|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hi all
"
>> >If they are, it seems the only way to provide reasonable protection is
to
>> > write the code in another language and compile it and create a .dll to
be
>> > called from TS. Is that the case? "
if somebody could send me a DLL file , i would like to see if it is
crackable , i have some tools for decompiling.
Cheers
Cameron
-----Original Message-----
From: robert pisani [mailto:r.pisani@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 3:28 AM
To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Fwd: Re: cracking .ELS files
>
>
>Eduardo (or anyone who can shed some light on this) --
>>for sure his claims are correct.
>
>How do you know?
I just got the answer to this question:
Bill Brower sent him a 'protected' ELS file and he posted the
contents of that file - and Bill Brower verified the message it contained.
>>about your solution, I'm sorry to tell you that any dll is easy to be
>>patched as well.
>
>I'm not sure what you mean by "patched". To recover the source code from
>a .dll you have to go into the object code and figure out what it is
>doing. This is not a trivial task unless it is only doing something very
>simple.
>
>>If there is a $$$ incentive for didtributing your stuff, someone will
>>patch it.
>>
>>what they won't get is your program logic, as is the case with eld and
>>els files binary source protected (token ring).
>By "patching" do you mean "copying"?
>
>>Any application is also patchabe, no matter what you do, someone will do
it.
>>
>>that is why we are unfortunatelly seeing many services and indicators
>>being offered on web subscription only, but usually those applications
>>are very slow and lagging.
>>
>>sorry, but this is the reality, nothing is protected anymore!
>>
>>EJM
>>
>>
>>On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:46:13 -0600, robert pisani <r.pisani@xxxxxxx>
>>escreveu:
>>
>> > De: robert pisani <r.pisani@xxxxxxx>
>> > Data: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:46:13 -0600
>> > Para: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
>> > Assunto: cracking .ELS files
>> >
>> > According the viziblesoft.com, .ELS files can be used to reconstruct
the
>> > source code of a TS-"compiled" routine. Does anyone know if
viziblesoft's
>> > claims are correct?
>> > If they are, it seems the only way to provide reasonable protection is
to
>> > write the code in another language and compile it and create a .dll to
be
>> > called from TS. Is that the case?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
---
---
|