From: Patrick Hurley <phurley@...>
Date: 2006-06-20T03:25:29+09:00
Subject: Re: ZenObfuscate - for when you really really have to ship a

On 6/19/06, Kris Leech <krisleech@interkonect.com> wrote:

> > But I could just rename the compiled so file, write a simple loader
> > that loads the .so and then do what ever I wanted.

> But would the code in the .so be modify-able?

I could write a routine that creates a thread, and call break point. I
could alias and breakpoint any routine I care about. So the .so is not
modified, but I can modify its code in place.

> What do you think to these programs like EXECrypter which adds
> anti-debug, encryptioned code and other anti-tamper/hack techniques.

They make things difficult, not impossible -- check out how long it
takes for games to hit Usenet after they are release. Most of these
are filled with all the best tricks.

> It looks like Ruby is mostly suited to the service based approach. And
> can not be distributed like compiled desktop applications.

I think it is a great tool for desktop applications, but the real
question is that of your business model. If you want to release code
that cannot be copied give it up. Secure things need to be on secure
servers -- everything else can be modified -- it is really just a
question of difficulty.

pth