>Hi Walter.
>
>At the end of the day the app needs to run in memory, unprotected. That is where your app is vulnerable to a whole host of attack vectors. Of course your comment about attacking Armadillo instead of the application directly - well why not? It's fair game to the cracker. They just want the code, or at least, to an understanding of how it works.
>
>The key imo to the discussion of copy protection is (a) what do you want to protect, (b) for how long, and (c) from who? If you want to stop frivolous copying and to provide some level of protection against all but knowledgable hackers then Armadillo, Konxise, etc, will do the trick.
Jos, in your reply to me (Message #
972952) you said
'Compiling with encryption on and debug off protects nothing.' But I think that if
you want to stop frivolous copying and to provide some level of protection against all but knowledgable hackers then compiling with encryption on and debug off is just as effective as using Armadillo, Konxise, etc.
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
