Thanks for the details Kenji.Good to know that the issue is resolved.
Closing this thread.
Regards,
Ashish
↧
Re : Windows Server 2012 BSOD: KMODE_EXCEPTION_NOT_HANDLED aksdf.sys
↧
Re : Google Chrome Version 67.0.3396.62 (Official Build) (64-bit) is unable to render Sentinel EMS portal
Hi Ashish,
False alarm, sorry. I assume it was a glitch on my side, today I am not facing this issue anymore. JFYI, I use Sentinel EMS for Sentinel LDK v.7.8.
Thank you for you kind attention!
Warm regards,
Oleg
↧
↧
Re : Google Chrome Version 67.0.3396.62 (Official Build) (64-bit) is unable to render Sentinel EMS portal
Hi Oleg,
Good to know that the problem no longer persists.Please feel free to contact us if you face any other issues.
Closing this thread.
Regards,
Ashish
↧
Application slowed down after enveloping
We have an application composed of the main exe and several assemblies (dll's).
All written in .Net Framework.
Once we used Sentinel EMS Envelope to protect the exe and selected (one) dll (assemblies) the execution of the program slowed down 10 times or more.
The protected dll is very CPU intensive!
How to use the envelope protection and do not loose the performance that much!
↧
Slow recovery of session licenses.
We would like to protect the selected program to be licences-ed for 1 (one) running process only.
We used the HL/Product admin mode and choose the concurrent licenses 1 - count each session.
We enveloped the program using standard enveloping tool.
Problem.
Once the application is closed the license key is still occupied for some few minutes. This disables to start the program again.
Question
How shall we protect the program to have both control of the number of instances running and be able to fast close and run application. The application runs as a windows system service and needs to be restarted automatically!
↧
↧
Re : Application slowed down after enveloping
Hi NEOJG,
When the application is run, the protected files get decrypted at the runtime. This causes some difference in performance. The delay can vary depending on the size of protected file or number of methods protected in case of .Net.
Please ensure that only the important methods that have your intellectual property code, are protected. Protecting methods that do not contain important code (that needs to be secured) will cause unnecessary decryption time.
Try the following-
1. Open the envelope and add your exe/dll (do not use any saved envelope project file)
2. There should be some methods selected by default. Protect the files without any change in the methods list
3. Check the performance difference
4. In second test, add the file in envelope and click "Clear All" to de-select all methods
5. Now select only your important methods and protect the files
6. Check for the difference in performance
Do not use "Select All" option
Please perform these tests and share the results.
Also confirm the version of envelope used for protection.
Regards,
Ashish
↧
Re : Slow recovery of session licenses.
Hi NEOJG,
Please confirm the following-
- The application is using the license from a locally connected key or from network.
- "Once the application is closed the license key is still occupied for some few minutes." Please check if the service is stopped in this time or stuck in "Stopping" state
- Try after placing "hasp_rt.exe" in the same folder where application exe is present. Check if it makes any difference
"hasp_rt.exe" should be there in the output folder of envelope while protecting the files.
Regards,
Ashish
Ashish
↧
Re : Slow recovery of session licenses.
- We use "locally connected" software dongle - HL admin mode
- YES we verified that the service is actually closed
↧
Re : Slow recovery of session licenses.
Please share the status after testing with hasp_rt.exe file.
We may need to do detailed investigation if you still face the issue. Please contact us on our customer portal https://supportportal.gemalto.com/csm/ if issue is not resolved with hasp_rt.exe
Regards,
Ashish
↧
↧
Re : Slow recovery of session licenses.
After adding hasp_rt.exe and dll's the service still blocs.
Please take a look at the attached screen dumps.
First shows the session status after running the application (service) - what bothers me is why there are two entries not one!!!
Second shows the session status just after application (service) shutdown - one session left.
After a minute or two this phantom session will also disappear.
↧
Re : Slow recovery of session licenses.
Hi NEOJG,
In case of .Net or Java applications there can be more than one sessions connected when the application is used.
This is because they use Method Level protection. So number of sessions can change depending on the protected methods running within the application. Please confirm if this is a .Net application.
Share the screenshot of "Features" page to show the concurrency details set in the license.
Please contact us on our customer portal regarding delay in starting the service due to time taken in session getting killed.
Thanks,
Ashish
↧
Re : Slow recovery of session licenses.
Hi Ashish
- Yest the application is .Net Framework based
- Provided is the screen dump with features.
Thanks
Jacek
↧
Re : Application slowed down after enveloping
Hi Ashish
Is there a way to achieve the following regarding protecting the .net dll (assembly):
- Envelop assembly (.net dll) and encode the strings and some methods.
- Have the runtime system (hasp) to decode the strings/methods only once per the live of assembly (.net dll) and this to be done on loading
- do not obfuscate the code so it does not degradate in execution time
So in descriptive words having code encrypted in file and fully decrypted (decoded) and not obfuscated while executed in memory!!!
By the way how shall I contact the support you mentioned in one of earlier comments?
Regards,
Jacek
↧
↧
Re : Slow recovery of session licenses.
The screenshot shows that the feature's concurrency is set to "Count by Process".
In this case, any number of sessions opened by single running process (of protected application) will be allowed.
The user will receive a message "Too many users" if he tries to open two instances of application simultaneously as the process count will be 2 but allowed value is 1.
Thanks,
Ashish
↧
Re : Slow recovery of session licenses.
Hi Ashish
Yes this is exactly what we like to achieve.
PROBLEM
Once the program is activated and next closed the immediate re-activation (running again) fails with the message to many instances!!! If we wait a minute or two it will succeed.
Look in my previous posts and screen dumps.
Thanks
Jacek
↧
Re : Slow recovery of session licenses.
Hi Jacek,
In my last comment I explained you in detail the reason why you see two sessions instead of one and how this is controlled by concurrency setting.
As mentioned in my previous comment, you can contact on our support portal for the issue- delay in session getting closed after application is closed. This needs detailed investigation that is not possible on the forum.
Following are the steps to access our customer portal if you are not already registered-
- Drop an email to technical.support@gemalto.com with your email id (that is registered with Gemalto) requesting for your "Customer Identifier"
- Open https://supportportal.gemalto.com/csm/ once you have the customer identifier
- Click on "Register"
- Fill the sign-up form
Once registered, you should be able to create support tickets and also access our knowledge base.
Regards,
Ashish
Ashish
↧
Re : Application slowed down after enveloping
Hi Jacek,
In default settings, license check and decryption happens "Once per program". This means license check and decryption happens once the protected method is executed and it remains valid until it is closed.
Please add your application in envelope and check these protection settings -
You can try to modify these settings to find the sweet spot for you application that has the optimal performance.
Please note that this is a trade-off between security and performance as each setting (if On) works as an additional level of security.
You may also like to upgrade to latest version LDK 7.8 as the new envelope may have some performance improvements.
I have shared the steps to contact support portal on your other post-
Regards,
Ashish
↧
↧
Unable to uninstall Sentinel v7.6
Hi,
I am windows 7 user. Currently, I am updating Sentinel from v7.4 to v7.6.
To do that, I have run the following command in administration mode:
hasp_update_x64.exe u XXXXXX.v2c
However, I found that I cannot identify if Sentinel v7.6 has been installed successfully.
If I run the same command again, I will receive the following error message:
hasp_update failed with status 65
I discovered that I should install Sentinel v7.6 in non administration mode. But I can't find the way to remove Sentinel v7.6 from my PC.
Could you please help on these issues? Thank you.
↧
Re : Unable to uninstall Sentinel v7.6
Hi Tan,
It looks like you want to update the Sentinel Runtime Drivers to the latest version. Please confirm.
Hasp_update tool can only be used to install license files or collect fingerprint/key information.
It cannot perform any version updates for the runtime.
Error 65 means "HASP_UPDATE_ALREADY_ADDED". This is expected in this case as you are trying to apply the license update (v2c) that is already applied.
Please note that here "update" means the license update v2c file and not the version update for runtime.
You can check the version of currently installed runtime from the following page-
Check at the bottom of the page where it shows "Run-time Installer"
The latest version of drivers can be found on our knowledge base https://supportportal.gemalto.com/csm/
Look for the article number KB0016782
This will download a file named haspdinst.exe. Open Command Prompt with Admin access and run the following command to install the latest drivers version 7.80-
haspdinst.exe -i
Thanks,
Ashish
↧
Re : Unable to uninstall Sentinel v7.6
Thank you Ashish.
From the link you provided, i could see that my Run-time Installer version is 7.41.
My next question is, if I perform haspdinst.exe -r, does it able to uninstall Sentinel Runtime Driver and remove the license I updated with hasp_update_x64.exe?
Another question is, is there any different if I install and update license with admin/non admin mode?
Thank you again.
regards,
eeyong
↧