Sandboxie Support

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

2013-07-03T07:08:31-04:00

As I said earlier in this topic, these changes are internal, and do not change the way you use Sandboxie.

Settings may be evaluated at a different point during program execuion, but they are evaluated the same way.

Statistics: Posted by tzuk — Wed Jul 03, 2013 7:08 am

New Version

2013-07-02T19:14:43-04:00

As for the new version, I'm curious about a few things.
As you stated, the main behaviour now is restricting before allowing which I really appreciate.

I didn't like a few main ways of behaviour in the old versions.
Mainly the part where you had to restrict access to specific files instead of allowing it.
Has this changed?

For example:
I want Firefox to be able to read a specific Filepath on a drive but no other path.
Do I now have the option to ONLY allow the access to this specific path?
So to whitelist only one path instead of having to blacklist every other path on that drive?

Thanks

Statistics: Posted by Blackbeat — Tue Jul 02, 2013 7:14 pm

help

2013-06-24T10:33:32-04:00

hi guys,can i ask something?imma noob,i try to play a game,but they said that i cant play it without sandboxie,so i look for it and download it,but after i choose the language it say "sandboxie can be installed on the following versions of microsoft windows: (64 bit) windows vista (sp1), windows 7, windows 8"

im using windows xp sp 3 64bit
thx guys be4,n sorry, for bad in english

Statistics: Posted by Guest — Mon Jun 24, 2013 10:33 am

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

2013-06-23T09:11:03-04:00

Please don't report problems here. There is the Problem Reports forum for posting problem reports.

Statistics: Posted by tzuk — Sun Jun 23, 2013 9:11 am

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

2013-06-23T02:17:10-04:00

Hello, I just installed the new version of sandboxie and now I am not able to read encrypted files (using EFS) under the sandboxes, my guess is it happens because now the sandboxed processes are opened using the ANONYMOUS LOGON account, tzuk, is there any workaround to fix this? Thank you for this great software...

Statistics: Posted by Guest — Sun Jun 23, 2013 2:17 am

More Information for you...

2013-06-22T18:30:06-04:00

I just found out that with Outlook forced, and I open Outlook, and Word is running in the sandbox....if I attempt to open a Word file by 'double-click' it still wont open. *BUT* if I right-click and 'open in sandbox'... the file pops right open! That will keep 'Her' happy, but is that what you expected to happen??

Bill

Statistics: Posted by Guest — Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:30 pm

Prob with v4; FIRST ever with S/B !!

2013-06-22T18:15:36-04:00

First off, Tzuk, I am a fully licensed and Long Term S/B user. I love it and do my best to 'sell' it to anyone that hears my voice or sees my printing! *GOOD* software.

I recently upped to 4 on both my computer and my Wife's, and saw no immediate issue, as we are both running WIN 7 [64] and are used to S/B v3+ working perfectly.

I *do* use Microsoft Office 2003 for our E-Mail client and Word, with no problems at all in S/B v3, 'Outlook' as a Forced Program. You may know, when you open Word independently it is not sandboxed. But when Outlook is open, BOTH Outlook and Word are sandboxed. It is no problem to have Outlook E-mail open and also open a Word file.

In S/B v4 I am finding that opening Word independently, Word opens fine, not sandboxed. But...If I have Outlook open, in the sandbox, THEN try to open a Word file, I cannot! I note that the program 'splwow64.exe' is then in the sandbox, but that seems to be something related to printing.

I'm not a programmer, but I've done a lot of messing about in these computers [an old retired Electronics Guy]. I do hope someone has a 'fix' for this, or 'She' will be insisting I go back to S/B v3.

BILL [abcdefg@wavecable.com]

Statistics: Posted by Guest — Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:15 pm

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

2013-06-18T04:49:10-04:00

PiwPi wrote:But how does Sandboxie decide what kind of permissions to grant to a program ? (i.e. whitelist or heuristics ?)
What kind of permissions will the default configuration grant ? (i.e. disk operations and everything else that can be allowed or blocked)
Can a malicious program within a sandbox take control of a more trusted program in the same box and abuse of its permissions ?

Could we please get an answer to this? I've had Sandboxie for so long, this new update made me think of finally buying it, but I'd like to know a bit more on how it works.

Jake wrote:Though now I'll be careful and do some research before installing it, see if it supports my use cases.

Perhaps you should install it in some sort of *sandboxed* mode to try it out .

Statistics: Posted by Marc05 — Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:49 am

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

2013-06-08T19:42:44-04:00

Hi,

I have to partially agree with nicknomo: Sandboxie is an insanely useful tool in that you can shield your real system (files®istry) by installing updates to apps inside a sandbox and rolling it back at will with absolutely no consequence whatsoever on the real system. Many other tools that are not perfect in this area, in my experience.

You can also install an app in a sandbox and move that sandbox from computer to computer, effectively turning the app into a portable app. It's pretty cool when you are restoring the system regularly; you don't lose the registry keys and C: files that were added in between because they are nicely stored within a sandbox. You don't have to waste disk space imaging incrementally, not to mention that it's a modular approach whereas incremental imaging is linear and so, much less flexible.

Unfortunately not all apps can be successfully installed in a sandbox, but that's still pretty awesome.

So I agree with Nicknomo, these ways to use Sandboxie are half of its awesomeness. However I still DO care about security when using Sandboxie this way, so I'm not too fond of the default allow idea.

But then again I don't understand why it poses a problem with v4...if anyone cares to explain that would be super nice

Either way, looking forward to v4 ! Though now I'll be careful and do some research before installing it, see if it supports my use cases.

Statistics: Posted by Guest — Sat Jun 08, 2013 7:42 pm

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

2013-06-02T06:46:29-04:00

Thanks, I appreciate the kind words

Statistics: Posted by tzuk — Sun Jun 02, 2013 6:46 am

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

2013-05-31T22:57:52-04:00

tzuk wrote:Well it's really just the DDE thing that is getting in your way, I think. And I may be able to figure out some way to make it work, at least for some use cases, later on. If not, perhaps I will consider this compatibility mode that you're suggesting here. In any case, it wouldn't be a small change, and right now I want to move towards releasing a stable version v4 so I don't want to make any risky changes.

Well, I've had a few other problems too that I posted, but all in all I can't knock your approach. From a security standpoint, I want the restrictions to be heavy. The harder the sandbox is to bypass, the better it is for everyone... Like I said though, some times I don't mind liberal access if it means the program just doesn't write to disk.

I wasn't sure if this was a big change or not, but from your response I guess it is. I know you have a lot on your plate trying to get 4.01 ready for release, and that is definitely where your time should be spent. I was just throwing the idea out there...

Either way, I can't really complain. Sandboxie has to be the most useful security software I've ever used, so I'm definitely happy that you are still actively developing this product.. Thanks for all your work..

Statistics: Posted by nicknomo — Fri May 31, 2013 10:57 pm

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

2013-05-31T10:04:18-04:00

tzuk,

Any chance you could post the changes/fixes that have been made to each beta build?

Thanks,
Cruise

Statistics: Posted by Cruise — Fri May 31, 2013 10:04 am

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

2013-05-31T06:09:37-04:00

Well it's really just the DDE thing that is getting in your way, I think. And I may be able to figure out some way to make it work, at least for some use cases, later on. If not, perhaps I will consider this compatibility mode that you're suggesting here. In any case, it wouldn't be a small change, and right now I want to move towards releasing a stable version v4 so I don't want to make any risky changes.

Statistics: Posted by tzuk — Fri May 31, 2013 6:09 am

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

2013-05-31T03:23:22-04:00

I just got a chance to read this. It sounds like the new implementation in v4 is more secure by impleneting a default deny philosophy.

My concern, and I think part of the problems I've already experienced, is that I'm not always using Sandboxie as a protection against malware, or for security. Some times my goal is to simply virtualize the writes to the file system/registry/etc, while not being concerned about what it does from a security perspective. In other words, to use it as a way to do something without having permanent changes applied to the disk. For instance, my flight simulator often has updates that are half baked. I typically use Sandboxie to update the software and see if that update is worth keeping. If not, I just delete the contents of the Sandbox. I don't really care about being "breached" or about system security in this case. My main concern is really that the software is able to run and function.

The way I see it is that the two different uses seem to have very different ideologies, and sometimes they are opposed to one another... and to be honest, I'm pretty amazed at the level of support you've been able to provide so that the use of Sandboxie can be so flexible... It sounds though like the new implementation might make it harder for the latter of the two uses.

I guess my concern is the that new approach might harm usability in some instances where the extra security is not really wanted.

Have you ever considered implementing a "compatibility mode" option in the Sandbox settings, that is more along the lines of "default allow" rather than "default deny"?

Statistics: Posted by nicknomo — Fri May 31, 2013 3:23 am

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

2013-04-25T08:54:13-04:00

Thanks for the reply tzuk.

Statistics: Posted by ad18888 — Thu Apr 25, 2013 8:54 am

Sandboxie Support

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

New Version

help

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

More Information for you...

Prob with v4; *FIRST* ever with S/B !!

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

Version 4.01 - Major changes to underlying architecture

Prob with v4; FIRST ever with S/B !!