COM Callable Wrapper Strong Namer

[James]

I hae a .NET Assembly which will be used via COM by a Win32 application.
When I register it using RegAsm (with /codebase option) I am warned not to
use /codebase wiithout a strong named assembly because of a security risk.

I am wondering what security risks to which it is vulnerable above any other
registered COM object.

Thank you!

[TDC]

It's not worse than other COM objects, it's worse than the full
protection .NET assemblies offer that are digitally signed.

I hae a .NET Assembly which will be used via COM by a Win32 application.  
When I register it using RegAsm (with /codebase option) I am warned not to
use /codebase wiithout a strong named assembly because of a security risk.
I am wondering what security risks to which it is vulnerable above any other
registered COM object.
Thank you!
--
James

[James]

That's what I thought. Just making sure.
--
James

Post by TDC
It's not worse than other COM objects, it's worse than the full
protection .NET assemblies offer that are digitally signed.

Post by James
I hae a .NET Assembly which will be used via COM by a Win32 application.
When I register it using RegAsm (with /codebase option) I am warned not to
use /codebase wiithout a strong named assembly because of a security risk..
I am wondering what security risks to which it is vulnerable above any other
registered COM object.
Thank you!
--
James