Leaderboard

There is a whole thread on LabVIEW and SSH. and one of the posts has your solution Cat is the expert on SSH now I will however reiterate that using a username and password, although exchanged securely, is a lot less desirable than private/public keys. The later makes it impossible to brute force. There is only one real weakness with SSH - verification. When you first exchange verification hashes you have to trust that the hash you receive from the server is actually from the server you think it is. You will probably have noticed that plink asked you about that when you first connected. You probably said "yeah, I trust it" but it is important to check the signature to make sure someone didn't intercept it and send you theirs instead. Once you hit OK, you won't be asked again until you clear the trusted servers' cache so that first time is hugely important for your secrecy.

There are undocumented, unsupported scripting APIs for the FPGA nodes located here: vi.lib\rvi\ClientSDK\Core\Script I have talked about this API a few times on the NI forums, as have others. You can google that vi.lib path to find some of the posts related to this topic.

I would like to mention the WireQueue system created by the WireFlow team. Shameless plug: here is the link https://www.wirequeue.com/ WireQueue has been presented already in this forum in this topic. WireQueue is a service for secure communication over the internet, specifically designed for targets running LabVIEW or LabVIEW RT from National Instruments.

I am pretty happy myself, that I decided to "help" in this topic, otherwise I would never find out, about PostLVUse.... making a deep copy of supplied data What on earth are those orange and yellow nodes? Are you refering to "run in any thread" and "run in UI thread" for the call library nodes ? If so, how does it relate to the "NI engineer" example? The only issue I see, is that you cannot use the global DLL variable for some session based app design, but it still doesn't explain the orange and yellow nodes.

Am I missing something here? In your example you allocate a handle each time you send an event but never deallocate it. And right below that you say that it's not necessary to copy the original data since PostLVEvent will create its own copy of the data!

So am I I haven't tried that yet but it shouldn't be a problem as long as your browser supports HTML5 and websockets

What's missing? Don't get too involved with this project. I'm currently rewriting it to get rid of the NI WebService and replace it with websockets. Should have an update out soon.

Here's news worth sharing: StarUML is not dead! http://staruml.io/download They're working on v2 (major new release). They've rolled out 12 beta versions since May 2014. G# plug-in tool seems to work brilliantly with it. I reverse engineered a LabVIEW project with 18 classes, and liked the result much better than what the GOOP Development Suite UML Modeller produced (though I didn't make effort to tweak UML Modeller's reverse engineering settings). Though the G# add-in helps produce code and reverse engineer, I sure wish it could sync with a project like GDS UML Modeller does. StarUML doesn't have good diagram clean-up utility -- it took me an hour to get all my wires uncrossed and classes neatly laid out. Then, after I modified the code, all I could do was reverse-engineer again then hand-arrange the UML all over again (only 30 minutes 2nd go-round since I had previously worked out a neat arrangement). I'm still dreaming of the day we have a professional tool like Enterprise Architect with tight linkage to LabVIEW, but for now it's encouraging to see StarUML being brought back to life; it's a useful tool with much lower barrier-to-entry than EA; great for casual users.

Personally I'm not interested in UML code generation. By the time your UML tool has enough information to create the code the way you want it you've essentially created a completely separate programming language. For me UML's main value is in the thought process I go through while creating the models. At the same time, it's not uncommon for me to discover an overlooked problem in my model while implementing it. I might miss that using automatic code generation. That said, I'm not a stickler for adhering to the UML standard as long as I can accurately convey my design intent. Supporting the diagrams I use and a good UI are more important to me that strict standard compliance. I use Enterprise Architect for my modelling and I have a hard time figuring out how to model certain things. Maybe it's because I'm still learning how to model correctly; maybe it's because UML doesn't support Labview ideas very well. I can't say for certain either way. (It's probably a combination of both.) As for StarUML, I like it lightness (and cheapness) for hobby or open source projects, but I certainly wouldn't base business critical processes on it. (As a matter of fact I'll probably use it for LapDog unless there is a compelling free alternative.)