Encrypted standalones

JJS jjs at krutt.org
Thu Apr 18 12:30:06 EDT 2019

If you use this sentence in the message box (which i got from another 
fine member here) the stack is encrypted, and when turned into an APK is 
well accepted by Google Play Store:


Op 18-4-2019 om 02:33 schreef Richard Gaskin via use-livecode:
> J. Landman Gay wrote:
> > Finally got to this. The password is saved in the standalone custom
> > property set, but when testing on a trial standalone it isn't actually
> > being used. So the answer is "no, you can't set a password on a mobile
> > app via the standalone builder."
> >
> > After thinking about this, I realized that since none of the three
> > major app stores will accept an encrypted app, that's why it's
> > disabled.
> That seems a strangely LiveCode-specific policy.  It would be cool if 
> Apple, Google, and Amazon were so impressed with LC that they felt the 
> need to write policies just for it, but I suspect I merely don't 
> understand.
> If the policy prohibits encrypting compiled machine code, I can 
> understand it.  All three use automated processes to review code for 
> inappropriate symbols, and encryption would thwart those good efforts.
> But LC standalones don't encrypt the engine, only the scripts. The 
> compiled machine code remains available for automated review, while 
> the it's just scripts that operate within the constraints imposed on 
> that engine sandbox that are protected. In that sense they're not much 
> different from tokenized bytecode used in many game engines.
> Unless this policy is oddly LiveCode-specific, I suspect you've 
> discovered a regression, one worth reporting.

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list