I thinked that the files of the folder could be deleted in this way and finally the empty folder that is not important can be deleted from the system instructions.
This idea is feasible, but the only concern is about the complexity for the huge folders with various subfolders; it is time consuming.
From the other responses presumably the following is what you want to do.
1. You want to shred files.
2. You want to shred file information in the directory itself.
For 1 you iterate over files in the directory and recurse through each sub directory and shred each file. You MUST do this. There is no magic solution that would allow you to do it in some other way.
For 2 it is more complex and depends on what you want you think a 'shred' would do. At a minor level you can just rename each file before shredding it. That overwrites the name. For a real shred you would need to
1. Create an API to access the file system at a raw level
2. Parse the file block
3. Shred the relevant file info that was found by step 1. In this case 'shred' includes the same basic methodology employed to shred a file but on a very small scale. You would need to write the shred code yourself.
Note that if you choose to implement the solution above then you MUST back up your hard drive because when you mess up the code you will need to reformat the hard drive. You must also extensively test this feature as well for the same reason. Also account for different file system types (like ssd and usb.)
PS: Sorry if my answer sounds a bit rude, but I am realy confused about the question what getchar does. If I were you, my first step would be asking google, bing are whatever searchmachine you want. Or taking a look inside a book. If I don't understand the description/answer there, I would ask in a forum again.
I'm using C++ to develop a small Bootstrapper (Setup.exe) application in C++. Using CreateProcess() to launch a .hta (HTML Application) which is used as a UI. It then calls other installers one by one which includes *.exe, *.msi etc.
What I'm trying to do is if I execute my Setup.exe, it asked for UAC for once and launch .hta so that it doesn't required UAC any further. Here is my code:
ZeroMemory( &si, sizeof(si) );
si.cb = sizeof(si);
ZeroMemory( &pi, sizeof(pi) );
if( CreateProcess(NULL, // No module name (use command line)
"C:\\Windows\\MsHta.exe SetupGUI.hta"// Command line
NULL, // Process handle not inheritable
NULL, // Thread handle not inheritable
FALSE, // Set handle inheritance to FALSE
0, // No creation flags
NULL, // Use parent's environment block
NULL, // Use parent's starting directory
&si, // Pointer to STARTUPINFO structure
&pi // Pointer to PROCESS_INFORMATION structure
// Wait until child process exits.
WaitForSingleObject(pi.hProcess, INFINITE );
// Close process and thread handles.
CloseHandle( pi.hProcess );
CloseHandle( pi.hThread );
I actually saw same in an application installer, but I don't have its Setup.exe's source code.
I think it is nothing to do with how you call CreateProcess. If your main application Setup.exe is launched in elevated mode, all processes lunched by this application will be launched in elevated mode.
In order to have an elevated prompt for your Setup.exe, you need to create manifest.
This simple manifest will trigger the UAC prompt for your application:
but after maybe 10 seconds i receive this error message:
and the debugger show in this code in the file thrdcore.cpp:
// first -- check for simple worker thread
DWORD nResult = 0;
if (pThread->m_pfnThreadProc != NULL)
nResult = (*pThread->m_pfnThreadProc)(pThread->m_pThreadParams);
A thing what make me confuse is that i cant find this position with memory allocation, i do nothing like this in this Function?
No parameter is NULL, what i'm doing wrong?
Any help is welcome
It's impossible to guess what may be wrong with the information you provided. You should use your debugger to set some breakpoints in your code, and check the actual values of the various parameters at the time of the failure. You can also use the stacktrace to see which functions have been called recently.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.
Could be wrong here but I think you have to call a Macro just after the thread enters in order to set it up properly, google it, it is well known. (Had this years ago, and havent done any user mode for ages. )