folks) and with a 4k-display in particular the screen would be entirely unusable, even with a magnifying-glass, when used on 100%_DPI. Even with Full-HD 120-150% is the operational minimum. And then - like here - there certainly is no 16x16 at all. So I wouldn't worry about that too much.
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2020
  20. bjm_

    bjm_ Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Posts:
    4,104
    Location:
    .
    150% scaling with small desktop icons n' small taskbar buttons -
     
  21. algol1

    algol1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2020
    Posts:
    178
    Location:
    Vienna, Austria
    Sounds very reasonable to me, at least for Hi-res-displays like 4K! But even Full-HD IMHO requires like 120% at least for a readable user-experience.
     
  22. bjm_

    bjm_ Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Posts:
    4,104
    Location:
    .
    17in lappy - integrated graphics - 1920 x 1080
     
  23. robert147

    robert147 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2020
    Posts:
    22
    Location:
    Netherlands
    @DavidXanatos, for me the code signing certificate is much more important than the icon.
    Can you give an update about the latest status.
    I understand that it's not that easy but can you please try to arrange it.
     
  24. Special

    Special Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2016
    Posts:
    454
    Location:
    .
    Are you funding it?
     
  25. robert147

    robert147 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2020
    Posts:
    22
    Location:
    Netherlands
    Yes, I already did.
     
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.