I'm not quite as familiar with SUF as I am with AMS, so forgive me if this is a RTFM-type question. But I've noticed that there seems to be a problem when trying to decode Base64/Blowfish encrypted SUF installers.
I created a basic toolset in AMS to:

The 1st tool is used to encrypt the binary file.
The 2nd tool is used to decode and execute the encrypted output.
Seems to work AOK if I create a mockup installer with Inno Setup. (The attached apz files will demonstrate this). And it seems to work just fine with mockup installers created in other similar software suites.
But when I create the same mockup installer with SUF, I encounter a problem during the decode/execute phase. Whereby the following error is thrown:

So what's the problem, here? Do SUF-created installers have some kind of protective wrapping which prevents Base64/Blowfish encoding from being applied? I can't quite identify the source of the problem, here. Any insights?
I created a basic toolset in AMS to:
- i) encrypt a binary file (ie. setup.exe) to Base64/Blowfish encoded output.
- ii) decode and execute the encrypted output from AMS.


The 1st tool is used to encrypt the binary file.
The 2nd tool is used to decode and execute the encrypted output.
Seems to work AOK if I create a mockup installer with Inno Setup. (The attached apz files will demonstrate this). And it seems to work just fine with mockup installers created in other similar software suites.
But when I create the same mockup installer with SUF, I encounter a problem during the decode/execute phase. Whereby the following error is thrown:

So what's the problem, here? Do SUF-created installers have some kind of protective wrapping which prevents Base64/Blowfish encoding from being applied? I can't quite identify the source of the problem, here. Any insights?
Comment