06-06-2011 12:56 PM
@PaulG. wrote:
Nobody's code is "that good" ...
I always thought that passwords are primarily used to hide embarassingly bad code. 😄
06-06-2011 12:57 PM
I don't know how many times I've heard a similar story. I'll give you my standard response: if you need passwords you have a management problem. Not you, but the folks that run your organization. In a perfect world messing with someone else's code without authorization would be grounds for immediate termination. Nobody's code is "that good" and nobody should have to worry about needing a password on a VI unless you are making money from it. And it that were the case everyone would have the sense to remember the password or where the password is written down.
Passwords are for secret clubs and bank accounts.
Exactly Paul! In my previous jobs we didn't password protect the logic, granted it was PLCs and Panelviews not Labview. Anybody that had the right to work on it could and did work on it.
I'm still working on trying to figure the password out!
I really don't want to have to rewrite the code because it works great, I just want to add some logic to make troubleshooting the machine easier!
Seth
06-06-2011 01:19 PM
@setchmo wrote:
I really don't want to have to rewrite the code because it works great, I just want to add some logic to make troubleshooting the machine easier!
Seth
Depending on the vi and what logic you need to add maybe you can put the password protected vi in a wrapper vi. Are the inputs and outputs enough for what you need, that is, is the vi just a black box or do you really need to get inside of it? If you are talking about multiple vis you could create a wrapper for each. Ironically the better the code (or rather the interface) the more difficult this will be.
06-06-2011 01:41 PM
All I want to add is input and output lights: On or Off for each input and output. We can't open the enclosure with the PLC in it when they are running the machine and this would help the mechanical techs and the operator when the machine stalls. Does this make sense???
Seth
06-06-2011 01:49 PM
I think it makes sense. If there is enough information available on the inputs and/or outputs of the protected vi to turn lights on and off then you could put that vi in a wrapper. Make the wrapper have the same connector pane as the password protected vi and do a search and replace. Now add the code to turn on and off the lights in the wrapper. But again it all depends on if you have enough information on the connector pane or if you really need to get inside.
06-06-2011 01:57 PM - edited 06-06-2011 01:59 PM
There is one more extreme possibility that I just though of.
I remember a story about a guy who password protected his drive using full disk encryption. Had a nice long password based on a sentence and everything. He went on vacation to Europe for a month and returned with a nice clear mind ready to get back to work. Unfortunately his mind was a little too cleared out from the vacation and he couldn't remember the password. This was a huge deal as there was YEARS worth of stuff on that drive! It was his business computer and worth well over six figures a year (allowing him to take month-long European vacations).
He freaked. The more freaked out he got the harder it was to remember. He was in a full blown panic as this could have permanently altered his life by destroying his business.
The solution? He went to a hypnotherapist who was able to help him remember his password. So if you did know the password at one time and it is important enough you might want to consider this.
06-06-2011 03:10 PM
That's an amazing story. However, if I were to come up with a really long password for something that important I would at least write it down and put it in my safe. That's what "safes" are for.
06-06-2011 03:12 PM
06-06-2011 03:25 PM
I like the idea of using the decoder ring!!!!!!!!!!
06-06-2011 03:54 PM