How safe and feasable is it ?

[Bob Sneidar]

It would be better to just download the updated app, have a handler in the preOpenStack that quits the prior app, with user permission of course, then run the new stack normally. Replacing components gets dicey. 

It is feasible however if you design the app as a splash stack monistic first because the actual stacks in the apps are normal substacks that you *should* be able to replace at will. 

Bob S


> On Nov 7, 2014, at 15:33 , jbv at souslelogo.com wrote:
> 
> Hi list
> 
> Here's something I've had in mind for quite some time.
> Let's say you have an app built with LC that you send to
> various users as standalones with regular updates.
> What if all the most important functions of that app were
> gathered as handlers in the main stack script for instance, and
> at every startup, a script would check with a remote server
> for a possible update of that script, and dowload the new
> version (if any) to replace the old one with a simple
> "set script of this stack to myVar" ?
> The standalone could be a simple front end with all the
> most important objects, and therefore would weight slightly
> less than the complete app, and above all would need to
> be downloaded only once by end users who would not have
> to worry about versions and updates.
> At first glance this looks like a convenient way to update
> existing functions, add new ones, manage different settings
> among users, etc.
> But what about safety ? Is there a way to encrypt the main
> script while it is downloaded at startup so that it can't be
> caught by some sniffer ? And is there any other crucial
> security issue that didn't cross my mind ?
> 
> Thanks
> jbv
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode