How do I make the warning go away that my app is unsafe to install when side loading?
Do I have to create a certificate? This app is never intended to be released in the Windows Store. I read on MSDN that there is a test certificate shipped with every VS project, so not sure why this warning exists.
How do I make the warning go away that my app is unsafe to install when side loading?
I think there is no way to make it go away.
Do I have to create a certificate?
Yes, otherwise it will fail when you package your UWP apps. And if the certificate is not installed on your device, your app cannot be installed in sideload mode.
so not sure why this warning exists.
Because our test certificate is not a microsoft trusted certificate, certification is used for recognizing the developer of this app, for sideload, we only need a self-trusted certificate or a business uniform pfx.
Update: Where to choose the certificate:
Related
I am trying to build my ios app in debug to test it i couldn't find a debug certificate so i used a development cert.
I got this in the build
The provided provisioning profile and certificate do not match. Please ensure that the provisioning profile you provide was generated using the certificate that you provide.
To skip validation, you may add the ios.validateProvisioningProfile=false build hint
Here is my actual configuration of certificates
I couldn't find any documentation about it.
Thanks in advance
I'm assuming you made these manually and didn't use the certificate wizard to make them. The P12 certificate information is also embedded into the provisioning profile so if you use a provisioning profile that was generated with a different certificate it just won't work.
You can enable that build hint in the build hints section if you want compilation to continue but it will probably just take longer to fail and will give a more obtuse answer.
A solution would be to use the certificate wizard and redo your certificates.
If you did this manually then redo everything. There are many nuances to making a P12 file and it's possible one of those was missed.
I write SL5 application. I signed with thawte code sign certificate. I set registery that allow run inside browser.
When I check haselevationpermission I got false. If I install certificate in trusted puplishers I got true.
But my application will be used by enduser and I can't tell them "install this certificate into Trusted publishers"
What is wrong?
Any advice?
You shouldn't have to tell them to install into Trusted publishers, as the root certificate should already be there for Thawte. Try installing on a different machine and see if you get the same results.
When installing OOB with a valid cert, the install dialogs will look different than with an invalid cert. Does it look like a valid cert, or not when you install? It should of course.
Also, make sure you check the "Require elevated trust when running outside the browser" checkbox in the OOB settings.
Greg
I tested it on 3 different machine (win 7 , Window server 2008 and windows 8)
In certificate Manager, Trusted publisher list is empty.
When I install OOB, Cert seems valid. (It shows Company Name as well)
I also check Require elevated trust when running outside the browser and in browser.
i have developed a winform application in VS 2010 using c#.
Created setup and now faced "publisher unknown" situation when starting the application.
Then came to know that need to sign the application with digital certificate. But i am so confused with creating the certificate. I saw that we can create self certificates using makecert,cert2spec tools.
While creating the certificate i got a link by googling that saying "If you use a test (self-created) certificate, the installation dialogs will display an "Unknown publisher" message".
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff699202.aspx
So actually what is the purpose of self certificate creation.
Pls help me to understand ths. I am new to this topic and correct me if have done anything wrong.
Thank You.
There's quite a good explanation on this page:
You can create your own signing certificate with Visual Studio (check
out the Signing tab, and that button that says “Create Test
Certificate”) or using a program called MakeCert. When you do this,
the trust dialog says the publisher is unknown. If you purchase a
certificate, the trust dialog will list your company as the publisher.
The certificate vendor basically guarantees that you are who you say
you are.
My company (GoldMail) uses ClickOnce to deploy our application from a
content delivery network to our customers, The Public. We did not want
our deployment to say “Unknown Publisher”; we wanted it to say
“Published by: GoldMail”. This gives our customers a warm cozy feeling
when installing our application from the internet, and provides
reassurance that it is coming from our company and not from some guy
living in the frozen tundra hacking deployments for fun.
If your application is going to be deployed internally, you might
choose to forego the cost of a purchased certificate, because people
would know where the application was coming from even if it didn’t
specify that on the installation dialogs. You can also choose to
install the test certificate on each user’s machine, and the trust
dialog will then show the name on the certificate as if it were one
purchased from a vendor.
You also might want to use a test certificate if you are deploying
your application for specific customers who know you and know the
application is coming from you, like if you are writing shareware, or
creating an application for your friends and family to use to keep
track of what you want for your birthday and Christmas.
Well, a Self Signed Certificate is the root certificate by which you can create child certificates, and those child certificates are authenticated against the self sign certificate, being self signed means that it holds its private key by which it was created.
For instance, when you want to use a certificate on a web site and also you want to have it verified by an authentication issuer, you ask an issuer like verisign in order to get a certificate. So when a user enters your site by https it will recognise that you own a certificate, and the way to verify that the certificate corresponds to your organization is by checking it against verisign certificate.
You can create self-signed certificates to emulate the production environment, what you will be doing is faking verisigns responsibility.
If a certificate is from a CA (e.g. GoDaddy, Verisign), does the certificate need to be installed on a client machine?
I have a SilverLight application that needs elevated privileges and will be installed on numerous client sites. I'm also trying to minimize the installation at each of the sites (100s of deployments per site with the application hosted locally at each site).
I believe the registry changes can be deployed via a group policy update.
If the certificate still needs to be deployed, is there a value of having a certificate from a CA over a self-signed application when the primary goal is minimizing local site administration?
Yes, if a certificate is from a CA, the certificate does need to be installed on the client machine. That said however, Microsoft does already install many root certificates as well as keeps this list up to date with Root Certificate updates. See the Root Certificate Membership List
GoDaddy and Verisign are currently apart of this list, so doing an extra step should be unnecessary on a computer which is up-to-date. This is not always the case, so it still might be required on some machines.
All that said, to run Silverlight in elevated privilege mode, the user must simply click that they 'trust' the application at install time. See MSDN Trusted Applications
Taking the time of getting a signature from a CA only buys your user's a bit of extra peace of mind when the click the button as
They will see this:
Instead of:
If the goal is minimizing local site administration, then I don't see that going through the trouble of getting a certificate to sign your application would meet that goal, its only there to help provide some security for your users, which doesn't sound like it would be an issue.
sorry for my bad english (and for the newbie question) - I have a silverlight 4 OOB application that requires Elevated Trust to run. The CheckAndDownloadUpdateAsync only works in this case if my xap is signed. There is a problem if I deploy my app using the "test certificate" that I can create on VisualStudio? The CheckAndDownloadUpdateAsync works fine and I prefer not do buy a certificate only for this... also, what will happen when the certificate expires? Would the user have to go to my page and explicitly update the app since it would be a new (renewed) certificate?
Also, what kind of certificate I would need to buy for this and what advantages do I have doing so?
You can deploy without any issues using the test certificate as you have done. The drawback of using a test certificate over one you purchase really is just what appears in the UAC dialog when the user installs the OOB application. With a test certificate, it tell the user that "unknown publisher" is trying to install software, whereas with a purchased certificate, your company name will show up. Depending on your user base this may or may not be important.
As for what happens when the certificate expires, you can renew the certificate and re-deploy your XAP. These renewal instructions should work (even though they are talking about ClickOnce and not silverlight, the same principles apply).