Victor, I have seen you post this so many times over the years. I am asking whether there is a downloadable, point and shoot hack out there for Refox XI+. I have not heard of one myself and the only contender at one time was UnFoxAll which is no longer an option.

I am not asking if ReFox XI+ is hackable - everything is. At the end of the day even US$6000(?) Thinstall can be cracked by people with the motivation and skills to do it. Any language which uses intermediate code is a particularly "soft" target which includes .Net applications.


>>Hello Scott,
>>
>>iro Refox XI+, are you aware of a known, available hack against the latest version? i.e. yes, a hacker can hack anything given sufficient skill and motivation but is there an easily accesible automated hack?
>
>Yes there is. You have to hack the refox.exe & make a few changes - once you do that then you can run the tweaked refox.exe against a branded refox-protected vfp .exe and it no longer asks for the password.
>
>
>>>Reasons to change:
>>>1) Conditional support for Windows 7 with the older versions.
>>>2) Stay current with your tools.
>>>3) Help the Russians with your money.
>>>4) I working on a fourth reason.
>>>
>>>FWIW, I read on a hackers site that the "Ultra" version had already been cracked. At some point I'll be following up on this. I know older versions were hackable, albeit with some effort. In any event, everything is hackable so that's not a show stopper. Unsecured foxpro applications are incredibly easy to hack and refoxed versions aren't far behind. At least with Molebox (any version) the required skill level to hack increases by a magnitude, which makes the auditors happy.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Bonjour François,
>>>>
>>>>Is there a big difference between ordinary MoleBox and the Ultra version? Why should I get the Ultra one?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>I had problems with their latest "Ultra" version and reported the problem. Recently they emailed that there was a new build 4.2408 (download at http://www.molebox.com/MoleBoxSetup.exe ). I haven't tried it yet but plan to in the next few days.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thank you for the useful feedback. Here using 4.2244 with deep satisfaction. Tried the 4.2321 a couple of months ago that failed and resorted to older stuff.
>>>>>
>>>>>It just made a rough test with this new 4.2408 build that you mentioned. It worked but no full test suite at this moment!
>>>>>
>>>>>PS: For readers of this forum, do not be fooled. The software is robust. Just that the testing process is a bit weak. You just have to cope :)