BorlandTalk.com Borland discussion newsgroups   Archives   FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in  req: please change implementation of "tRegistry"          BorlandTalk.com Forum Index -> Delphi Non-Technical View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message Arthur Hoornweg Guest Posted: Fri May 14, 2004 7:46 am    Post subject: req: please change implementation of "tRegistry" The standard access rights of the tRegistry class (key_all_access) are set too high, so that an "openkey" on HKLM fails on WinXP/Win2003, even for powerusers. It would be more appropriate to change the default value of fAccess to (key_write or key_read). Submitted as QC 8164 -- Arthur Hoornweg (please remove the ".net" from my e-mail address) Back to top Arthur Hoornweg Guest Posted: Fri May 14, 2004 10:48 am    Post subject: Re: please change implementation of "tRegistry" Craig van Nieuwkerk wrote: Quote: I think the TRegistry class is a fairly simple wrapper around the Registry API, so you can easily get around it in the meantime. Yes I can and will, but there's literally hundreds of modules I have to checkout. I'd rather not change the original VCL code and risk that future updates of D7 won't install. Moreover, I have the impression that Borland's "key_all_access" constant doesn't seem to match Microsoft's definition of it. Microsoft's definition (platform sdk, feb. 2003) is: KEY_ALL_ACCESS : Combination of KEY_QUERY_VALUE, KEY_ENUMERATE_SUB_KEYS, KEY_NOTIFY, KEY_CREATE_SUB_KEY, KEY_CREATE_LINK, and KEY_SET_VALUE access. Borland's version also includes write_owner,write_dac, read_control and _Delete which is stuff for changing ownership etcetera (who the heck needs that???) so a poweruser has insufficient rights to read HKLM. -- Arthur Hoornweg (please remove the ".net" from my e-mail address) Back to top Craig van Nieuwkerk Guest Posted: Fri May 14, 2004 3:16 pm    Post subject: Re: please change implementation of "tRegistry" I think the TRegistry class is a fairly simple wrapper around the Registry API, so you can easily get around it in the meantime. Quote: The standard access rights of the tRegistry class (key_all_access) are set too high, so that an "openkey" on HKLM fails on WinXP/Win2003, even for powerusers. It would be more appropriate to change the default value of fAccess to (key_write or key_read). Submitted as QC 8164 -- Arthur Hoornweg (please remove the ".net" from my e-mail address) Back to top Thomas J. Theobald Guest Posted: Fri May 14, 2004 3:16 pm    Post subject: Re: please change implementation of "tRegistry" Sounds like you should have made a few registry functions and isolated them, rather than copy the methods throughout the whole project... T Back to top Colin Wilson Guest Posted: Fri May 14, 2004 3:35 pm    Post subject: Re: req: please change implementation of "tRegistry" Arthur Hoornweg wrote: Quote: The standard access rights of the tRegistry class (key_all_access) are set too high, so that an "openkey" on HKLM fails on WinXP/Win2003, even for powerusers. Yes. It's annoying. But you can override this in the constructor, which takes an optional AccessRights parameter. eg. var reg : TRegistry; begin reg := TRegistry.Create (KEY_READ or KEY_WRITE); try reg.RootKey = HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE; if reg.OpenKey ('SoftwareBorland', False) then begin end finally reg.Free end end; -- Colin - using XanaNews HTTP Transport e-mail :colin (AT) wilsonc (DOT) demon.co.uk web: http://www.wilsonc.demon.co.uk/delphi.htm Posted with XanaNews 1.16.3.1 Back to top Steve Trefethen (Borland Guest Posted: Fri May 14, 2004 3:37 pm    Post subject: Re: please change implementation of "tRegistry" Arthur Hoornweg wrote: Quote: Yes I can and will, but there's literally hundreds of modules I have to checkout. I'd rather not change the original VCL code and risk that future updates of D7 won't install. Moreover, I have the impression that Borland's "key_all_access" constant doesn't seem to match Microsoft's definition of it. From winnt.h: #define KEY_ALL_ACCESS ((STANDARD_RIGHTS_ALL | KEY_QUERY_VALUE | KEY_SET_VALUE | KEY_CREATE_SUB_KEY | KEY_ENUMERATE_SUB_KEYS | KEY_NOTIFY | KEY_CREATE_LINK) & (~SYNCHRONIZE)) From Windows.pas KEY_ALL_ACCESS = (STANDARD_RIGHTS_ALL or KEY_QUERY_VALUE or KEY_SET_VALUE or KEY_CREATE_SUB_KEY or KEY_ENUMERATE_SUB_KEYS or KEY_NOTIFY or KEY_CREATE_LINK) and not SYNCHRONIZE; Looks the same to me. I'm not saying that TRegistry shouldn't change but it requires a bit more investigation than I have right now. So, please make sure this gets into QualityCentral ([url]http://qc.borland.com)[/url]. Btw, why is this in non-tech? Followup set to b.p.d.vcl.components.using.win32 Thanks -- -Steve Delphi.NET/C#Builder R&D Borland Software Corporation http://homepages.borland.com/strefethen Back to top Rick Francken Guest Posted: Fri May 14, 2004 7:48 pm    Post subject: Re: please change implementation of "tRegistry" Run Regedit. Got to the HKLM key and right-click on it. Select "Permissions..." to see if Power Users are included. If Power Users are included check if they have more than Read access. IIRC, these permissions are much tighter in XP and 2003 than in NT or 2000, so that by default only Administrator and System accounts have more than Read access. This is a change in the Operating System, not the TRegistry class. If you do not specifically grant Write permissions on the keys in HKLM for the User or Power User account, the program will not be able to write to that key. "Arthur Hoornweg" <arthur.hoornweg (AT) wanadoo (DOT) nl.net> wrote Quote: The standard access rights of the tRegistry class (key_all_access) are set too high, so that an "openkey" on HKLM fails on WinXP/Win2003, even for powerusers. It would be more appropriate to change the default value of fAccess to (key_write or key_read). Back to top Arthur Hoornweg Guest Posted: Mon May 17, 2004 6:34 am    Post subject: Re: please change implementation of "tRegistry" Thomas J. Theobald wrote: Quote: Sounds like you should have made a few registry functions and isolated them, rather than copy the methods throughout the whole project... But I did! Every project has classes that implement methods like: Procedure tmyclass.Openreg; Begin registry:=tregistry.create; registry.rootkey:=hkey_local_machine; registry.openkey(myApplicationkey,true); //myapplicationkey=Application specific constant end; Procedure tmyclass.Closereg; Begin registry.closekey; registry.free; end; .... but this doesn't change anything about the problem (having to check a LOT of units)... Besides, the handling of tregistry is so small, it doesn't really make sense to wrap this tiny VCL class into yet another tiny class... -- Arthur Hoornweg (please remove the ".net" from my e-mail address) Back to top Arthur Hoornweg Guest Posted: Mon May 17, 2004 6:43 am    Post subject: Re: please change implementation of "tRegistry" Rick Francken wrote: Quote: Run Regedit. Got to the HKLM key and right-click on it. Select "Permissions..." to see if Power Users are included. If Power Users are included check if they have more than Read access. IIRC, these permissions are much tighter in XP and 2003 than in NT or 2000, so that by default only Administrator and System accounts have more than Read access. This is a change in the Operating System, not the TRegistry class. I agree that it is (power users indeed have no write access under HKLM under my windows XP). Still I think it makes sense to change the default "key_all_access" because the "openkey" itself fails. -- Arthur Hoornweg (please remove the ".net" from my e-mail address) Back to top Rick Francken Guest Posted: Mon May 17, 2004 2:42 pm    Post subject: Re: please change implementation of "tRegistry" Quote: I agree that it is (power users indeed have no write access under HKLM under my windows XP). Still I think it makes sense to change the default "key_all_access" because the "openkey" itself fails. No. The RootKey by default is HKEY_CURRENT_USER, and KEY_ALL_ACCESS is consistent with that setting. If you explicitly change the RootKey to HKLM, you must also deal explicitly with access permissions, one way or the other. The reason "OpenKey" fails is because you pass CanCreate as true, and Creating a key is not permitted. If you are only reading from that key change this from: registry.openkey(myApplicationkey,true); to: registry.openkey(myApplicationkey,false); Or better still, call: registry.OpenKeyReadOnly(myApplicationKey); If you have to write to the key, it does not matter how you set the access, it will fail if the user does not have sufficient access according to the Windows operating system settings. You will either have to change the key location to HKEY_CURRENT_USER, or you will have to grant Full Access to Power Users for that key in HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE. Given that you have hundreds of modules coded the way you have coded them, it sounds like the best initial approach is to let your Installer program set the permission levels at install-time, as most installers can run with elevated privileges. Again, this has nothing to do with the TRegistry class. Good luck, -Rick Francken Back to top Colin Wilson Guest Posted: Thu May 20, 2004 11:15 pm    Post subject: Re: please change implementation of "tRegistry" Arthur Hoornweg wrote: Quote: Procedure tmyclass.Openreg; Begin registry:=tregistry.create; I still don't understand why you do this. Why not do... Quote: Procedure tmyclass.Openreg; Begin registry:=tregistry.create (KEY_READ or KEY_WRITE); ??? Then all your problems are solved - without any extra classes! -- Colin e-mail :colin (AT) wilsonc (DOT) demon.co.uk web: http://www.wilsonc.demon.co.uk/delphi.htm Posted with XanaNews 1.16.3.1 Back to top eshipman Guest Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 3:28 pm    Post subject: Re: please change implementation of "tRegistry" In article <xn0diirjb12ob6000 (AT) newsgroups (DOT) borland.com>, [email]colin (AT) wilsonc (DOT) demon.co.uk[/email] says... Quote: Arthur Hoornweg wrote: Procedure tmyclass.Openreg; Begin registry:=tregistry.create; I still don't understand why you do this. Why not do... Procedure tmyclass.Openreg; Begin registry:=tregistry.create (KEY_READ or KEY_WRITE); ??? Then all your problems are solved - without any extra classes! Speaking of registry mods, your TEXRegistry unit needed a little reworking to work with the new version 5 Regedit files. I will send you the mods... E. Back to top eshipman Guest Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 3:31 pm    Post subject: Re: please change implementation of "tRegistry" <SNIP> Quote: Speaking of registry mods, your TEXRegistry unit needed a little reworking to work with the new version 5 Regedit files. I will send you the mods... On another note Colin, please check out the post titled: "Funny thing about those reg files" in b.p.d.l.d.win32. It pertains to your usage of TFileStream to import reg files in your TExRegistry unit on XP. Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First         BorlandTalk.com Forum Index -> Delphi Non-Technical All times are GMT Page 1 of 1   Jump to: Select a forum C++ Builder Newsgroups----------------C++ BuilderC++ Builder (ActiveX)C++ Builder (Announcements)C++ Builder (Command Line Tools)C++ Builder DatabasesC++ Builder Databases (ADO)C++ Builder Databases (Desktop)C++ Builder Databases (InterBase Express)C++ Builder Databases (Multi-Tier)C++ Builder Databases (SQL Servers)C++ Builder (Graphics)C++ Builder (IDE)C++ Builder (Internet)C++ Builder (Internet Socket)C++ Builder (Internet Web)C++ Builder (Jobs)C++ Builder (Language)C++ Builder (Language C++)C++ Builder (Compatibility with MFC)C++ Builder (Native API)C++ Builder (Non-Technical)C++ Builder (Students)C++ Builder (Third Party Tools)C++ Builder (Upgrade)C++ Builder (VCL)C++ Builder (VCL Components Usage)C++ Builder (VCL Components Development)C++ Builder (VCL Usage)C++ Builder (WinAPI)C++ Builder Installation Delphi Newsgroups----------------Delphi (General)Delphi ActiveX Controls UsageDelphi ActiveX Controls DevelopmentDelphi As400Delphi DatabasesDelphi Databases (ADO)Delphi Databases (dbExpress)Delphi Databases (Desktop)Delphi Databases (InterBase Express)Delphi Databases (Multi-Tier)Delphi Databases (SQL Servers)Delphi DeploymentDelphi GraphicsDelphi IDEDelphi InternationalizationDelphi InternetDelphi Internet Isapi-WebBrokerDelphi Internet WebSnapDelphi Internet WinsockDelphi JobsDelphi Language BASMDelphi Language ObjectPascalDelphi Model Driven Architecture (General)Delphi Model Driven Architecture (Third Party)Delphi MultimediaDelphi Native APIDelphi Non-TechnicalDelphi ObjectPascalDelphi OLE AutomationDelphi OO designDelphi OpenToolsAPIDelphi Reporting-ChartingDelphi RTLDelphi StudentsDelphi TeamSourceDelphi Thirdparty ToolsDelphi Thirdparty Tools (General)Delphi Thirdparty Tools (IntraWeb)Delphi Thirdparty Tools (RaveReports)Delphi UpgradeDelphi VCLDelphi VCL ComponentsDelphi VCL Components UsingDelphi VCL Components WritingDelphi WebServices SOAPDelphi WinAPIDelphi XMLDelphi Installationcomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.misccomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.usagecomp.lang.pascal.delphi.components.writingcomp.lang.pascal.delphi.databasescomp.lang.pascal.delphi.misccomp.sources.delphi JBuilder Newsgroups----------------JBuilderJBuilder AnnouncementsJBuilder Applet IssuesJBuilder As400JBuilder CompilerJBuilder CORBA/RMIJBuilder DatabasesJBuilder DB SwingJBuilder DebuggerJBuilder DeploymentJBuilder DocumentationJBuilder EnterpriseJBuilder HandheldJBuilder IDEJBuilder JavaJBuilder JavaAPIJBuilder Java LanguageJBuilder Java SwingJBuilder Java BeansJBuilder Java Beans UsageJBuilder Java Beans DevelopmentJBuilder JBCLJBuilder JDataStoreJBuilder JobsJBuilder LinuxJBuilder MacintoshJBuilder & MobileSetJBuilder MultiLingual AppsJBuilder Non-TechnicalJBuilder OpenToolsJBuilder Servlets (JSP)JBuilder StudentsJBuilder Team DevelopmentJBuilder Thirdparty ToolsJBuilder UpgradeJBuilder Installation InterBase Newsgroups----------------InterBaseInterBase Bug DiscussionInterBase GeneralInterBase IBConsoleInterBase OpenSourceInterBase ReplicationInterBase SQLInterBase ThirdpartyInterBase Installation Miscellaneous Borland Newsgroups----------------AppCenterAppServerEnteraVisiBroker  You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group SEO toolkit © 2004-2006 webmedic.