Debugging the DLL? In MT4 and MT5 - page 12
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I suggest, in that vein, we discuss chopping off one's own leg with an axe. I propose that we also discuss the blacksmith who forged such an axe, who does not care about the needs and aspirations of the woodsman.
And I suggest that instead of being sarcastic, we discuss the problem.
It's a nuisance to everyone. It's time for the developers to think about it. Chopping the bough they're sitting on...
Let's suppose the options - I understand there are plans to open account monitoring on the site soon. This can be used as a third independent party to resolve disputes..... Only monitoring, should be correct and thought out, and the company should be ready and willing to act as arbitrator...
Once again, who wants to find an opportunity...., and bicker with you, absolutely futile exercise, neither you nor I here do not decide anything, the decision is up to the developers ... want to protect traders, do not want not be ... I can only vote with my ruble, for this decision (to use or not this TA on the real).
As for the prohibition of dll, if it will 100% eliminate the possibility of hacking EAs (indicators, etc.) that will be for sale. That's good and great. It will give many people the opportunity to get a decent remuneration for their work. Time will show whether this is 100%. But if the prohibition prevents you from connecting the terminal for analysis, the same matlab, then it's bad ... then we need built-in tools to connect other programs, not made by homebrew ones, but created and tested by developers ...
Then if there are solutions on this subject for those suffering from compiler protection, why nevertheless issue with possibility of DLL debugging is solved negatively?
Need to clarify: The issue with the ability to debug a DLL using the built-in debugger is resolved negatively. No one has forbidden anyone to write and debug DLLs themselves.
Even at least two ways to do this were given on the first pages.
Have you considered creating a means to decompile code to protect against unscrupulous people? Sometimes it is necessary and important to look inside the code before you release it. In my opinion, this is the very thought of protecting the user, especially against viruses and trojans?
Sometimes you may indeed need to look into the code of DLL or EXE. There that can be viruses (but it's like they say, the problem of people using these resources, as well as the problem of his antivirus).
But why tell me, why do you need to try to get the source code (or something like that) from ex4/ex5? If only to see what's really going on there.
It all makes sense then and everything falls into place.
This is why we are concerned that the EX5 format is closed, so that an intruder does not have possibilities to learn the format and build a desired set of commands in EX5.
Now it is impossible to create malicious EX5 at the language level.
It depends on what you mean by maliciousness. And this is only if there is a ban on calling external DLLs.
But it is possible that there is some code that requires, for example, to download some data from the Internet, and it requires an external DLL.
This seems to me quite a realistic scenario - for example signals or something by subscription.
So before you run it, we need to see what the code does - and here we need decompiling. And it may be prohibited in the same way it is now done in the web. And then such a ban in itself speaks volumes.
Need to clarify: The issue with the ability to debug a DLL using the built-in debugger is resolved negatively. No one has forbidden anyone to write and debug DLLs themselves.
Even at least two ways to do this were given on the first pages.
Sometimes you may indeed need to look into the code of DLL or EXE. There that can be viruses (but it's how they say the problem of people using these resources, as well as the problem of his antivirus).
But why tell me, why do you need to try to get the source code (or something like that) from ex4/ex5? If only to see what is actually happening there.
Well, it all makes sense then, and everything falls into place.
Debugging DLL by built-in tools on the contrary is kind of possible. But I don't really need it.
But debugging with standard tools, e.g. Visual Studio. Not possible. And it is prohibited. What were you arguing about before? :)
And the use of third-party DLL will always be a risk for the user, here we can not guarantee safety.
Once again, the language environment will evolve, so it is realistic emergence of EX5 libraries (safe for users) allowing to receive data from the Internet, here you (the users) and should be persistent - to demand such tools from us.
And the use of third-party DLL will always be a risk for the user, here we can not guarantee safety.
If I look at the decompiled code, and see there just downloading from the Internet through WinInet.dll, it will not scare me, well, let them download.
Or as mentioned above matlab.
In a word, is it possible to reproduce in a closed environment what has been worked out by talented programmers around the world for decades. Of course not.
Judging by your posts, YOU have no idea of the opportunities that the developers provide to the dealing centre.
(I don't, and you shouldn't either).
Z.U. All secret, will become clear at some point. Whoever wants to, looks for opportunities, whoever does not want to, looks for reasons ...
And I propose not to sarcasm but to discuss the problem.
Lawlessness is a nuisance to everyone. It is time for developers to think about it. Chop the bough on which they sit...
Let's suppose the options - I understand there are plans to open account monitoring on the site soon. This can be used as a third independent party to resolve disputes..... Only monitoring, should be correct and thought out, and the company should be ready and willing to act as arbitrator...
Once again, who wants to find an opportunity...., and to argue with you, is absolutely futile, neither you nor I decide anything here, the decision is up to the developers ... want to protect traders, do not want not ... I can only vote with my ruble, for this decision (to use or not this TA on the real).
What do you do when you try to use this program?
Another thing is if the terminal wasn't developed by MQ, but by a bunch of enthusiasts (like some versions of Linux and its software) - then yes, the voting, polls, discussions...
About protection of traders` rights
And how many "traders" (real traders) do you know, that use MT4? I mean they are registered as traders in agreement with brokerage companies, it is specified what they do and so on.
How many of them pay taxes as traders?
We all know that the current mess in the Russian legislation (unfortunately) does not allow us to talk about any civilized market, moreover we cannot talk about protecting the rights of "traders".
As they say, SAVING THE DROWNERS is a matter for the drowning people. Why do not they (some would like to) take the initiative to the president, especially since he is an advanced one ...
On banning certain activities for DCs
Certainly, certain possibilities are embarrassing. But as I understand it, I hope that you do too, certain opportunities are present not so that VCs can fool "gullible" citizens, but for completely different things.
Prohibit brokerage companies - to create, modify and delete orders; to correct and close open positions
Ok, we have banned it. If the lamp goes out and I call my brokerage company with a request to close an open position, I will probably get an answer. They would probably answer me: "Sorry, we can not do it, because 100 (or even 1000) people asked MQ to prohibit it.
So answer me please - Why should I need such a PROTECTION of the rights of a trader? Why do I need such a terminal and such a brokerage house?
If youprohibit spread management - let us prohibit widening of spreads (just for fun). And spread may not be larger than 50 pips in 5 digits...
Ban on Locking - how could they attack the sacred, the very locks! :( Bring it back, bring it all back, otherwise the heavens will open and the Apocalypse will begin.
Then we're really screwed.
In short, let's do it, let's not fall for DC's dirty provocations and give back LOCKEY ...
PS
Let's also: bring back DDE; add OLE; add full support for WinAPI (what trading without it); publish ex5 specification; add support for Java and assembler (we can add even more); add possibility to create exe and dll with built-in language (no way without it).
And finally, to complete the PROTECT FOR TRADERS package, we will publish all sources of the trading complex and the specification of the network protocol (to the delight of competitors).
That's it, have not forgotten anything? Just in case...
And I suggest that instead of being sarcastic, we discuss the problem.
It's a nuisance to everyone. It's time for the developers to think about it. Chopping the bough they're sitting on...
Let's suppose the options - I understand there are plans to open account monitoring on the site soon. This can be used as a third independent party to resolve disputes..... Only monitoring, must be correct and thought out, and the company must be ready and willing to act as arbitrator...
Are you suggesting software developers act as arbitrators? How can you not be sarcastic here?
On what basis, with what authority will MQ do this? Who will give them that authority? And who will give them the tools to enforce arbitration decisions? Do they want it themselves?
Holy shit! It's time to start raising funds for MQ to build a prison where MQ staff will incarcerate unscrupulous DTs. Also, it's time to start fundraising, for the purpose of opening a madhouse.
My opinion, MQ should not act as an arbitrator or in general any kind of account monitoring showcase. There is a conflict of interest.
Once again, who wants to look for opportunities...., and to argue with you, is absolutely futile, neither you nor I decide anything here, the decision is up to the developers ... want to protect traders, do not want not ... I can only vote with my ruble, for this decision (to use or not this TA on the real).You are not looking for a solution. You're looking for someone to blame your own problems on.
You want to vote with your own money - as they say, vote, but do not shake hands on the forum that you are not solving the problems that you must solve yourself. When you find the terminal of your dreams, with arbitrage - let me know, at least in the middle of the night, I will come and see it.
Debugging the DLL with built-in tools is kind of possible. But I don't really need it.
But debugging with standard tools, e.g. Visual Studio. Not possible. And it is prohibited. What were you arguing about before? :)
It's hardly possible in the full sense of the word, or you wouldn't need a different solution. And I understood about VS, it was clear from the beginning.
Of course not built-in, but external (I was too busy writing it)...
Are you suggesting that software developers act as arbitrators? How can you not be sarcastic?
On what grounds, with what authority will MQ do this? Who will give them that authority? And also who and what tools will give them to implement arbitration decisions? Do they themselves want it?
It's time to start fundraising for MQ to build a prison where MQ staff will incarcerate unscrupulous DTs. It's also time to start fundraising to open an insane asylum.
In my opinion, MQ should not act as arbitrator or in general any kind of account monitoring showcase. There is a conflict of interest.
You are not looking for a solution. You're looking for someone to blame your own problems on.
You want to vote with your own money - as they say, vote, but do not bend your hands on the forum, that you are not solving the problems that you must solve yourself. When you find the terminal of your dreams, with arbitrage - let me know, at least in the middle of the night, I will come and see it.
What nonsense you are talking. That's crazy. According to your logic, the firm has released a product - it is a drug, cool everyone who wants it, sells it for 5 kopecks. Except for one thing, in large doses it's a drug. Wai wai how can you blame them, they are so good, it's all Putin's fault, there is no law saying firms are responsible for their products ... we were a sovk and will stay a sovk with this logic...
Z.I. I found the terminal, don't worry about me. I'm OK. You're the one with the problem because you can't see the forest for the trees...