On Tue, 8 Jun 1999, Craig Schofield wrote:
>
> Take it from a shareware author who has implemented an equivalent scheme for a
> desktop app... It isn't worth it. The weak point in software that can be
> unlocked via a code is the code. Even if the application is un-hackable
> (probably impossible), it is simple to distribute the unlock code. If the
> application is un-hackable AND the unlock code is based on a hardware key, a
> competent hacker can trace through the code and reverse engineer the key
> algorithm. Alternately, the hacker can create a utility to modify the
> application in memory AFTER it is decrypted.
>
> The point is... implement a simple, semi-secure copy protection scheme... then
> don't lose any more sleep over it. Those who don't run in hacker circles will
> pay the shareware fee if it is good software at a reasonable price.
it is not possible to "fool" them forever.. they will find a way
to do it.. thats the sad thing.
they key is to be able to delay the time they take to crack it.
the ideal solution is to have a regcode system that takes as
long to crack as it does for you to make enough money from it
not to worry.
these hackers are quick.. current schemes are cracked in
under 1 month.. thats too quick for me.. i will be rethinking
my regcode generation techniques..
i believe a user has put a "hackme" challenge on PilotGearHQ,
and is selling his software for $39.95 or something..
dont believe it is totally un-crackable, but it is probably
saver to do "private" techniques.. so that they are not traceable.
someone can purchase this software (the hackme stuff), and see
the code.. and then know exactly where to look.
bad thing..
we all hope for good techniques.. getting them is the key,
and keeping them private is even more important.
cheers. just my 2c.
az.
--
Aaron Ardiri
Lecturer http://www.hig.se/~ardiri/
University-College i G�vle mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SE 801 76 G�vle SWEDEN
Tel: +46 26 64 87 38 Fax: +46 26 64 87 88
Mob: +46 70 352 8192 A/H: +46 26 10 16 11
