Comments on: Dynamically compiled VNC binary with repeater

By: B

Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:41:51 +0000

The repeater problem I mean is, specifically, with UltraVNC 1.0.8.2 SERVER — it actually has nothing to do with the version or even provenance of the repeater! (Or whether it’s running as a service.) Some of this is described at http://forum.ultravnc.info/viewtopic.php?t=18016&highlight=

Basically, after a a couple of hours, UltraVNC Server 1.0.8.2 stops being reachable via a repeater, apparently because it incorrectly raises its reconnect interval too high.

Anyway, it’s probably moot for your project if your server is based on anything other than UVNC 1.0.8.2 (we find that 1.0.8.0 works fine, and the SC strain you’re using is probably older; hmm, yours comes up as 1.1.0.0 from 11/24/2009.)

My earlier caution was that, if you were to change to using a “wrapper” around the full UVNC client/server as those other packages did, to please avoid specifically the 1.0.8.2 version due to its repeater issues. Anyway, thanks.

By: robplatt

robplatt — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 00:02:20 +0000

B -
Im afraid you haven’t read post close enough. I am using UltraVNC. I am using their repeater. It doesn’t lock up after x hours if you run it as an application. I agree, there was some trouble I encountered as well trying to run it as a service. However, as an application it runs for days on end. Again, I use this exact solution both personally and professionally. That’s why I wrote this. The version of SC that I’m using does support the DSMPlugin. I’ll still add the encryption into my tutorial, but this solution is solely for UltraVNC. Hope you find this useful.

By: B

Mon, 21 Jun 2010 23:08:33 +0000

Great! Good to hear. Not sure whether the old SC (that I think you’re using) supports the DSMPlugins, but you could freely borrow from the various wrapper projects. Suggestion, though; if possible please avoid UltraVNC 1.0.8.2; its repeater support is broken (locks up after x hours). 1.0.8.0 is okay. Anyway, thanks again for your project work.

By: robplatt

robplatt — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 21:21:37 +0000

B -

I see your point. I will work on adding encryption. It should be relatively easy. Keep checking in, or subscribe via email/twitter. I will post a new post as well as update this one when I do.

By: B

Mon, 21 Jun 2010 17:40:35 +0000

No, not really. That (NTLM and .htaccess) would only secure the interaction with the web site. They would do nothing, as far as I understand, to secure the VNC communications or even the authentication — once the VNCViewer and server are running on either end, they’re using plain old RFB and only as secure as the SC package you generate allows. Am I mistaken?

So that’s why I’m encouraging more security within that SC package. Does your current SC allow a password? Or is the chosen repeater ID the only barrier at present? Chunk, for one, randomly generates an MSRC4 key, which is better than nothing.

I’m sure I could fiddle with your project to add this sort of thing INSIDE the relevant script and directories, but it’s just so much easier to beg.

By: robplatt

robplatt — Sat, 19 Jun 2010 01:32:45 +0000

You can always put your own security layer on top. NTLM, .htaccess, Encryption or whatever else you want.

By: B

Fri, 18 Jun 2010 20:37:42 +0000

I just noticed, reading PHPrs’s documentation, that no security at all is included yet. That’s really a deal breaker for me. I want something that can be taken seriously in the enterprise as well as the home/hobbyist market. So far it seems one still has to pay for that.

It looks like both of these are based off the old SC. I think perhaps you guys could add better security, as well as other features, if you took the tack that ChunkVNC and SCPrompt take, rolling up the full UVNC client and server instead?

By: Nick Van Dorsten

Nick Van Dorsten — Thu, 27 May 2010 03:48:33 +0000

Just wanted to drop a note that PHP Remote Support v.2b has been released!

Due to missing files, this should be considered a mandatory update.

Grab a copy here: http://phpremotesupport.com/2010/05/26/updated-phprs-v-2b-released/

By: Nick Van Dorsten

Nick Van Dorsten — Thu, 27 May 2010 01:19:32 +0000

Thanks B for your support! I hate self promotion, so any word of mouth is always appreciated…

In regards to your question, currently only Windows is supported at the moment, I have personally tested with XP Pro, Vista, Win7 Pro. All in a domain environment and encountered no issues (aside from the various browser or operating system security prompts). If you do have issues, just ask!

By: robplatt

robplatt — Wed, 12 May 2010 15:24:53 +0000

No reason really. If you want to drop a line there pointing to this page and Nicks site, that would be great.