There are several threads on SO that describe how to check which application creates a file with tools like Sysinternals process monitor. Is something like this possible programmatically from .net?
Background: My program has to remote-control a proprietary third party application using its automation interface, and one of the functions I need from this application has a bug where it creates a bunch of temporary files in %TEMP% that are called tmpXXXX.tmp (the same as .net's Path.GetTempFileName() does) but does not delete them. This causes the C drive to become full over time, eventually failing the application. I already filed a bug to the manufacturer, but we need a temporary workaround for the time being, so I thought of putting a FileSystemWatcher on %TEMP% that watches tmp*.tmp, collects these files, and after the operation on the third-party application finishes, deletes them. But this is risky as another application might also write files with the same file name pattern to %TEMP% so I only want to delete those created by NastyBuggyThirdPartyApplication.exe.
Is this anyhow possible?
This kind of things is possible, but maybe a bit tricky.
To know who created the file, look at the user that owns it. Therefore you might need to create a specific user, and that application will run under this specific user. In order to do that, you need to create a small application that will start your buggy app by impersonating another user, so anything done within the app will be under this user so as file creating...
I don't know how to monitor and get triggered when a file is created, but nothing can prevent you from setting a timer that wakes up every five or ten minutes, then checks if any file in the directory is owned by the application user and closed, so it deletes it.
Maybe if they react fast for this bug fixing, you won't need your app very long time. So another solution, if possible might just to change the Temp folder into another drive, which has lots of space...
One solution is that you use a FileWatcher to automatically delete all the files but before deleting you should check if the file is not currently locked or used by other process, for example the Sysinternal Suite has a tool called handle.exe that can do this. Use it from the command line:
handle.exe -a
You can invoke this from a c# program (there might be some performance issues though)
So what you would do is when a file is created you verify if it is in use or locked (for example u can use the code provided in Is there a way to check if a file is in use?) and then delete it.
Most of the time when an app is using a temp file it will lock it to prevent just what you fear, that you might delete files from other processes.
As far as I can tell there is no sure way to identify which process created a specific file.
Related
Searched a lot, but without luck - so here goes
My C# winforms application creates temp files which are opened using the default registered application (let's call them viewer apps). Once the user is done viewing those files, I want to delete them.
Currently, I register for an Application.ApplicationExit event, to delete the file. This approach covers most of the situations but not all. Sometimes the user still has the viewing application open while exiting my app, so the success of my File.Delete depends on whether the viewer has opened the file with FileShare.Delete or not - which is out of my control.
This is what I have found so far, but fall short of what I want
FileOptions.DeleteOnClose does not help, since my app will already be closed in some cases and the temp file will still be needed. Also, when I create the file like this: new FileStream(fn, FileMode.CreateNew, FileAccess.ReadWrite, FileShare.ReadWrite | FileShare.Delete, 4096, FileOptions.DeleteOnClose), the viewer apps like say adobe reader & notepad, still complain about file in use by my application The process cannot access the file because it is being used by another process
MoveFileEx with MOVEFILE_DELAY_UNTIL_REBOOT dwFlags works, but it would wait till a reboot to delete it - I would rather have it deleted once the use is done, since reboots can be few and far between and forcing reboots IMO is not the most user friendly approach. On a side note, does windows automatically clear the %temp% folder on restart? Or is there any temp folder that windows automatically clears on restart?
I can write another background process which constantly tries to delete the temp files till it succeeds, but I would like to avoid deploying one more piece of software to accomplish this. It can be done using a windows service or scheduled task or adding command line switches to my existing app and making it run in "delete mode" in background or through task scheduler. All of it decrease my ease of deployment and use along with increasing my footprint on client's computer
In a nutshell, I am wondering if there is any Win32 API or .NET Framework API that will delete a file as soon as there are no processes with open handle to that file?
EDIT:
The information in the temp files are reasonably private (think your downloaded bank account statements) and hence the need for immediate deletion after viewing as opposed to waiting for a reboot or app restart
Summary of all Answers and Comments
After doing some more experiments with inputs from Scott Chamberlain's answer, and other comments on this question, the best path seems to be to force the end users to close the viewer app before closing my application, if the viewer app disallows deletion (FileShare.Delete) of the temp file. The below factors played a role in the decision
The best option is FileOptions.DeleteOnClose, but this only works if all files open before or after this call use FileShare.Delete option to open the file.
Viewer apps can frequently open files without FileShare.Delete option.
Some viewers close the handle immediately after reading/displaying the file contents (like notepad), whereas some other apps (like Adobe Reader) retain such handle till the file is closed in the viewer
Keeping sensitive files on disk for any longer than required is definitely not a good way to proceed. So waiting till reboot should only be used as a fail-safe and not as the main strategy.
The costs of maintaining another process to do the temp file cleanup, far exceeds the slight user inconvenience when they are forced to "close" the viewer before proceeding further.
This answer is based on my comments in the question.
Try write the file without the delete, close the file, let the editor open the file, then open a new filestream as a read with DeleteOnClose with an empty body in the using section.
If that 2nd opening does not fail it will behave exactly like you wanted, it will delete the file as soon as there are no processes with open handle to that file. If the 2nd opening for the delete does fail you can use MoveFileEx as a fallback failsafe.
We have a python application that checks a directory(C:\sample\folder) every 5 seconds, there's also this external application(.net app) that puts file into that same directory (C:\sample\folder).
Will there be any conflict when the two application access the same folder at the same time (accidentally)?
Conflicts like :
the external app wont be able to place a file because the python app is currently walking through that same directory?
It should be fine for the external app to create and write to a file. If the Python app is reading a file, the .NET app may not be able to write to it while Python is reading it, without both processes opening the file in a shareable way, however.
Likewise if the Python app is going to start reading the newly-created file, it may either find that it can't do so until the .NET app has finished writing to it, or it may read incomplete data. Again, changes would quite possibly be required to both processes to allow reading at all.
It's worth thoroughly testing all the poosibilities you're concerned about, possibly involving the creation of a "fake" external app which writes to a file very slowly, but opening it in the same way that the real one does.
I have a service running on a webserver that waits for a zip to be dropped in a folder, extracts it, and then moves it to a certain directory. Since we want to replace the directory in question, it renames the existing folder (very large folder, takes a couple minutes to delete), then moves the extracted files in its place, then deletes the old folder. The problem is: when it tries to rename the existing folder, it gets 'Access to the path '<>' is denied.', I believe because the folder is in constant use by the webservice. Is there a way I can force the folder to rename, or take control and wait for it to not be in use? Or is there another way I can accomplish this goal?
You can't "force" a rename while any process holds an underlying operating system handle to the folder(it would be horrible if you were able to do that).
You can:
Implement pause/resume functionality for the webservice so it can be told to pause its work and release the handles, then resume after you are done.
or
Stop the webserice completely, do your work, then start the webservice
This question already has answers here:
Why does rename a loaded .net assembly work?
(3 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
We are trying to push updates to multiple servers at once and my manager has found that it is possible to rename running .exe file. Using that knowledge he wants to rename a running exe and copy over a new version of said exe such that anyone running their in memory copy of foo.exe are fine and anybody who opens a shortcut pointing to foo.exe will get a new copy with updates applied.
I guess I need to clarify, He doesn't expect the old copy to magically update, he just expects them to keep running the old copy until they open the exe again, in which case it will then open the new one that has the name of the old one.
It sometimes throws an exception that the file is in use on his program but if he tries renaming it in a loop it will eventually succeed. On my machine I have yet to be able to get it to work even in a loop.
My first and main question is this: Is it ever acceptable to do this. Should renaming a running executable ever be a valid scenario?
Secondly, if it is a valid scenario then how could one reliably do this? Our current thoughts are try a bunch of times using File.Move (C#) to do a rename and if it doesn't work then write out to an error log so it can be handled manually.
An airplane mechanic and a surgeon meet in a bar. The mechanic says "you know, we have basically the same job. We take broken stuff out and put new, better parts in." The surgeon says "yeah, but you don't have to keep the plane flying as you're making the repairs!"
Trying to update an application by moving files while the application is running seems about as dangerous as trying to fix an airplane in flight. Possible? Sure. Greatly increased risk of catestrophic crash? Yep.
If the application you are updating is a managed application, consider using ClickOnce Deployment. That way, the next time someone runs the application, if there is a new version available it will be copied down and installed automatically. That's much more safe and pleasant than trying to mess with an application while its still running.
No, this is not acceptable. Do not do this. This is not a valid deployment mechanism. This should have been yours or his first clue:
It sometimes throws an exception that the file is in use on his program but if he tries renaming it in a loop it will eventually succeed.
And it won't work, anyway. His theory is quite wrong:
Using that knowledge he wants to rename a running exe and copy over a new version of said exe such that anyone running their in memory copy of foo.exe are fine and anybody who opens a shortcut pointing to foo.exe will get a new copy with updates applied.
Specifically, the copy in memory will not be automatically replaced with the new executable just because it has the same name. The reason that you're allowed to rename the executable in the first place is because the operating system is not using the file name to find the application. The original executable will still be loaded, and it will remain loaded until you explicitly unload it and load the new, modified executable.
Notice how even modern web browsers like Chrome and Firefox with their super fancy automatic, in the background, no one ever notices that they exist, updaters still have to close and relaunch the application in order to apply the updates.
Don't worry about shooting the messenger here. It's more likely that your customers and your tech support department will shoot you first.
See number 1.
In our organization, we solved the problem of Updates by having two release folders say EXE_A and EXE_B. We also have a release folder called EXE which only has links ALL of which points to either to EXE_A or EXE_B from which the user runs the applications.
When we publish a new version of the program, we publish it to the folder that is not referenced in the links and then update the links (EXE). In this way, you do not get into exceptions that users are holding the application / assemblies. Also if a user wants to run the updated version, all he need to do is close / re-execute the link in EXE folder.
If you use Windows Vista/Server2k8 or newer you could use mklink to create a symbolic link to the folder containing your application and start the application out of the "symblic linked folder" and then at the update create a new folder, e.g. "AppV2" and change the SymLink to that folder, so the next time the user restarts the application he starts it out of the new folder without noticing.
Renaming open files is ALWAYS a bad choice!
But in general I would think of a better deployment strategy anyway, because if you need to use such "hacks" it is always a messy situation. I don't know your application, but maybee ClickOnce would be a point to start, because you can configure it to check for updates on every start...
Is there a reliable method to check if an application is run from somewhere beneath program files?
If the user installs the application to program files on local machine, we need to put writable files somewhere else to avoid virtualization on Vista and Win7. When installed to a network disk, though, we want to keep these files with the installation for shared access among users.
Today we do an string comparison between startup path and CSIDL_PROGRAM_FILES, but something tells me this is a very unreliable method.
Any smart solution out there?
Is there a 'IsRunningFromProtectedFolder( )'-api that I do not know about?
Are there any other folders giving the same problems as program files do?
This is not a terribly good idea, as a user can install it wherever they want to, and then the check might fail. Instead have a checkbox when the user installs the app, deciding if it is installed locally or on a server.
As you I also found problems dealing with UAC folder virtualization.I suggest a workaround, it seems that it should work.
It comes from the assumption that elevated processes always use original copies and not the virtualized ones (CMIIW). Also I assume that you setup processed was executed elevated
The idea is to create a "general" process (non-elevated, legacy), that your main installer should run. This process will create a file name in the user chosen folder with a name and contents that both your programs know (for example, test73819704.bin). If the folder virtualized, this file should appear in the user VirtualStore and SHOULD NOT in the original one (from the point of view and privileges of the installer).
So for chosen C:\Program_Files_But_Not_Necessarily and Process-1 (elevated)
Process-1 ensures there's no file C:\Program_Files_But_Not_Necessarily\test73819704.bin
It launches Process-2 with no elevation
Process-2 creates C:\Program_Files_But_Not_Necessarily\test73819704.bin and checks whether it really exists. If exists it would return with a good return code, otherwise with a "failed" one.
Process-1 waits for Process-2 and analize the result. If good, checks for C:\Program_Files_But_Not_Necessarily\test73819704.bin, if it exists, go for "Bingo! No virtualization occured", if doesn't exist, "Bad, let's find some other storage place". If the code from the Process-2 is "failed" one, show the user some error message.
Unfortunately I could not test it right now, but I guess it should work and there's a logic behind this, with Process-2 you just emulate the behavior of your main program )
We allow our users to install anywhere...
If the user has taken the default, and is installed in Program Files, we make the assumption that we need to write to Documents and Settings/Users. Otherwise, we write our data to a folder under the directory the software is in. This of course can still cause problems, and the install does indeed allow people to choose a different data location if they choose to not go for the default.
On top of that, it's a simple ini file change and a copy to move the data.
On start up we detect if we are in the Program Files directory by comparing the value we obtain from SHGetFolderPath(CSIDL_PROGRAM_FILES) with the start of the path the executable is in.