From: Ruby Maniac Date: 2007-09-29T04:50:03+09:00 Subject: Re: Feature request for RubyScript2Exe On Sep 25, 8:50 pm, John Joyce wrote: > On Sep 25, 2007, at 10:00 PM,RubyManiac wrote: > > > It would be nice if RubyScript2Exe was able to handle a passwordedZIP > > Lib rather than not. This way any code placed into the .EXE would be > > encrypted and this would be useful. Heck, I might even consider using > >Rubymore often even thoughRubyis rather slow. > > If you're really worried about it, write it in a compiled language or > just write hard to read code. > A password protectedzipwouldn't make software anyone can use would it? > > Protecting your source code is silly. Real, hardcore hackers can > decompile or recreate or hack what you make. > Real customers will pay if it is not free. Why? Because they can't > write it. Competitors can reverse engineer and they will. I have no problem with hard-core hackers decompiling my code. Give them enough code to decompile and they can spend days, weeks, months or years doing just that. Give them encrypted code and they can figure out how to break the encryption but this is one more step they must deal with before they get to see the source code. Another thing to consider is the fact that if you cannot prove you took steps to keep casual users away from your source code you cannot also claim later that your code was not released into the public domain even when such code had license agreements tied to it.