DS2000A Upgrade Utility

[AndersAnd]

Download link
Mirror 1

Could you please replace these two direct download links with these two VirusTotal links instead:

Download link: https://www.virustotal.com/url/029ed60a28546c71f28bf314bfad4e397cab65c6c81020a05b4b7fe735a60b06/analysis/1396511367/

Mirror 1: https://www.virustotal.com/url/62a59092a4c65bff087f185176f6a3460925085de5cde1f9afdb0d58200608ce/analysis/1396511872/

Then you see a virus report before downloading and the file URL are at the top of the VirusTotal pages. And people can also add comments there discussing if there's any false positives or actual trojans/viruses.

You can add any file links here https://www.virustotal.com/#url and it will create a VirusTotal link instead with direct download links and virus reports.


Btw. if you want you can manually remove 'hu/' from the links before posting them to make them a bit shorter and if you don't want people to see you are from Hungary. So https://www.virustotal.com/hu/url/... becomes https://www.virustotal.com/url/...
When clicking the 'hu/' part will be automatically inserted or changed to another language depending on you location.

On 2nd thought actually I think this just scans the website links, but not the DL file itself. You have to enter a DL code to even get access to downloading the file. The scan was very quick and VirusTotal won't even scan files above 64 MB anyway, so I don't think it scans the file itself.

So I think you should just delete these VirusTotal links again as they just gives a false sense of security.

I have deleted my original post again.

[madcrow]

I took the package, stripped the uninstaller, the installation-helper executables, as well as the installers of all the prequisites.
I adapted its help file accordingly, repacked it az a ZIP archive and uploaded it as a "Portable edition" (see OP)
As expected, VirusTotal gives it a 100% clean rating. If that is not good enough for you I do not know what is.

So from now on, I'll consider the whole "trojan false alarm" thing closed.

[KedasProbe]

Thanks, I'm considering buying the DS2072A for the deep memory and the cheap 300Mhz BW. (as second scope)

[madcrow]

Thanks, I'm considering buying the DS2072A for the deep memory and the cheap 300Mhz BW. (as second scope)

If good after-sales support is important for you, I can only recommend Silcon Electronics.
The owner, Petr Smid is also an EEVBlog member under the nickname "Drieg". He has tremendous experience with Rigol DSOs, and he is very helpful.
Like many other EEVBlog members, I bought my DS2072a from him an have not regretted it.
BTW, they offer free shipping within the EU

[Rigby]

It doesn't need to be open source (because then other people can make bad versions)
Just find a way to make it not generate 'false positives' !!

That... doesn't make any sense.  Anyone can patch a binary or replace a binary in a closed source installer and turn a "good" version into a "bad" version.  Open source has nothing at all to do with that.

[KedasProbe]

It doesn't need to be open source (because then other people can make bad versions)
Just find a way to make it not generate 'false positives' !!

That... doesn't make any sense.  Anyone can patch a binary or replace a binary in a closed source installer and turn a "good" version into a "bad" version.  Open source has nothing at all to do with that.

Yes, you are right it still can be made bad, but I'm pretty sure it will be much easier to spot a bad one if there is only one good version.

[KedasProbe]

If good after-sales support is important for you, I can only recommend Silcon Electronics.
The owner, Petr Smid is also an EEVBlog member under the nickname "Drieg". He has tremendous experience with Rigol DSOs, and he is very helpful.
Like many other EEVBlog members, I bought my DS2072a from him an have not regretted it.
BTW, they offer free shipping within the EU

Thanks for the info.

edit: deleted, batronix isn't cheaper.

[Arkku]

Regarding open sourcing this, I personally feel strongly that open source is the only way for this kind of “hack” based on community effort (by the author's admission, the key functionality is the modified firmware and rigup). Open sourcing is giving back to the community, and it also means that once the original author is no longer interested in maintaining the utility, and the procedure changes, others can take up the work.

But of course here one can simply choose not to use the utility and do the modification manually, so no harm done as such, except maybe for potential burden of helpful people having to provide support for the utility in problem cases without knowing what's actually happening inside.

[Rigby]

Yes, you are right it still can be made bad, but I'm pretty sure it will be much easier to spot a bad one if there is only one good version.

Not really, not to me, anyway.  Give me the source so I can see it and compile it myself, ESPECIALLY if it's a C# app, and I'll be happiest.

Maybe (omg) I can contribute a fix or 10 back to the repository and improve it.  If I have to get it from GitHub then I know it's legit, binary or not.  I don't know if it's legit or not if it's from some silly free web filehosting crapsite like it is now.

[Mark_O]

Wow, what an enormous amount of pissing and moaning  about a tool someone spent their time on, for free, to try to help people out.

Way to say "thanks"!      

[/sarcasm]

[miguelvp]

Wow, what an enormous amount of pissing and moaning  about a tool someone spent their time on, for free, to try to help people out.

Way to say "thanks"!      

[/sarcasm]

Specially when the original source is available and linked on the monster thread.
Write your own people and make it open source if you feel so strong about it!
 

And as a bonus you have to look through the sniffing thread to find where the code is at! 

[Rigby]

Wow, what an enormous amount of pissing and moaning  about a tool someone spent their time on, for free, to try to help people out.

Way to say "thanks"!      

[/sarcasm]

i wasn't informed that thanks were required.  is this a new rule of yours?  i don't own a DS2000A so I'm not sure why I should be saying thanks.

[madcrow]

========UPDATE========
=====================

This afternoon, I ditched the "Advanced BAT to EXE Converter" tool along with my current install-helper executables, and recreated them using AutoHotKey. The upside is that AutoHotKey is a much more widely known and used scripting tool, and consequently, compiled AHK scripts are whitelisted by all major AV solutions.
I uploaded an all-new installer package (under the old link in the OP), built on the AHK install-scripts, which look an awful lot better in virusTotal:
VirusTotal analysis of dotNet451-x86-x64-silent-launcher-w-installation-detector.exe
VirusTotal analysis of bonjour-3.0.0.10-x86-x64-silent-w-installation-detector.exe
VirusTotal analysis of bonjour-3.0.0.10-x86-x64.exe
As you can see, all the "big players" (Symantec, McAfee, Kaspersky, Comodo, Malwarebytes, etc.) report them as safe.

@People, who already installed the previous release:
It is unnecessary for you to update to this one! The application itself is exactly the same as before  (this is why the version number is still 1.0.0.0). In fact, functionally, everything is the same. The only difference is that the installer-scripts are now written in a different language. The only reason I made this adjustment is to make the installer look more trustworthy for newcomers.

[madcrow]

Wow, what an enormous amount of pissing and moaning  about a tool someone spent their time on, for free, to try to help people out.

Specially when the original source is available and linked on the monster thread.
Write your own people and make it open source if you feel so strong about it!
 

Hey Mark_O and miguelvp

Thanks for the support. It's really nice to see there are some people out there who actually appreciate my effort

BTW, have you already tried the Utility?
If you are using a Win8.x OS and/or you chose the package with the built-in installer, it would be very useful for me if you could provide some feedback. (E.g.: Did the app complain about missing components after installation? Does it work and look OK under Win8?)

[madcrow]

Here is the source, binary and changelog of the updated "rigup" tool I am using in the Utility, in case any of the open-source fans are interested.

[Rigby]

Wow, what an enormous amount of pissing and moaning  about a tool someone spent their time on, for free, to try to help people out.

Specially when the original source is available and linked on the monster thread.
Write your own people and make it open source if you feel so strong about it!
 

Hey Mark_O and miguelvp

Thanks for the support. It's really nice to see there are some people out there who actually appreciate my effort

I don't understand why asking for source is complaining or even considered ungrateful.  I'm not an ass-kisser, if that what you mean by appreciation.

I already complimented you on your GUI skills and asked if you'd be interested in designing a GUI for me, but you turned me down.  We didn't even get to the "how much will you pay me" bit before you just said you were too busy.  That's fine, and I hope you understood that I would not be interested in your GUI skills if I didn't think they were really good...

Rigup source is available in a lot of places.  I'm a C# developer.  I wanted to see the entire solution and just see how someone else writes their code.

Sorry.  I won't ask again...  Clearly I've offended you deeply and apparently have cost you thousands of moneys in pain and suffering....

[miguelvp]

BTW, have you already tried the Utility?

No, I have the non A model and I don't need to change anything on it.

[madcrow]

I don't understand why asking for source is complaining or even considered ungrateful.  I'm not an ass-kisser, if that what you mean by appreciation.

Rigby,
I don't understand why you are assuming my comment was directed specifically at you... You were not the only one requesting the source, and also not nearly the loudest one among them. Plus I do remember and appreciate your compliment.
On the other hand, I admit, I was getting increasingly pissed off about receiving two full pages of comments, 80% of which was about moaning about things unrelated to the actual functionality of the application.

[madcrow]

About publishing the source:

I've wanted to provide a certain level of support for the software. And it would be very difficult to do if people started to create their own variants, and (inevitably) sharing them with others who might not even be aware they were using non-standard releases, consequently asking me to explain features / fix bugs that might not even exist in the main release. This is why I consider providing support and publishing the source mutually exclusive.

So I definitely do not want to make the SW open-source, at least not initially. But it doesn't mean I entirely discarded the idea.
In any of one of the following scenarios I will publish the source:

• A sufficient amount of time has passed without any contact from users (which means the SW can be considered stable and well documented, thus not needing my support anymore).
• I loose interest or for any other reason cannot keep up the support
• A bug is discovered, which I cannot fix due to lack of time or skills.

I believe this is a fair and reasonable approach, which is in everyone's best interest.

[Noircogi]

I tried to use this tool on my new DS2072A.

It could not detect the USB-connected scope at that step after loading the custom firmware.  Ultra-sigma worked fine.  I ended up just doing the upgrade manually.

My PC is running Windows 8.1 x64 and I tried multiple USB controllers/ports.  ultra-sigma could see the scope in every case.

[madcrow]

It could not detect the USB-connected scope at that step after loading the custom firmware.  Ultra-sigma worked fine.  I ended up just doing the upgrade manually.
My PC is running Windows 8.1 x64 and I tried multiple USB controllers/ports.  ultra-sigma could see the scope in every case.

Hey Noircogi,

Thanks for the feedback.

Off the top of my head, I can think of 3 possible reasons:

• You are using an old version of the NI VISA runtime (It has to be >=v5.4)
• The serial number of your DSO does not start with "DS2D" (in which case it gets filtered out in the discovery process)
• There is a bug in the SW which makes it incompatible with your config.

What you can do:

• Check if there is an error log (ErrorLog.txt) in "[Installation folder]\Temp\" and if there is, please send it to me.
• If you used the variant with the built-in installer, there should be a log (NiVisa.log) generated by the NI VISA installer in "[Installation folder]\Installers\". It might be a good idea to take a look at it. If it says there was a problem during installation, you should try reinstalling the VISA 5.4 drivers manually.

[ve7xen]

Portable version mirrored here, as usual: http://www.gotroot.ca/rigol/

Happy to host the full version, but these stupid download sites make me download it at home then upload it again, and after 100MB or so I gave up. If anyone wants me to bother, just ask.

[Rigby]

stupid download sites

They are stupid and I have no idea why people use them.  I inherently distrust software served from these places.  Legit software authors should know better.

• Amazon S3 (< $0.10/month for the traffic we'll create for a file this size.)
• Dropbox
• OneDrive
• Google Drive
• etc...

[Rutger]

I am thinking about getting a Rigol DS1074z, will this utility work for the DS1000Z series scopes?

Thanks for writing the Utility!

[Rigby]

No, but getting license keys for the DS1074Z is as easy as filling out a form.

This utility was generated because for this particular scope (the DS2000A series) it isn't so easy.  This utility automates a bit of that into a wizard.