Crash when protecting and boxing dlls
Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 12:22 pm
Hello,
I have one problem and one question.
I am trying the demo version.
The program is VC++ 32 bit using Visual Studio and running (my computer) on Win 7.
1)
I am protecting one exe and two dlls with the protector with integrated virtual box option.
Except for the protected files I box about 20 addiotional dll and data files.
On run time, the exe loads the first dll and the first one loads the second dll.
Upon loading the second dll I get an exception.
But when I am protecting the exe and 2 dlls without boxing, everything works fine.
Furthermore, I can even box all the files (exe + 2 dlls + 20 additional) after the protection, with the stand alone virtual box, and it works fine.
Q: How can I solve the exception.
2)
As explained above there are two optional schemes:
a) protection and boxing at once (Protector with the integral virtual box)
b) first protecting and then stand alone boxing
Q: Is there any protection quality difference between the two methods ?
3)
I have noticed that with the two methods above I get different resulting file size.
The file that is protected with integral boxing is about 3 times larger than the
file that is first protected and then boxed with the stand alone virtual box.
In the printed event log of the protector I see that the boxing takes place three times, once for each protected file.
Q: Am I doing something wrong ?
Thanks,
Yoshke.
I have one problem and one question.
I am trying the demo version.
The program is VC++ 32 bit using Visual Studio and running (my computer) on Win 7.
1)
I am protecting one exe and two dlls with the protector with integrated virtual box option.
Except for the protected files I box about 20 addiotional dll and data files.
On run time, the exe loads the first dll and the first one loads the second dll.
Upon loading the second dll I get an exception.
But when I am protecting the exe and 2 dlls without boxing, everything works fine.
Furthermore, I can even box all the files (exe + 2 dlls + 20 additional) after the protection, with the stand alone virtual box, and it works fine.
Q: How can I solve the exception.
2)
As explained above there are two optional schemes:
a) protection and boxing at once (Protector with the integral virtual box)
b) first protecting and then stand alone boxing
Q: Is there any protection quality difference between the two methods ?
3)
I have noticed that with the two methods above I get different resulting file size.
The file that is protected with integral boxing is about 3 times larger than the
file that is first protected and then boxed with the stand alone virtual box.
In the printed event log of the protector I see that the boxing takes place three times, once for each protected file.
Q: Am I doing something wrong ?
Thanks,
Yoshke.