On 11/4/12 4:03 PM, Alejandro Tejada wrote:
But, What is your personal conclusion
about the methods proposed to protect
stacks?
Safe or Not?
I think it depends on how paranoid you need to be. If we disregard
determined hackers who have infinite amounts of time, then I think it is
possible to reasonably lock down a standalone so that the content and
scripts can't be copied. Password-protecting the mainstack (and
substacks) will prevent anyone seeing the scripts, property values, and
other content if the stack is opened in a text editor. If all fields are
locked and have tranversalOn and auto-hiliting false, and if there is no
copy item in the menus, then field text cannot be copied and pasted into
another app. (It may be enough to simply not allow a "copy" menu item.)
Images or whole cards can always be reproduced with a screenshot and
there is no way to prevent that, but that is a universal problem for any
app.
If you want to protect a stack that isn't a standalone, then the
encryption idea should work, since only the mainstack knows how to
decrypt the stack. The stack could not be opened with a copy of
LiveCode. The stacks should also have all their fields and menus locked
down so that text can't be copied. If there is no "copy" menu item, then
objects and images couldn't be copied either.
Usually that's as safe as I need to be. Others may have different
requirements.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | [email protected]
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
