but I'll take some precautions to lessen unnecessary sufferings.
By reacting like that, you're doing the exact opposite. Just IMAGINE that the botnet would have passed my antivirus protection, and my PC was infected to a point I could not talk here anymore. Just imagine the big "THANK YOU" echoing in my head, and how I would feel about your moral. Attack are real, and botnet are a real shit. You don't protect people by avoiding them to show the facts.
Politeness should never overpass common sense. I see that positive racism still reshape the politically correct everyday, even with all the precautions (I specifically said "don't take this as racism" and "this is not a definitive accusation"). I find dangerous to not be authorized to say that a [put a nation here] botnet attacked me (and no, that's not "normal") neither that a [put the same nation here] user, acting like a pro, try to underestimate the constant threat of the attacks, or that the origin of both the user and the bot converge and is a sign. Especially if the attacks are made on one of my DYNDNS addresses and not the basic :80 port, suggesting that
this is not a hasardous coincidence.
Moreover, I find very worrying to see an admin keeping the same speech than the aforementioned user, maybe based on a "de-escalation" psychological effect, and saying me that those error messages are "
normal" and "
benign". Sorry, but constant injections are dangerous, Python in HTTP-serving context is dangerous, windows error SOUNDS are not a good sign, and antivirus triggered and now alerting from a
botnet activity on my computer
is definitively a new step indicating that all the previous ones has paid off.
Don't considere that just because a forum user
"has a nice avatar",
"acts nicely", and
"have a lot of message", that would never be a foreign hacker hooked on a technology and having a main interest to wait and see victims coming in his "generous" hands. Scams, since the begining of humanity, always proceed on the basis of empathy. And if you add geopolitical knowledge to that (a country that I won't name, given that violence has such power that we are muted by hypocrisy), well you have an idea of what
CAN be (not what IS forcefully). If we can't talk and share our clues anymore, that's
more than ever dangerous. Paranoia has nothing to do with it (botnet + antivirus triggered).
If error messages + sounds + antivirus reaction + general escalation of alerts was normal, I think simply launching servers like CADDY or HFS would lead to such common patterns. However, I never experienced such things before. Finally, I considere that if the author of a script doesn't react normally and doesn't keep adding security (I asked him to add URL filters, as I suggested you to implement it in HFS v3), I find this very suspicious.
About HFS v3 and VHOSTThe vHost works like a charm. It's set on port 80 by default, so it's perfect for my use because I don't want additional port used in URLs.
Suggestions- We cannot move entries (up, down) with the mouse. It would have been cool, to sort things. For now if we're not satisfied after a few moment of what we have done, we have to delete the entries and recreate them.
- There's not EXE staying in the systray, like the V2. Now we launch a CLI, and that populates our taskbar, and I don't want that. I'm sure there's a workaround with softwares allowing to minimize any window in the systray, but the ideal would be to have a native solution.
- Popups hovering when we finished an action don't disappear by themselves. We have to click in the void around, and that may disturb people not used to.
- Network drives aren't detected if we don't launch HFS v3 in admin mode. That's normal with most of softwares, and know this since a long time ^^, but I suggest to put a line in the UI to inform users.
_______________
Now I want to say congratulations for this new version of HFS. The UI is amazing, there's many options. That's a damn good HTTP solution. The upgrade since v2 is stunning. Keep the good work !