ts_block VS winget-cli

> Is there something inherently insecure about remote desktops, or is MS software here known to be particularly insecure...

Exposing RDP to the Internet directly has been frowned-upon because of the attack surface being presented, there's no two factor "story" out-of-the-box, and you're opened up to brute force attempts on cruddy user passwords.

Older versions of the Microsoft Remote Desktop Protocol had a much larger attack surface than current versions. The current versions with Network Level Authentication (starting in Windows Vista/Server 2008) present a smaller attacks surface. Older versions used "homegrown" Microsoft crypto, whereas current versions use TLS.

Disclosure: I made a FLOSS fail2ban-like tool for RDP many years ago[0]. I had a situation where I was forced to expose RDP to the Internet and I didn't like having it open w/o some protection against brute force attacks. This tool happens to still works in Server 2022 and will slow the velocity of brute force attacks. I still highly recommend not exposing RDP directly to the Internet anyway.

(The ts_block tool is missing some fairly essential functionality that I never got around to implementing. It works fine and is really easy to install but some things are sub-optimal.)

[0] https://github.com/EvanAnderson/ts_block

My old ts_block[0] project does something similar to yours, albeit for RDP only and with much less sophisticated customization.

I opted to go with a WMI Event Sink rather than polling the Event Log. I've never done a benchmark to see which architecture would use less CPU, but I can say the WMI event sink causes nearly instantaneous reaction.

As an aside: I'd love to hear if somebody tries ts_block on Windows Server 2022. It works fine on 2012 R2 thru 2019 but I've never tried it on 2022.

[0] https://github.com/EvanAnderson/ts_block

The perspectives in the comments on this article re: WiX XML source and Windows Installer being difficult are interesting to me. Like I said elsewhere, I overcame that learning curve so long ago that I can't put myself in a position where it seems daunting now.

To be fair, though, an MSI to install a 10 files in "C:\Program Files\AppName", register a couple .NET assemblies, create a couple of shortcuts, and throw a few values into the registry would amount to <100 lines of XML.

Here's a years-old WiX 2.0 syntax source file to install 4 files in "C:\Program Files\appname" and run an EXE embedded in the MSI to install a service: https://github.com/EvanAnderson/ts_block/blob/master/MSI/ts_...

I've only seen "thousands of lines" of WiX source when dealing programs that install a ton of files, or put scads of entries in the registry.

Most of the MSIs with WiX are based on a simple skeleton generated from a template, and using "includes" generated by the "candle" tool.

Understanding the Windows Installer and the WiX source feels analogous to what I see in "modern" web development-- a bunch of tools that developers use, seemingly without understanding what they do, to create a massive pile of edifice into which original code is finally placed.

GitHub

Source: https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli/issues/3832

You're correct here, and that's exactly the reason Winget is a package manager, as dependency management is part of teh stable release since version 1.6.3133:

Currently, I'm troubleshooting an annoying issue on my shared devices that it's a hell to delete. See this ticket: https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli/issues/3365

It's also on the official microsoft package manager (winget).

https://github.com/microsoft/winget-cli

Winget install