FSL back at it again

[Ashatsea 7]

I am not a programmer or very computer savvy. I use my rig to sim but also VPN and occasionally VDI (telecommute) into my work for my job.

1) In your opinion is there any risk of my PC being hijacked or the file in question being commandeered by a third party? I have had the FSL A320 installed for 2 months with no visible problems with my rig.

2) For clarification purposes is this a potential backdoor or vulnerability.

3) Should I uninstall this program until this is sorted out?

[kingm56 1,031]

2 minutes ago, Cactus521 said:

Judge not lest ye not be judged

No judgment, sir...I just don't want to see your day ruined by us 'deaf, dumb and blind' posters...

[kaosfere 3,115]

40 minutes ago, Skywolf said:

Please see Esellerate page for their info

Thanks for that link.  In particular, from that page:
 

Quote

Windows File Descriptions

The eSellerate engine, which actually handles the purchase/update/registration functionality, is either called eWebClient.dll or else eSellerateEngine.dll, depending on which method the developer used to include the eSellerate functionality in the application. Similarly, eWebControl365.dll and eSellerateControl365.dll are two different versions of an ActiveX Control that interacts with the eSellerate engine in some installations. If you have installed more than one application that uses eSellerate's technology, it is possible that any or all of these items might be present on your computer; having more than one of these is normal and will not cause any problems.

Note: You may also have older versions of the files on your computer, such as older versions of the ActiveX Control. For example, you might have eWebControl350.dll instead of eWebControl365.dll.

Windows File Locations

Unlike on Macintosh, many of the eSellerate files for Windows are not required to be in a specific location on your hard drive. The developer of the application can install the eSellerate files anywhere on the machine, although there are some default locations that will be used unless the developer specifically chooses to install the files elsewhere.

For eWebClient.dll, the default location is C:\Program Files\Common Files\eSellerate\eWebClient.dll on Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows XP. On Windows Vista, the default location is C:\ProgramData\eSellerate\eWebClient.dll.

For eSellerateEngine.dll, the default location is C:\Windows on Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows XP. On Windows Vista, the default location is C:\ProgramData\eSellerate\eSellerateEngine.dll.

For eWebControl365.dll, the default location is C:\Program Files\Common Files\eSellerate\eWebControl365.dll on Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows XP. On Windows Vista, the default location is C:\ProgramData\eSellerate\eWebControl365.dll.

For eSellerateControl365.dll, the default location is C:\Windows on Windows NT, Windows 2000 and Windows XP. On Windows Vista, the default location is C:\ProgramData\eSellerate\eSellerateControl365.dll.

This proves exactly the point I was making:   the explanation that it's needed for eSellerate feels distinctly like bull-poopy.   There is something more going on here.

 

On edit:  it looks like Skywolf deleted their link for some reason.   It was https://support.esellerate.net/528#win.

Edited June 3, 2018 by kaosfere

[Christopher Low 5,353]

Can we stick to the FSL issue, please? The side topic is getting boring.

[kingm56 1,031]

1 minute ago, Ashatsea said:

I am not a programmer or very computer savvy. I use my rig to sim but also VPN and occasionally VDI (telecommute) into my work for my job.

1) In your opinion is there any risk of my PC being hijacked or the file in question being commandeered by a third party? I have had the FSL A320 installed for 2 months with no visible problems with my rig.

2) For clarification purposes is this a potential backdoor or vulnerability.

3) Should I uninstall this program until this is sorted out?

No to all 3; the argument here is FSL using 'non standard' practices, which some don't view as a good idea given their turbulent history.  However, your computer is not at risk from FSL; if you're currently enjoying FSL, you should keep enjoying it....

[RollingRock 22]

5 minutes ago, Skywolf said:

https://support.esellerate.net/528#win

Unlike on Macintosh, many of the eSellerate files for Windows are not required to be in a specific location on your hard drive. The developer of the application can install the eSellerate files anywhere on the machine, although there are some default locations that will be used unless the developer specifically chooses to install the files elsewhere.

That certainly begs the question why they chose windows system folders then.  Nice find.

[Holdit 551]

3 hours ago, Cactus521 said:

As a rule I prefer it when the add-on developers I like protect their products from piracy, otherwise they won't be in business for me to purchase their next add-on and there is nothing worse than to see some developer who has graced our community with quality add-ons go out of business

Perhaps, but we're not talking about general protections against piracy, we're talking about FSL-specific anti-piracy measures. A2A, PMDG, Orbx, Aerosoft, Just Flight and many other developers manage to stay in business with the standard approaches against piracy, so it's hardly a case of "install something...questionable...on the customers PC or go bust". 

[overspeed3 410]

I just realized something:  Everyone of us in this Forum who purchases and uses payware (or freeware)  has ticked "YES" in the permission box to abide by EULA:  You know, the God of Addons document. 

So, how 'bout the companies or individual designers give us full disclosure in future EULA's about what folders or files they have been, or will be additionally installing (perhaps surreptitiously) in our collective hard drives? 

Yeah, that could happen...         

 

 

 

[ms2 184]

7 hours ago, 188AHC said:

Move on.  There are much more serious things in life other than what a vendor does to protect his software.

Hello 1888HAC

No problem for me for protections of softwares, I buy always what I want and use, but in this case, do You think, it is a safety one ?... because haved the intention to buy it... 

[188AHC 2,138]

If I want the add on I would get it.  I have fairly robust protections on my system in case some nefarious code gets by.  But in this case I personally don't think there's anything to be concerned about. 

[DrumsArt 270]

I have the Concorde, the A320 also from Fsl because they are very good simulations made by very competent developers. That's what matters most to me. Sure Fsl has made some mistakes with the laudable aim of protecting their products. These clumsiness does not justify the torrent of insults uttered by a gang of hysterical and frustrated no life on the site where was published the problem. To tell you the truth, it shocks me more than Fsl's mistake.

The lack of moderation (speaking about insults) on this site is probably related to the ambient culture that reigns on FB.

Needless to say, I will continue to support and buy Fsl products as long as they are good and meet my expectations.

Regards,

 

[Greggy_D 936]

Mistakes?  Clumsiness?  Oh please, sir.

[DrumsArt 270]

13 minutes ago, Greggy_D said:

Mistakes?  Clumsiness?  Oh please, sir.

Yeap I persist and sign.How would you describe/name it ? A crime ?

Regards,

[kingm56 1,031]

2 minutes ago, Greggy_D said:

Mistakes?  Clumsiness?  Oh please, sir.

No, he likes the product so it must be supported and opposition should be swiftly moderated. While he's free to support the product for meeting his "expectations", the rest of us appear to be succumbing to today social media norms by voicing our legitimate concerns (I wonder he recognizes the irony). The only conclusion i can muster is some have higher expectations for flight sim companies than others?  That has a certain logic as this genera seems easily preyed upon (e.g. PSS/Blackbox and Airsimmer).  Any company should adhere to certain ethical practices, especially as they relate to customer relationships; this ideal should occur regardless of quality of products.  

Conversely to DrumArts' opinion, I'd like to thank AVSIM for allowing the discussion to progress unfettered; to my knowledge, opinions have been based on facts and free of overt suppositions.  Once the latter has been violated, I'm all for moderation; until that happens, I'd prefer the conversation continue....

[honanhal 1,420]

1 minute ago, DrumsArt said:

Yeap I persist and sign.How would you describe/name it ? A crime ?

Regards,

To me the point is that they don’t see it as “mistakes”, because they keep doing it. You’re implying their actions aren’t intentional, when all evidence indicates the opposite.