windows - Network address inaccessible if ran by the Task Scheduler -

-

i have c# program this:

directory.exists(@"\\pcname\somedir");

and prints whether path accessible (exists) or not.

this problem: run app via task scheduler right after log-in (auto-log-in user), using "on login" trigger, , returns false, although path is accessible! (i manage open path using explorer.exe few seconds before app starts). marked to:

run highest privileges

if run manually runs ok, when right click task , select "run" via task scheduler!

  • if deselect "run highest privileges", there no problem, must ran highest privileges (accesses registry , whole lot other stuff)

  • it runs under same user if run manually or automatically task scheduler - made sure using process explorer

  • it happens on machines (win8x64, admin-privileges-user no password, auto-log-in, workgroup machines, not domain), not on anothers (same: win8x64, admin-privileges-user no password, auto-log-in, workgroup machines, not domain).

  • even if insert thread.sleep(timespan.fromminutes(1)); or enter 1-min delay in task (in task scheduler) still says path not exist

problem solved. had "impersonate", although i’m not sure why: if use scheduler without restarting, accesses remote share – same settings, 1 one. after restart fails access share (and moment later, again – same settings, able access).

the difference in running after restart app-process’s parent services.exe , not explorer.exe usual. guess has log in after restart, must use services.exe (explorer.exe not supposed exist @ stage, if i'm not mistaken).

below solution in c#, roughly, whom may concern:

// logonuser "p/invoked" api: // http://www.pinvoke.net/default.aspx/advapi32/logonuser.html // solution works logon32_logon_new_credentials 4th parameter: using (var h = logonuser(username, domain, password,      logontype.logon32_logon_new_credentials,      logonprovider.logon32_provider_default)) {     using (var winimperson8ctx = windowsidentity.impersonate(h.dangerousgethandle())) {         return directory.exists(path); // works fine...         } }

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

c# - How Configure Devart dotConnect for SQLite Code First? -

-
can configure following sample code ? when run following code, error : no entity framework provider found ado.net provider invariant name 'devart.data.sqlite' setting in machine.config <system.data> <dbproviderfactories> <add name="dotconnect sqlite" invariant="devart.data.sqlite" description="devart dotconnect sqlite" type="devart.data.sqlite.sqliteproviderfactory, devart.data.sqlite, version=4.6.287.0, culture=neutral, publickeytoken=09af7300eec23701" /> </dbproviderfactories> </system.data> after add below block code in app.config <?xml version="1.0"?> <configuration>   <configsections> <!-- more information on entity framework configuration, visit http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=237468 --> <section name="entityframework" type="system.data.entity.internal.configfile.entityframeworksection, entit...
Read more

java - Copying object fields -

-
what best way of copying classes when need have 2 independent variables? have simple class: public class myclass { boolean = false; string b= "not empty"; } do need make method : assign(myclass data ) { a= data.a; b= data.b; } is there automatic method copy (duplicate) objects in java? do need make method : pretty close. instead of making method, should make constructor. such constructors called copy constructor , , create them this: myclass(myclass data) { = data.a; b = data.b; } and create copy of instance, use constructor this: myclass obj1 = new myclass(); myclass obj2 = new myclass(obj1); copy constructor can tedious : using copy constructor create deep-copy can tedious, when class has mutable fields. in case, assignment create copy of reference, , not object itself. have create copy of fields (if want deep copy). can go recursive. a better way create deep copy serialize , deserialize object. why not use clone()? ...
Read more

c++ - Clear the memory after returning a vector in a function -

-
i have function processes , stores lot of data in , returns results vector of class. amount of data stored in function tremendous , want clear storage memory of function after finished job. necessary (does function automatically clear memory) or should clear memory function? update: vector<customers> process(char* const *filename, vector<int> id) { vector<customers> list_of_customers; (perform actions) return list_of_customers; } variables defined locally within function automatically released @ end of function scope. destructors objects called, should free memory allocated objects (if objects coded correctly). example of such object std::vector . anything you've allocated new must have corresponding delete release storage. try avoid doing own allocation , use raii instead, i.e. containers or smart pointers.
Read more