Saving a standalone

[J. Landman Gay]

On 6/27/02 7:02 PM, Shari wrote:
> 
> But if you are creating a standalone to distribute, a password is a bad 
> thing.  The objective is to create a program, to distribute, but have 
> whatever data you want "hidden" to remain that way even if someone tries 
> to get into it.  It is easier to "break into" a stack than a standalone, 
> at least in Hypercard.  So I'm assuming that MC is similar.

Nope. :)  When you password protect a stack in HyperCard, all access is 
denied to everybody; the stack (or at least the scripts, depending on 
what you've protected) won't open without the password. But even then, 
scripts are still visible in a text editor. But when you password 
protect a stack in MC, the scripts and all the "hidden" parts you 
describe are tokenized, i.e., scrambled. The stack is still usable by 
anybody, runs normally, looks the same, acts the same, you'd never know 
-- unless you try to look at the scripts. Within MC, access to scripts 
is simply denied with an error message. If you look at the stack in a 
text editor, all you see is the tokenized gobbledegook.

Password protection is just what you want. You as the author can enter 
the passkey phrase and the scripts are opened up for editing in MC. Your 
users, however, don't need a password to run the stack. It will run just 
fine and they'll never know.


-- 
Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     jacque at hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com