"It turns out, due to a quirk in the design of the Java Runtime system
and
the relationship with its compilers, that Java code can be almost
entirely
reconstructed, including the actual names of variables used by the
original
programmer! The only things missing are the comments. This is an
amazing
oversight in the architecture of Java. Why is it this way? I don't
know. I'd
be interested in hearing more."
Yes...you're right. Bytecode is essentially reversible. However, note I
mentioned obfuscated bytecode. Obfuscation can make reverse engineering
impractical, if not impossible. I'm looking for the equivalent in Ruby.
Yes...you're right. Bytecode is essentially reversible. However, note I
mentioned obfuscated bytecode. Obfuscation can make reverse engineering
impractical, if not impossible. I'm looking for the equivalent in Ruby.
Don't use the exe converters that other persons mentioned. In a previous discussion
about this i posted a generic 5 lines crack patch for all of them. Use google to
search the comp.lang.ruby group for this patch and the discussion.
You must extend the ruby interpreter and change the internals of some
function names to do it. This will work, then use one of the
commerical copy protection systems like armadillo to protect the
source code from decryption.
···
--
Best regards, emailto: scholz at scriptolutions dot com
Lothar Scholz http://www.ruby-ide.com
CTO Scriptolutions Ruby, PHP, Python IDE 's
Don't use the exe converters that other persons mentioned. In a previous
discussion
about this i posted a generic 5 lines crack patch for all of them. Use
google to
search the comp.lang.ruby group for this patch and the discussion.
You must extend the ruby interpreter and change the internals of some
function names to do it. This will work, then use one of the
commerical copy protection systems like armadillo to protect the
source code from decryption.
So essentially, you're saying yes, it is possible, but man...not easy ;).
Wonder if this is a potential commercial product? I know my company would
be willing to pay for a supported option.
Lothar Scholz said:
> Don't use the exe converters that other persons mentioned. In a previous
> discussion
> about this i posted a generic 5 lines crack patch for all of them. Use
> google to
> search the comp.lang.ruby group for this patch and the discussion.
>
> You must extend the ruby interpreter and change the internals of some
> function names to do it. This will work, then use one of the
> commerical copy protection systems like armadillo to protect the
> source code from decryption.
So essentially, you're saying yes, it is possible, but man...not easy ;).
Wonder if this is a potential commercial product? I know my company would
be willing to pay for a supported option.
There is a ruby to c converter, native binaries are much harder to
decompile. It probably doesn't do 100% but you may be able to
obfuscate a significant portion of your code.
···
On 4/27/05, John Wells <lists@sourceillustrated.com> wrote:
Use a ruby to windows executable (i.e. tar2rubyscript[1] and
rubyscript2exe[2]) and then look into using some sort of executable
protection software on it (no recommendations, sorry). That may be a
fairly straightforward route to go for redistribiution.