FileVoyager - file manager

[FileVoyager]

Hi. I'll check this evening (it's 9:30 AM here)

[FileVoyager]

@Mario,
I haven't been able to reproduce that issue.
Would you mind to provide me with some more info? Your OS used and a screenshot of FV when stuck is already a good start.
You can PM me if you want

[webfork]

just confused because there's this forum sub-category (the new submissions), as well as a category for software updates

many developers use the main thread of their programs to notify about the updates

Smaragdus is right: the primary focus of the Submissions vs. New sub-categories is just to keep things organized and avoid casual visitors being bewildered from successive posts. If you're ever worried that an update will spawn a lot of separate discussion, feel free to post it to Update or I can move it later.

[webfork]

@FileVoyager:

Note about the use of the Creative Commons license: I appreciate your willingness to use a more permissive license, but I'd recommend something other than Creative Commons for reasons described here. I'd be happy to make a suggestion for a similar license if you're interested or you can check out recommendations for software licenses by the CC folks.

On a related note, I did an edit to the official entry. I tried to give a little more detail behind the "orthodox" descriptor.

[FileVoyager]

Hi webfork,
This is an interesting questioning.

I'd recommend something other than Creative Commons for reasons described here.

I read the link provided. I understand that they discourage using the CC's because they don't protect the Source Code as FSF licenses do.
But FV is closed source...
I remember, when I was looking for a license model to apply to FV, I have been convinced by this discussion on StackExchange, and by the accepted answer.

As far as I remember, the FSF licenses are all Open Source oriented.
But maybe another existing license is more suited to FV, so I'll be very glad to read your suggestion(s).

[webfork]

I read the link provided. I understand that they discourage using the CC's because they don't protect the Source Code as FSF licenses do.
But FV is closed source...

I'll fill this out a bit more in a few days, but the short version is that I didn't know your program was closed-source. You might want to look at the Creative Commons a bit more closely (here's a good intro). You might be able to license images, help files, and other related items in use by FileVoyager with CC, but not the compiled code.

[webfork]

Continuing from my earlier post ...

maybe another existing license is more suited to FV, so I'll be very glad to read your suggestion(s)

Thanks for hearing me out. There are a wide variety of freeware licenses out there to choose from. It's crucial you include a copyright notice and disclaimer of warranty, but some notice of patent usage is also good. The critical thing to avoid is anything to that prevents redistribution in it's original form. We occasionally get held up when trying to find new homes for old programs with redistribution restrictions.

Here's a possible license from TinySpell you might draw from:

--------

• tinySpell 1.9 License Agreement
  Copyright (C) 2016 KEDMI Scientific Computing. All rights reserved.
  
  1. Acceptance
  KEDMI Scientific Computing grants you a non-exclusive license to use tinySpell 1.9 (revision 1.9.61) - a software and accompanying documentation ("SOFTWARE"). Exercising your rights to use the SOFTWARE indicates your acceptance of the terms of this Agreement.
  
  2. Copyright
  All intellectual property rights in the SOFTWARE are owned by KEDMI Scientific Computing and are protected by international copyright laws and international treaty provisions.
  
  3. Use
  You may install and use an unlimited number of copies of the SOFTWARE.
  
  4. Reproduction and Distribution.
  You may reproduce and distribute an unlimited number of copies of the SOFTWARE; provided that each copy shall be a true and complete copy, including all copyright and trademark notices, and shall be accompanied by a copy of this Agreement.
  
  5. Restrictions
  You may not reverse engineer, decompile, or disassemble the SOFTWARE.
  You may not remove any component, copyright notices, or proprietary notices from the SOFTWARE.
  You may not sell, rent, or lease the SOFTWARE.
  
  6. Disclaimer of Warranty and Limited Warranty
  The SOFTWARE is provided on an "as is" basis without warranty of any kind, either express or implied, including, without limitation, that of fitness for a particular purpose.
  
  7. Limitation of liability
  In no event will KEDMI Scientific Computing be liable for any damages including any lost profits, data or information, or other indirect, incidental, special, or consequential damages arising out of the use or inability to use the SOFTWARE, even if advised of the possibility of such damages, or for any claim by any other party.
  

Edit: FileASSASSIN also has a pretty solid license that could be adapted to your use: https://www.portablefreeware.com/?id=1092

[FileVoyager]

The tinySpell license is great. By looking at it, I directly noticed what's missing in CC to comply with Software Distribution.
I'll certainly replace the license of FileVoyager with something like this as of my next release.
This is very interesting, thank you very much!

[webfork]

This is very interesting, thank you very much!

Glad to help You've put a lot of work into this program and you should be able to protect your work and yourself.

[FileVoyager]

Hi there!
A long time ago since my post here.

@webfork
I never aknowledged you, but I've changed my license from CC to Freeware.
You have been of a great help to me. Thank you very much!

@smaragdus
You asked me a long time ago if I had plans to add a File Verifier. Well it's done now
see FileVoyager 17.4.7.0

Cheers!

[webfork]

never aknowledged you, but I've changed my license from CC to Freeware.
You have been of a great help to me. Thank you very much!

I'm very glad to hear it.

I had plans to add a File Verifier. Well it's done now

Is it batch? Meaning can you hash and then verify lists of files recursively?

[FileVoyager]

Is it batch? Meaning can you hash and then verify lists of files recursively?

You select files and/or folders, and you execute the Hash Tool.
Folders are optionaly computed recursively. You can then save the resulting hashes.
The tool is a bit rough at this moment. I'm waiting for real world scenarios to improve the user experience.

[webfork]

The tool is a bit rough at this moment. I'm waiting for real world scenarios to improve the user experience.

I checked the latest version and found it a very interesting implementation you put together. I've seen a lot of programs like this so I got excited with what you built here. As such I put together a few possible scenarios you might draw from:

• VT - We frequently use the VirusTotal service here on the site to check for security issues. This site really just uses SHA256 hashes as their lookup (for example, your program has a SHA256 hash of 5114459a85b3a8b280cba758b53b34c036bb9456575e475074ac9e05301189e9, which then shows up in the VirusTotal URL: https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/5114 ... 491666372/).
  
  Is there any way you could integrate some kind of VirusTotal check?
• Batch Verification - One fairly common reason to use hashes are to create a long list of hashes for folders and subfolders, but there doesn't appear to be a way to verify them. So for example if you hash a list of files, write the data to a DVD, and then want to check that the files were saved exactly as the originals. Some kind of system to read the created hashes and see if they matched the originals is ideal. You'll want to know:
  
  • 1. If all the files check out
    2. A list of incorrect files if any fail the comparison
• Primary set - As far as I can tell, the only hashes in regular use are CRC32 for system checks (ideal in the the scenario above), MD5 or SHA1 for internet download verification, and SHA256 for security checks. I'd recommend using those for your defaults.
• Subfolder check - You might want to introduce something so that files are listed with their associated folder. This is because duplicate files often appear in system backups and one verification might overlap another. So for example, I hashed some files in the TEMP folder and it's subfolders, but the resulting hash just listed the file name and it's hash. To be sure your data is exactly the way you want it, having each folder + file name + hash is necessary.

[FileVoyager]

@webfork
This is exactly the kind of real life use cases I was expecting
Let's discuss them...

• VT - I can easily dynamically build the url and put it as hyperlink on the SHA-256 digest (without the latest number). So this "https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/5114 ... /analysis/" is possible.
  Now to know in advance if there is an entry for the url in the VirusTotal database, I would have to query the site and check if I get a 200 or a 404 http status. This is something I'm not confortable with. If the list of document is long, It could even be seen as a DoS attack (I think).
  But on the other hand, the guys at VirusTotal have made a public API for such needs (https://www.virustotal.com/en/documenta ... file-scans). This is something I'm definitely eager to implement, in an on-demand mode, meaning that you will have to explicitely click a button or check a box.
• Batch Verification - I understand the use case. Isn't the folder comparator the right tool for this task. It's based on CRC32 hashes and is more suited, IMO, to a source-vs-destination comparison.
• Primary set - You decide what's your primary set. I mean, the state of your last algorithm selection is saved and restored when you reuse the tool.
• Subfolder check - would adding a "Path" column help in that case? So that we could continue sorting on whatever column, path included. If yes, this would be an easy addition.

[__philippe]

@FileVoyager - re: VT on-demand access

Here are a couple of VT's DB on-demand check exemples by other apps, which implement the function you want,
requiring either NO button click to display VT's overall score ( PEstudio | sigcheck ), or only minimal button click(s) for instant display of VT's full detailed results ( PEstudio | PPee ) :

• PEstudio
• PPee
• Sysinternals' Sigcheck (CLI, sigcheck -v)