Packing with password for other than ZIP, RAR, ARJ, ACE.

[Flint]

I have ZIP_Crypto DLL installed. When I try to pack, for example, TAR with "Encrypt" option set, TC asks for the password as usual, but the resultant archive is not encrypted at all, I can unpack it or view the files in it without any password needed. I think, this bug is quite serious, as user may pack some files with password and think that they are safe, while they are really not.

PS: Yes, I know that the option name contains "(ZIP only)" (BTW, outdated...), but the user may use some non-standard translation which does not contain such warning.

PPS: Sorry if the problem was already discussed, I tried to search for it but found nothing about it.

[Sir_SiLvA]

That why I changed the text in the Language file to
(Zip, Ace, Rar, Arj)

Encrypten of Tar, UC2, GZ, LHA and TGZ doesn't work.
Files encrypted with Arj 2.82 can't be unpacked by TC 6.52.

[Flint]

Sir_SiLvA
But changing the text does not solve the problem - there is no guarantee that every author of every localization will change the text to correct.

[Clo]

2Flint
Hello !

But changing the text does not solve the problem -…

- Of course … But it's better than a false string.

there is no guarantee that every author of every localization will change the text to correct.

- This is related on a Ch. Ghisler's request to the translators for the updates.
- Personally, I changed already @ home for French, and'll propose to the Author :

Code: Select all

5491="Cr&ypter (ZIP, et autres si disponibles)"

… (Zip, and others if available), that doesn't limit the number of packers able to support that feature
- Indeed, the unpack problem needs some improvements and seems ticklish to solve…

 Kind regards,
Claude
Clo

[Flint]

Clo
Are you sure that your variant of the string is correct? For example, if I have LHA packer it will be "available", but still won't allow me to pack with password. Your variant in this case will make someone think that it is possible to pack LHA with passwords. I recommend to change the text to the exact enumeration of all supported types (like in "Multiple disk archive" checkbox):

Code: Select all

5491="Encr&ypt (ZIP, ARJ, RAR, ACE)"

And I will make so, for example, in my Russian translation of TC.

[petermad]

As it is right now the "Encrypt (ZIP only)" option in the Pack files dialog is only visible if the available WCMZIP32.DLL file is supporting encryption. If the WCMZIP32.DLL file is the one provided with TC (dated 6-04-2005 00:00) the option for encryption is hidden.

So IMHO the right thing would be if TC checked all packer dll's for encryption capability - and only listed the packers that are capable of encryption in the Pack files dialog.

[Clo]

2Flint
Indeed, I mean "and others supporting passwords", but I think that the French-speaking users are able to understand, moreover the room to write in French is not unlimited there…
- And there are other packers than the ones you quote able to support passwords, i.e. AlZip…

 K R
Claude
Clo

[Sir_SiLvA]

For "ages" I have in my file:

Code: Select all

491="Verschl&üsseln (ZIP, RAR, ACE, ARJ)"

@petermad: what you are saying is wrong!
without the encrypten-zip-dll you cant even create
encrypted archives (without using the packer-cmdline)
with packeres that have build in support (Zip, Ace, Rar, Arj, Tar, UC2, GZ, LHA and TGZ)
And how should TC check if a packer can encryption?
(not mentening the slowdown if TC checks starting every packer-plugin some user has installed )
and as the space is limited i think it is enough to tell wich of the build in can encrypt...
( http://ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?p=58577&sid=68eff06c1fa035ed2239b600c88c8b81#58577 )

[petermad]

@petermad: what you are saying is wrong!

I am saying that it would be fooling people who doesn't have the encryption enabled dll's if it is written in the dialog that encryption can be used with for example RAR, ACE, ARJ - what if the user doesn't have the right version of the packers.

without the encrypten-zip-dll you cant even create
encrypted archives (without using the packer-cmdline)
with packeres that have build in support (Zip, Ace, Rar, Arj, Tar, UC2, GZ, LHA and TGZ)

That's right - but just because I have the encryption enabled ZIP dll doesn't mean that all the other dll's that I may have supports encryption - But it will still give the user the impression that I can encrypt with the other formats.

And how should TC check if a packer can encryption?

Well - how does TC figure out whether the ZIP dll is supporting encryption or not ? - wich TC does...

(not mentening the slowdown if TC checks starting every packer-plugin some user has installed )

TC would only have to do it when the Pack files dialog is opened - and I can hardly imagine it would take a split second to do (if it is doable) .

and as the space is limited i think it is enough to tell wich of the build in can encrypt...

If space and slowdown is an issue I would rather suggest that the text should say somthing like:

"Encrypt (if supported by selected packer)"

- then it will also be future proof - and it wouldn't have to be changed whenever a packer starts supporting encryption.

[Flint]

Indeed, I mean "and others supporting passwords", but I think that the French-speaking users are able to understand, moreover the room to write in French is not unlimited there…

Of course, it's impossible to describe ALL in one single line in the dialog, but it should be as close to the truth as possible. Your variant of the line contains more misunderstandings than mine (IMHO, of course). The dialog should describe in short the basic, but almost complete information! In my variant in almost every situation the user can see at once, if he is able to pack the file with the password or not - because I give him a normal list of supported archives. Yes, the additional info is needed, but your variant needs even more additional information, it does not even provide the list of supported archives, and without opening the history file (even not help file, because the help does not describe encryption feature!) the user is completely unable to define if he possible to pack, for example, RAR with password.

- And there are other packers than the ones you quote able to support passwords, i.e. AlZip...

There is one, but large difference: ZIP, RAR, ARJ, LHA and others are supported by TC in its base functionality, just after installing the official distributive. AlZip and other password-supporting packers should be installed manually, and in this case the user will know what and for what reason he does. What about the main archivers - the user does not need to make some tricky actions to use them, so he needs some additional info about if TC support some functionality or not. So, the dialog must give the user as much information as possible. There is no need to describe all external tools' possibilities - this is not a task for TC! But packing RAR, ARJ, ZIP, ACE is an internal TC functionality (though performed by means of external tools), and the user should be informed about it.

-----------

I am saying that it would be fooling people who doesn't have the encryption enabled dll's if it is written in the dialog that encryption can be used with for example RAR, ACE, ARJ - what if the user doesn't have the right version of the packers.

There is nothing written in the dialog concerning the encryption, if the user does not have the encryption enabled ZIP dll. So I don't understand your statement...

That's right - but just because I have the encryption enabled ZIP dll doesn't mean that all the other dll's that I may have supports encryption - But it will still give the user the impression that I can encrypt with the other formats.

Of course there is a problem. But if TC will describe possibilities of all external tools - what it will become? The dialog line "Encrypt (ZIP, RAR, ARJ, ACE)" will show that TC itself supports packing with password in these formats, but tells nothing about if the external tool also supports it, and I think this is quite correct approach.

(not mentening the slowdown if TC checks starting every packer-plugin some user has installed )

TC would only have to do it when the Pack files dialog is opened - and I can hardly imagine it would take a split second to do (if it is doable) .

One single ZIP DLL or all external packers and packer plugins - feel the difference! I'm not sure that it is so inoffensive...

If space and slowdown is an issue I would rather suggest that the text should say somthing like:

"Encrypt (if supported by selected packer)"

And this will be absolutely wrong! Let, for example (as I mentioned below), I have LHA archiver supporting passwords. Your phrase in this case will directly tell to me that I am able to pack LHA with password, and I will get incorrect information therefore, as TC itself does not support this functionality.

[petermad]

And this will be absolutely wrong! Let, for example (as I mentioned below), I have LHA archiver supporting passwords. Your phrase in this case will directly tell to me that I am able to pack LHA with password, and I will get incorrect information therefore, as TC itself does not support this functionality.

I see your point!

I still think it is in danger of being misleading, to state specific packers other than ZIP. It has happened before that external packers have changed their command line setup so that a packer that used to be supported by TC suddenly wasn't anymore until Christian get it fixed.

So in stead I suggest:

"Encrypt (if supported - see Help)"

And then the Help file should have a comprehensive chapter about which external packers in which versions that TC supports.

[Clo]

2petermad
Hello Peter!

And then the Help file should have a comprehensive chapter about which external packers in which versions that TC supports.

- It should be a good solution, if we'ld get a precise and complete info about this, that isn't the case till today

 Kind regards,
Claude
Clo

[Flint]

I still think it is in danger of being misleading, to state specific packers other than ZIP. It has happened before that external packers have changed their command line setup so that a packer that used to be supported by TC suddenly wasn't anymore until Christian get it fixed.

Yes, this can be a problem. But in this case we must add such descriptions to every packing setting: for example, "Multiple disk archives" and "Also pack path names". What if the archiver will change its command-line format for this feature as it once became (as you said)? Why rarely used "Encrypt" function should warn users about this possibility, but frequently used "Also pack path names" should not?

In my opinion, the most correct solution for this situation is the following: Call all the options as they are called now, and describe the possible misfunctions in the help file, without specifying particular functions.
Of course, the "Encrypt (ZIP only)" checkbox name should be changed, but in the manner of the old TC variant: it was only ZIP that TC supported - and the name was "(ZIP only)"; now TC supports 4 formats - and the name should become "(ZIP, ARJ, RAR, ACE)". Easy, effective and understandable solution.
Just in case: all the above is just MHO.

So in stead I suggest:

"Encrypt (if supported - see Help)"

And then the Help file should have a comprehensive chapter about which external packers in which versions that TC supports.

The help, containing the description of the encryption feature, supported by TC? I'm not sure that this will be legal... I don't know Swiss law, but it may be so, that even such a description is impossible...

[Clo]

2Flint

I don't know Swiss law, but it may be so, that even such a description is impossible...

According with several Ch. Ghisler's statements about this, the Swiss Law forbids the export of any encryption made in Switzerland; since the stuff supporting encryption doesn't come from this country, I don't think that supporting this feature and describing it in a Help folder be illegal … Please, give a glance there and following messages.
- Anyway, I could add this in the Tutorials
- In France, 128-bit encryption (and all around) is legal. Hence, no problem for a simple password…

 KR
Claude
Clo

[Hacker]

BTW: Would be fun to read in the Help about encryption checkboxes and encryption support of different packers without the checkbox being actually present in TC.

Roman