I was just wondering if the following situation was probable under Windows:
I am currently trying to use Safe Exam Browser in a remote deployment to users. To elaborate, I'd like to be able to send a user a configuration in order to access a test. The user would be responsible for installing the Safe Exam Browser and from there opening/installing the appropriate configurations. My question being, is there a way on Windows to send the students/users the configuration files (MsgHook.ini/SebStarter.ini) without them being able to modify the files?
I know that in this case, this is possible with Mac as you can send them a preferences file that is not modifiable to the end user and encrypted, however I'm to believe this is a Version 2.X feature. If that's the case, any updates in regards to progress for the SEB 2.0 Windows port? Mainly, I've just been wanting to see if this would be possible with 1.9.1
Thanks, I appreciate it,
Unfortunately the .NET porting of SEB for Windows is taking more time than expected. We expect to have a preview version of SEB 2.0 for Windows out in approx. 2 months, the final version till end of the year.
With 1.9.1 it's not really possible to protect the ini files. If you're a programmer you could check out the source code and hard code a configuration into the binary and compile an individual build of SEB 1.9.1, some ppl did this in the past.
I suggest to wait for SEB 2.0 or to use SEB 1.9.1 on managed computers if that would be an option for the time being.
Thanks for the response!
And in this case, it sounds like waiting may be the best option, unless hardwiring the configuration would not necessarily be that big of a hurdle. If I decide to jump it I'll keep you posted.
Just wanted to give you a head's up that in this case, we are trying to pursue hard coding the configurations into our installer, from there, we have gotten to a point where we are trying to modify the installer files. Our issue however, is that the files were built with InstallShield, when our expectation was that it used tools provided by Visual Studio. With that in mind, you wouldn't happen to know the correct version as well as license we would need for InstallShield in order to build the files properly?
Hi Tyler, in order to replace the hardcoded and newly compiled SebStarter.exe, you should not need InstallShield. If you are familiar with MSI techniques, you could use tools as e.g Orca or WiX and replace the standard SebStarter.exe by your new one at end of installation. This can be achieved by creating a Transform (.mst file) for the SebWindowsInstall.msi file. The same procedure already replaces the SebStarter.ini and MsgHook.ini at end of installation. Greetings, Dirk
Btw. we currently use InstallShield 2012 Professional with some postprocessing steps, e.g. using Orca.
Although I hoped to reach this point earlier as I wrote you end of August, we are getting closer for having a first running version of SEB 2.0. The most important features are implemented and working, the only essential 2.0 feature we're still working on is the encryption/decryption module for the .seb files, so that it is compatible with the existing Mac OS X 2.0 preview version. I am in California at the moment and have only limited time to work on it this and next week, but hope to solve that last eminent point latest last week of October. The current code of SEB 2.0 for Windows is always available in our public repository, so you could check it out and start using it as soon as the crypto module is working. Maybe this would be an alternative for patching SEB 1.9.1 if you still can wait till November.
Log in to post a comment.
Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:
You seem to have CSS turned off.
Please don't fill out this field.