Code obfuscation / decompilers?
josh at open.com
Mon Oct 9 05:16:12 CEST 2000
Sigh. Because it is not within my power to modify the form of the key. If
I was really trying to create an ideal system, I would start from scratch.
I'm not. I'm trying to create the "least sucky" solution, given the
constraints imposed on me.
This is the difference between real world coding and theory.
"Lokie" <anthony at lokie.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6D4E5.34334$Cl1.766003 at stones...
> Looking at this from a slightly different direction, and with the
> that any code designed to eventually be executed can be examined in at
> some form, leads me to conclude the solution is not to distribute the lock
> with the code.
> (*** Warning Here comes a wild tangent ***)
> Why not then make the unlock code and key one and the same?
> For example if I know the user name in advance I can use that for some
> simple (or as complex as you want) encryption/decryption of the key to
> unlock the application. And having that key as a Python code object which
> can then be exec'ed to perform the unlocking operations (maybe some
> redirection?) hides from your casual cracker the means to steal your hard
> Of course that doesn't solve the problem of "friends" sharing out keys and
> usernames, and casual code browsers gleaming some of your intellectual
> property, but as a means to protect a revenue stream may be the best way
> forwards in an interpreted language.
> Anthony McDonald
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
More information about the Python-list