New software versions suitable for betfair security update
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Have you changed the version of .NET it's uses?
Yes, and suitable settings to enforce TLS 1.2. It'll self install .NET 4.5 if it isn't found on the target PC. This drops support for XP and Windows Server 2003, but we haven't offically supported those for a while anyway.
Shaun -here's what i had to add to my code:
Code: Select all
System.Net.ServicePointManager.SecurityProtocol = SecurityProtocolType.Tls12 | SecurityProtocolType.Tls11 | SecurityProtocolType.Tls;
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
BetAngel: Can you just clarify that you'll only upgrade to 4.5, and not just install 4.5 if it's not found. I'd assume so but just assuming isn't ideal and your reply was slightly vague.
Jimi: Cheers for that but I got patched and tested last week thanks to some advice from elsewhere. I bit the bullet and went .NET 4.7.1 anyway which raised issues going beyond v4.5 with Betfair.ESASwagger, but all sorted.
The lack of clarity about the upgrade risked BA 'doing a Microsoft' and making undocumented system changes. Whatever, it's not my beef anyway cos I know what I'm doing, but far reaching changes like that really should be in marching ants on the release notes on 'Pro' software.
I wonder how people have got on who've had bespoke stuff written in India? Good luck tracking down your developer to make the necessary mods. It's just another hidden cost with cheap outsourcing and why people should hire local coders on proper wages (queue the National Anthem and flag waving).
Jimi: Cheers for that but I got patched and tested last week thanks to some advice from elsewhere. I bit the bullet and went .NET 4.7.1 anyway which raised issues going beyond v4.5 with Betfair.ESASwagger, but all sorted.
The lack of clarity about the upgrade risked BA 'doing a Microsoft' and making undocumented system changes. Whatever, it's not my beef anyway cos I know what I'm doing, but far reaching changes like that really should be in marching ants on the release notes on 'Pro' software.
I wonder how people have got on who've had bespoke stuff written in India? Good luck tracking down your developer to make the necessary mods. It's just another hidden cost with cheap outsourcing and why people should hire local coders on proper wages (queue the National Anthem and flag waving).
Shaun -afaik, the minor versions are only used if referenced. in a word, you can still have .net v4.5 installed on your machine as well as v4.7.1. Your code will directly reference a specific version of the runtime. i have a number of apps that i maintain that use everything from v3.5, 4.5, 4.6.1 etc and none conflict with the other. however, issues can occur with references to 3rd party dlls that were compiled with lower versions if those versions are no longer present.ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:00 pmBetAngel: Can you just clarify that you'll only upgrade to 4.5, and not just install 4.5 if it's not found. I'd assume so but just assuming isn't ideal and your reply was slightly vague.
Jimi: Cheers for that but I got patched and tested last week thanks to some advice from elsewhere. I bit the bullet and went .NET 4.7.1 anyway which raised issues going beyond v4.5 with Betfair.ESASwagger, but all sorted.
The lack of clarity about the upgrade risked BA 'doing a Microsoft' and making undocumented system changes. Whatever, it's not my beef anyway cos I know what I'm doing, but far reaching changes like that really should be in marching ants on the release notes on 'Pro' software.
I wonder how people have got on who've had bespoke stuff written in India? Good luck tracking down your developer to make the necessary mods. It's just another hidden cost with cheap outsourcing and why people should hire local coders on proper wages (queue the National Anthem and flag waving).
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
thx for the clarification. I wasn't worried.
It's a brave release manager who says a .NET upgrade "won't break anything"
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Yeah that's my understanding too. Everything's cushty until you bump into an old unloved dll tucked away somewhere.
I guess this thread will go down as yet another 'Project fear'
Windows 98 was the original DLL Hell, where the system had to be designed to automatically restore DLLs that had been downgraded with Win 3.1 DLLs, from the Sysbckup directory.ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Mon Feb 04, 2019 5:26 pmYeah that's my understanding too. Everything's cushty until you bump into an old unloved dll tucked away somewhere.
I guess this thread will go down as yet another 'Project fear'
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Tech as diverged. One one end it's all closed systems and you have shout your problem at an 'assistant' to fix it. On the other end it's got devilishly complicated.