MSI Packaging: Allowing Applications to AutoUpdate
As a packager, I was always taught that allowing applications to AUTOUPDATE was generally discouraged as it limited the control of the IT Desks to properly control the applications that are deployed to users desks
One of our 3rd party counter parties keeps pestering us about allowing this and our Application support team is willing to perhaps make an exception to the rule. Aside from the loss of deployment control (which the App support team accepts the responsibility for) is there anything else that might make this is a bad idea?
3 Comments
[ + ] Show comments
Answers (3)
Answer Summary:
Please log in to answer
Posted by:
Badger
10 years ago
what is the mechanism to the update??? It will involve your machines reaching out the their machines, or worse, their machines reaching into yours....
How would it be controlled, will it work if users are using the application???
Is there a backend?? could an upgrade mean a backend upgrade, who would be in charge of controlling when to upgrade the backend and heaven forbid, testing/implementing a roll back if needed???
Posted by:
MacDude
10 years ago
Posted by:
EdT
10 years ago
The most important issue is whether a standard (non-admin) user account has sufficient privileges to allow an update to be installed. If not, you are going to need to open up permissions in the file system and/or registry to allow standard users to autoupdate, and this creates a security issue. Alternatively, some vendors install an update service that has the rights to update the app, but technically drives a big hole in your desktop security that you have no control over.
So before you decide, find out exactly how the autoupdate mechanism operates and what the security issues might be if you allow autoupdate.
1. License Issue .
2. Uninstall or Upgradation issue. - rock_star 10 years ago
Besides, vendors don't have an exactly unblemished record in screwing up their deployments.
AVOID! AVOID! AVOID! - anonymous_9363 10 years ago