View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0005490SUMoBugpublic2019-05-27 22:08
Reporterwolf Assigned ToKyle_Katarn  
PrioritynormalSeverityminorReproducibilityalways
Status acknowledgedResolutionopen 
Product Version5.9.1 
Target VersionLong term 
Summary0005490: SUmo doesn't find the management consoles
DescriptionWhen enabling detection and reporting of Microsoft products in SUMo, it shall find also Microsoft products and third party add-ins i.e. for the Microsoft Management Console, introduced into Windows NT 4.0 in 1997 and all its successors. I couldn't see any such program detected although SUMo looks into standard locations where at least those manamgement consoles are installed as part of the operating system. They've the file extionsion .msc and also carry their version info.

A well known management console is the device manager of Windows which is useful for handling data reported by DUMo.

How may I configure SUMo to no longer ignore such Microsoft products?
Steps To ReproduceEnable Microsoft product detection and reporting in SUMo,
then redo a scan action in SUMo and
look for management consoles in the resulting SUMo report.

Version checking afterwards doesn't help neither.
Additional InformationCommon management consoles are:
device manager (devmgmt.msc),
defragmentation tool (dfrg.msc),
disk manager (diskmgmt.msc),
event viewer (eventvwr.msc),
group policy editor (gpedit.msc),
services (services.msc) and
Windows management instrumentation control (wmimgmt.msc)

Management consoles may be developed and distributed not only by Microsoft. Tool vendors and computer system integrators provide such management consoles too.
Tagsscan

Activities

Kyle_Katarn

2019-05-21 21:51

administrator   ~0003358

.msc files not supported as they do not hold version info.

OK to close ?

wolf

2019-05-22 14:12

reporter  

dev.mmc.info.20190522.png (130,946 bytes)   
dev.mmc.info.20190522.png (130,946 bytes)   

wolf

2019-05-22 14:12

reporter   ~0003362

That's not true and not ok. Microsoft has documented how to access the version info.

Microsoft calls these .msc files snap-ins (as a special form of extension of the [generic] management console). While it's true that this kind of files has no version information in the Windows Explorer view, this does not imply that it has no version info. Although the file devmgmt.msc has no version info displayed via details in Windows explorer, this same device manager reports currently version 10.0.17763 and being an extension to generic Management Console 3.0 version 1809 (Build 17763.503), see attached screenshots.

And here is the link of Microsoft documentation how to access this version info of these snap-in extensions of the generic management console:

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/windows/desktop/mmc/snapin-version

So according to this Microsoft documentation, version info may be empty. Usually it is not as seen in the reported and attached device manager sample.
dev.mmc.ver.20190522.png (31,643 bytes)   
dev.mmc.ver.20190522.png (31,643 bytes)   
mmc.ver.20190522.png (25,843 bytes)   
mmc.ver.20190522.png (25,843 bytes)   

Kyle_Katarn

2019-05-22 19:08

administrator   ~0003367

Yes but the ".msc" hold no information is the same format as .exe, .dll... specific version extraction code is required.

wolf

2019-05-22 22:23

reporter   ~0003373

SUMo reports not yet on file level but on its view of product level. These products may use different software technology for providing its functionalities. Samples of such technologies are Win32, .NET, .NET core, COM, DCOM, SOAP, Windows Apps, Web Apps, Management consoles, Admin center and so on.

Hence it seems to me the most appropriate to design the code for product version determination according to these technologies not to file types of their elements or components. The relation between those different abstraction levels is indirect.

As long as further grouping and abstraction is not yet implemented (as proposed by feature request https://www.kcsoftwares.com/bugs/view.php?id=5442), I recommend to postpone redesign of this relation. File based version determination blows up the resulting SUMo report even further. This is meaningful. But without further grouping and abstraction it will become difficult to use such a larger report (without the currently implemented consolidations and hidings).

Microsoft has documented version information types and variants for its different software technologies and uses various of them. Why shouldn't SUMo follow the same pattern according to the same determination scheme?

Version determination may change according to abstraction level. Reporting version of file level is addressing some power users. Without knowing the used technology and product association, update at file level may lead to loss of functionality and instability of products and system with strange side-effects. For some technologies, it works even if no corresponding product update is available by the product publisher without negative impact unless these file or component updates below product level are incompatible with its predecessor to be updated.

Issue https://www.kcsoftwares.com/bugs/view.php?id=5395 is already accepted handling such a case. And in SUMo forum for beta updates and undue reporting as well as in some other issues, several different version determination variants for various other products are already reported.

Look at Mozilla Firefox as an example too. It has its version information as reported by SUMo. I have some add-ins installed coming with their own version info. And I can't find these add-ins detected and reported by SUMo yet. Why?

So yes, .msc is another file type representing a different technology as .exe or .dll. So version determination has to be different in that case. As reported initially, the way of determining it in the same manner as for .exe or .dll will prove unreliable and inappropriate as the version info is found differently as documented by Microsoft. And indeed there exist at least a few open source products without any kind of version info regardless of their used technology.

Kyle_Katarn

2019-05-27 22:08

administrator   ~0003397

OK, good point. Batched on LT Roadmap

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2019-05-21 02:14 wolf New Issue
2019-05-21 02:14 wolf Tag Attached: scan
2019-05-21 21:51 Kyle_Katarn Assigned To => Kyle_Katarn
2019-05-21 21:51 Kyle_Katarn Status new => feedback
2019-05-21 21:51 Kyle_Katarn Note Added: 0003358
2019-05-22 14:12 wolf File Added: dev.mmc.info.20190522.png
2019-05-22 14:12 wolf File Added: dev.mmc.ver.20190522.png
2019-05-22 14:12 wolf File Added: mmc.ver.20190522.png
2019-05-22 14:12 wolf Note Added: 0003362
2019-05-22 19:08 Kyle_Katarn Note Added: 0003367
2019-05-22 22:23 wolf Note Added: 0003373
2019-05-27 22:08 Kyle_Katarn Status feedback => acknowledged
2019-05-27 22:08 Kyle_Katarn Target Version => Long term
2019-05-27 22:08 Kyle_Katarn Note Added: 0003397