Saving a standalone

[Scott Rossi]

>> You can only edit/save (non-standalone) stacks.  You can get close to
>> what you ask by keeping the bulk of your scripts in a stack and using a
>> small standalone engine to run the stack -- changes are save by the engine
>> to the stack.

> Doesn't that defeat the purpose of using a standalone?  Anything in
> the stack, can't it be opened etc. by anyone with Metacard?  The
> purpose of using a standalone besides convenience, is to protect the
> data, scripts, imports, etc. from anyone with prying eyes.  Yes you
> can script some protective things into a stack, but the whole purpose
> of having a standalone is for the extra protection it offers.

Actually, this is not the case.  As Andu mentioned, a standalone does not
guarantee protection, nor is the standalone format provided to enable
protection.  The password and cantModify properties are what should be used
for protection, and one might also consider base encoding, compression, etc.

In my own case, I've seen some UNIX folks take apart one of my standalones
with a binary editor and they could differentiate the engine from the stack
content, so I think it's safe to say that if you want to protect your
scripts, simply making a standalone is not the way to go.

Regards,

Scott Rossi
Creative Director

Tactile Media, Multimedia & Design
Email: scott at tactilemedia.com
Web: www.tactilemedia.com