>> I believe cfencode is the obfuscation of CF code and not the Java byte >> code. A file scrambler of sorts in an algorithm that the CF application >> understands. > > So I wonder what would happen if you cfencoded a set of cfm templates > and then cfcompiled them? I wonder if the resulting javabyte code be > even more difficult to revere engineer... Most likely cfcompile's > going to decode the templates before compiling them so I'd bet it's > really no better. > > Having said that, I think I would favor cfcompile over cfencode for > distributing applications since it's a longer path back to the CF > code, even if you can get the bytecode back into java source fairly > easily.
>From what I have read, cfencode is trivial to unencode back to CFML, which is not what I want here. I had found several websites discussing what Cameron said about the byte code and others talking about how easy it was to unecode a cfencoded template. I'm assuming during the encode process that a weak encryption algorithm is being used, and it's probably pretty easy to write a little utilty to figure that out. Interesting though about the idea to encode and then compile it - I wonder what the result would be. If I have time this weekend, I'll give it whirl. It's good to know that I don't need to worry about the path issue when deploying the resulting code. I'll be doing a test run this weekend. Thanks. ------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, manage your profile @ http://www.acfug.org?fa=login.edituserform For more info, see http://www.acfug.org/mailinglists Archive @ http://www.mail-archive.com/discussion%40acfug.org/ List hosted by http://www.fusionlink.com -------------------------------------------------------------
