|
So we pay for LastPass, Git, and the list goes on, and we keep reading about how they get hacked. Seems like your IT has it bassackwards. 
|
|
|
|
|
Like you, I've used Notepad++ for years. While I'm sure it has its bugs, I haven't heard of any security breach that was traced to it. I would expect that if one avoids plug-ins from unknown third parties, one should be quite safe.
Good luck convincing IT of this. 
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Just tell IT to make a monthly donation and it will no longer be free: Donate | Notepad++[^] 
Is VS Code insecure as well?
Could be a good alternative.
|
|
|
|
|
I am a great fan of Notepad++. It is my favorite editor on Windows.
Tell the IT folks you like the thrill of danger.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
In my experience IT-Sec doesn't have a sense of humor.
There are no solutions, only trade-offs. - Thomas Sowell
A day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes)
|
|
|
|
|
Give this man a BELLS 
|
|
|
|
|
Notepad++ is NOT freeware; it is open-source. Your IT people can download the source code[^] and inspect it for any security issues it may have. They are also welcome to fix those.
There is a dramatic difference between "freeware" and "open source". Not knowing that, shows some limitations in one's level of expertise (to put it mildly).
Mircea
|
|
|
|
|
Mircea Neacsu wrote: Your IT people can download the source code[^] and inspect it for any security issues it may have. They are also welcome to fix those.
Your IT must be like ours, they know that writing software is easy.  They tell us devs all the time and ask us things like, "Nuget access is dangerous. Why do you need access to nuget? Just write the code in those libraries yourself."
|
|
|
|
|
Luckily, I never had to deal myself with IT people. Was always something along the lines of "if you touch this laptop, I'm walking out that door". 
Mircea
|
|
|
|
|
That doesn't work very well in a Multinational.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
There are some perks to being a star programmer in a little shop 
Mircea
|
|
|
|
|
You are assuming IT is worth more than Vis Studio is a "secuirty risk as you can generate executables from it" (I quote) this generated two responses from me Learn the value of spell check, It doesn't generate executables it generates MSIL code which is run by the .NET frame work. 
|
|
|
|
|
I would seriously consider looking for another job. Life is too short to waste it arguing about such silliness.
Mircea
|
|
|
|
|
glennPattonWork3 wrote: It doesn't generate executables it generates MSIL code
No, it does neither of those things. Visual Studio is an Interactive Development Environment, and as such just manages your projects. All code generation, whether machine or MSIL, is done by the compilers. And straight C/C++ code does not generate MSIL.
|
|
|
|
|
Right, a plain vanilla Windows install with .net (since XP?) contains the compilers for C# and VB.net -- Visual Studio is not required. Anyone who knows how to write a bit of such code can produce a .net executable without installing anything else.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: contains the compilers for C# and VB.net
Well, certainly not on either of our non-dev systems, that I can find. Where would you expect them to be installed?
|
|
|
|
|
Assuming at least one version of .net is installed...
try
dir /s C:\windows\microsoft.net\Framework\csc.exe C:\windows\microsoft.net\Framework\vbc.exe
or
C:\windows\System32>where csc.exe
C:\Windows\microsoft.net\Framework\v4.0.30319\csc.exe
C:\windows\System32>csc.exe /?
Microsoft (R) Visual C# Compiler version 4.8.3761.0
for C# 5
(I'm using a rather old Win 8 tablet at the moment.)
|
|
|
|
|
You are correct, I was only looking in Program Files and Program Files (x86). Also was not aware of where.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah. A system may have several versions of the compilers installed.
More recent versions can compile different versions of the language (I tend to target C# v3).
Microsoft (R) Visual C# Compiler version 4.8.3761.0<br />
for C# 5
/langversion:<string> Specify language version mode: ISO-1, ISO-2, 3, 4, 5, or Default
|
|
|
|
|
Richard MacCutchan wrote: Interactive Development Environment
Integrated Development Environment == Bugging and debugging all in one place.
|
|
|
|
|
At my age, two words correct out of three is quite good. 
|
|
|
|
|
glennPattonWork3 wrote: can generate executables from it
Alternatively, some enterprise whackos are pushing for Python because either:
0) Executables are dangerous and with Python you don't create an executable.
or
1) A Python script is the executable, but it's easy to check that it hasn't been altered.
In both cases, they like that the script gets deployed directly to the production servers without a build process -- no "executable" in the traditional sense, but it's still an executable. Any other "scripting language" would be the same (e.g. Perl).
Of course, how do you know that the script wasn't altered along the way? Or that a bug wasn't "fixed" in production but not checked in?
It's the same issue I have with SQL objects such as Procedures, Views, Functions, etc. -- do they really match what we have in version control? Have we checked?
As a developer, I prefer traditional languages -- with compilers and "executables" -- when "security" is a factor.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote:
As a developer, I prefer traditional languages -- with compilers and "executables" -- when "security" is a factor.
You and me agree!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why MS hasn't doen more to notepad is beyond me.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
