No se maño, yo probaria esto:
a) Escribir los nombres de funcion en aleman.
b) Escribirlos en swajili.
c) Escribir las funciones en js/vb y emitir un eval() de ellas.
d) Usar hiew, o algun buen editor hacker para editar los nombres
directamente en el ejecutable.
e) Poner montones de funciones falsas con nombres atractivos, y las
verdaderas darles nombres que no llamen la atencion.
f) Escribir un mudulo (¿flex quizas?) que altere los nombres de funcion
por unos al azar(sin romper el codigo, claro).
g) Hacer tu codigo Open Source, es decir, si no puedes garantizar los
beneficios de hacer codigo privado, hazlo publico y te garantizaras sus
beneficios.
Yo, por rapidez, me decantaria por el editor hexadecimal, pero para un
profesional el modulo renombrador de funciones els lo mejor. Quizas se
pueda usar ademas para maquillar practicas de otros o te molestes en
hacerlo en BB y se pueda adaptar para que use el parseado para colorear la
syntaxis.
1 saludo
Tei
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001, Danforth, Douglas wrote:
//Greg,
//
//Ouch! Yes that does diminish one's desire
//to produce 'BlackBox' executables for
//commercial distribution. Sounds like an
//oversight to me.
//
//I also am in the process of constructing .exe files
//for distribution. I have argued to others that
//the strength of BlackBox resides in the degree
//of information hiding afforded:
//
//o creator: source, interface, code
//o developer: interface, code
//o user: code
//
//where each stage hides more information.
//If .exe exposes the interface then
//I can no longer make these arguments
//to potential customers.
//
//-Doug
//
//---
//Douglas G. Danforth, Ph.D. - Research Scientist
//QuikCAT.com 6700 Beta Drive, Suite 200, Mayfield Village, OH 44143-2335
//danforth{([at]})nowhere.xy//
//
//]-----Original Message-----
//]From: Greg Edwards [mailto:gedwards{([at]})nowhere.xy//]Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 11:12 PM
//]To: blackbox{([at]})nowhere.xy//]Subject: Scary: BB Source Code Names in Compiled EXE's
//]
//]
//]Has anyone else noticed that when you look inside an
//]executable compiled in
//]BB (by changing the program.exe name to program.txt) that you
//]can read all
//]of your function and module names? As someone who is producing
//]applications
//]to sell into a competitive world that is scary since it makes
//]it just that
//]much easier for someone to reproduce what you did.
//]
//]In C++ (or VC++) when you compile with Debug option on, you
//]can read all the
//]function names, but when you compile for production you can't see them.
//]
//]Can BB somehow have a "production" compile that changes all
//]the names into
//]numeric references or some other means so that our production
//]level .exe's
//]don't have the function names in them (this would also make the .exe's
//]smaller since all the text wouldn't need to be in there)?
//]
//]-Greg
//--------------------------------------------
//
//To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message containing the word "unsubscribe" to:
// blackbox-request{([at]})nowhere.xy//
//To get a list of valid e-mail commands and instructions on their usage, send a message containing the word "help" to the above address.
//
//Send any problem reports or questions related to this email list to the list owner at
// owner-blackbox{([at]})nowhere.xy//
--------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send a message containing the word "unsubscribe" to:
blackbox-request{([at]})nowhere.xy
To get a list of valid e-mail commands and instructions on their usage, send a message containing the word "help" to the above address.
Send any problem reports or questions related to this email list to the list owner at
owner-blackbox{([at]})nowhere.xy
Received on Wed May 02 2001 - 10:32:51 UTC