>That's a good idea; at least it makes it harder. But anyone with your code can write a crack for it... Assuming you have a decompress function dc(), they just call dc() but then instead of executing the decompress code, they write it to disk... But at least it would make someone work a little harder than buying the existing package for decompilation. It really depends upon what you are trying to protect against...

The dc() about what you are talking patch a process loaded in memory. But do not simpe unpack the code, also is needed to order the bytes in the correct sequence. But there is two dc() functions with different passwords: one to decrypt and decompress the original password, and another one to decompress the original code. After that, is needed to order the code in the correct sequence and finally the loader patch the process in memory.

Sincerely,

Jorge Grundman
http://mp3.com/grundman