FSHost as a Service

[jonf]

Allowing FSHost to run as a service would be a great addition. There are times I am forced to perform a remote reboot on the server (I can do this from my cell phone) but can't login to restart applications until I get home. If FSHost could run as a service then that would allow it to come back online before the machine is logged in.

[PeterR]

Meanwhile, you could set up an auto-login on that machine and put FSHost in the Start Up folder. Not as nice as having it as a service but it'll work.

[jonf]

I've already got the apps in the startup folder but using an autologin is not an option.  These servers are all in a locked cage in a climate controlled computer room but if someone wanted to get in they could and we have very sensitive data on many of the machines so they must be locked at all times. An autologin would violate security contracts with some of our customers (NYC Autopsy Dept, NYS Bar Assoc, etc)

[CowBoyGuy]

Maybe you should get an old PC and host it seperately?
<ETHICAL_RANT>
While I agree we need service run host sessions, I'm concerned that you run this on machines that host information of this nature. With other threads looking at issues of cracking and overtaking sessions, this would be considered a major issue with any security group responsible for the servers. Are they aware you run this software on these hosts? I manage a data center with over 700 servers, and we have found inappropriate content on some of them. Inappropriate is a relative term, but the owners resources should not be used for other purposes without consent. *IF* something goes wrong, it could give a bad reputation to Flight Sim hosts, and have personal repercussions. If they are willing to allow you to run the software, consider adding an old PC (I'm sure some are on a scrap heap around there). I run mine on an old 196mhz pentium pro... Then you can auto login.
</ETHICAL_RANT>

Also, you may want to consider launching via the scheduler - I set that up because of some other issues with startup icons, and it works great.

[Russell Gilbert]

I believe some FSHost users are also running it as a service with FireDaemon.  It's not perfect, but it allows you to setup any program as a service, and have it started when the machine starts, rather than when logging in.

http://www.firedaemon.com/

Russell

[jonf]

Thanks! I'll take a look

[Russell Gilbert]

Some things to know about running FSHost with FireDaemon...

After you install FD, run the "FireDaemon Service Manager".  Then add a new service for FSHost.  On the Program tab, don't check "Console Application".  On the Settings tab, don't enter a "Logon Account", but do check "Interact with Desktop".  This will cause it to run as the system, and be visible after you login, so you can change the settings inside FSHost.  If you set it to run under a specific account, it grays-out the "Interact with Desktop" checkbox and when you run it, you won't see the window.  If you have to run it under a specific account, it is still running, just invisible, but you can still get to it via Remote Access.

One side effect of running it under the system account is that it stores its settings in a different part of the registry.  It'll probably be in:

HKEY_USERS\.DEFAULT\Software\FSHost\FSHost\Settings

rather than the usual place:

HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\FSHost\FSHost\Settings

The problem with this is that the first time you run it, it'll use all the default settings.  But you should see the FSHost window, so you can then go in and change everything how you want it.  But if you run it under a user account, it won't be visible, but it will use all of the settings you already have in the registry, since it'll use the normal registry location.

Russell

[Russell Gilbert]

And one more thing...

If you decide to export the settings from the normal place in the registry and import them into the system part of the registry, be sure you're using one of the latest 3.0 betas.  Otherwise the session comments, FSNav "allow" list, and banned words will all have funny characters in them for the carriage returns.  In 3.0b2 I changed those fields so they save to the registry differently, to make it easier to import them somewhere else.

Russell

[PeterR]

Jon,

I know this has been touched on already, but if the servers are that important, they shouldn't be running other stuff like FSHost. There's nothing necessarily wrong with FSHost but security is security and running as minimal of a system as possible to get the job done is one element of keeping it secure.

I second CowBoy's recommendation to run FSHost on a separate little machine whether or not FSHost can be run as a service.

[jonf]

My security concerns aren't from an internet hacker. I've got more than enough protection from that. My concern is someone physically accessing that machine from the keyboard. All PC's are locked and require an admin login and I'm not worried about someone figuring out our password at the terminal but I can't have a machine autologin after a reboot since it would require someone to lock it right after the reboot. It's really not that someone would actually try to do this but we have contracts that guarantee the machines will remain locked at all times unless an admin (me or one of my business partners) are physically present.

[CowBoyGuy]

... and do the contracts have limitations to non-customer related software? If not, they might as well keep them unlocked anyway....

[jonf]

This part of the contract is in regard to local network security access. The server running FSHost is a completely different machine but if the OS was unlocked then the other client machines would be accessible via the local network. If someone were to hack my FSHost server externally then they would be attacking that machine, not the machines under contract. We have no secondary user accounts for local access so if a machines OS is unlocked the the user will have full admin rights across the entire network.  We just can't have a machine unlocked and unattended which is what an auto-login would do. Personally I think it's all a little silly but we really needed those accounts so we agreed to their terms.

[PeterR]

Yep, I can understand having to abide by the business terms. I believe Cowboy and I share the same concern about the security of your network in general, that's all. Certainly, having FSHost as a service rather than having the computer set to auto-login is better.

[fstower.com]

 

What we have done is on XP PRO or win2000 server
is run it under an admin remote terminal session.
(terminal services)
You might want to study up on what that is if unfamiliar
with it.

This allows it to run completely in the background and there is no access to the session from the local console.

You can do this on XP pro or windows 2000.

We have hosted many large sessions over 20+ people
and have not needed any reboots in months.

The system is EXTREMELY stable.

Feel free to use our MP server at fstower.com

Use "fstower.com" as your multiplayer server when connecting.

It's always there and rock solid reliable.

And we just shared one of our greatest secrets in
the FS 'business' with you!

Enjoy!

Take care!

Steve

[luisma]

I'm running FShost as a service in a W2k server box using W2k Resource kit utilities instserv.exe and srvany.exe. Two great exe's to put any program as service.

I'm also running as service TS in the same way