>Does this mean we should let hackers have it easier with tools like ReFox?

Can I take this conversation back a step. What, exactly, are we trying to protect our code from?

As developers, there are two areas of concern. The first is people using our applications without paying for them--that is, installing someone else's copy of an application. Refox has nothing to do with that, so while I have things to say on the subject, I'll leave that for another day.

The second is people getting access to our source code. That's where Refox comes in. But who and why might someone do this:

1) A user of one of our applications wants to make changes. Yeah, we'd rather they come back to us for changes, but not a big deal.

2) Someone thinks our application is so great, they want to modify and market it. Is this really likely?

3) Another developer wants to learn how we did something. Do we care? If they asked, wouldn't we show them the code?

4) We've built something into our app to prevent people from sharing it (like hard-coding company name in reports) and someone wants to change that so they can use the code without paying. If someone is willing to go to this length to steal the app, is this person ever going to buy it legitimately? Not likely. So there's no lost sale here, just the annoyance of someone getting the fruit of our work without paying.

In the ultimate scheme of things, none of this is important enough for me to lose sleep over Refox.

Tamar