My old man vs LC Standalone

[J. Landman Gay]

That was my first thought too, password protecting the stack makes the 
scripts unreadable. The hacker would have to read the memory directly and 
I'm not sure what that would show, but I don't think it would be 
particularly organized.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jacque at hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On October 22, 2019 10:09:40 AM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode 
<use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> I'd be curious to know how well simply pass protecting the stacks does. 
> Given the "hacker" doesn't know the key that was used for the encryption, 
> it shouldn't be possible.
>
> Bob S
>
>
>> On Oct 22, 2019, at 07:46 , Tom Glod via use-livecode 
>> <use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>>
>> JB, of course thats true, its just a matter of how long it takes and how
>> skilled the cracker must be.  Its definitely not a reason not to try.
>>
>> Kee, that sounds like quite the scheme.... a self-destructing stack.  My
>> initial instinct is to create some trap using hashing also.
>>
>> Thanks. :)
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 11:03 PM kee nethery via use-livecode <
>> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>>
>>> My wife built a Hypercard stack standalone that was protected by a dongle.
>>> But, every call to the dongle was something you could search for in the
>>> scripts. So she had scripts that did hashes of the scripts that talked to
>>> the dongle. And she had scripts that did hashes of the scripts that checked
>>> the hashes of the scripts …
>>>
>>> Plus, she broke up the calculations into various sections of other code.
>>> When a script noticed stuff was being altered, it would start erasing stuff
>>> in the app stack. And it would look for Hypercard itself on their disk and
>>> start erasing stuff in it. It would hold on as long as possible doing as
>>> much damage as possible.
>>>
>>> Setting the code to do all this protection was a carefully scripted
>>> process because one false step and it would self destruct and damage her
>>> Hypercard. It was pretty obvious to me when that happened because the
>>> cursing would be rather loud and prolonged.
>>>
>>> She’d do things like add up all the chars in a script, do a modulo on that
>>> number, and then go to script ID <that answer> to execute a line of code in
>>> that script.
>>>
>>> I’m sure someone could have eventually gotten past all that stuff but
>>> don’t think anyone ever did.
>>>
>>> ------
>>>
>>> All that said, shareware authors would routinely hang out on crack sites
>>> and seconds before releasing their app, they would post a crack. No one
>>> wants to be the second person to crack an app so the author would be the
>>> only crack. That crack would allow someone to use the app for some period
>>> of time (months) and then it would develop some kind of error. Users would
>>> call in for support on XYZ error and the answer was, the more recent
>>> version fixes that. It’s a simple upgrade, here’s the URL for users with
>>> this error. And those folks would become paid users.
>>>
>>> Kee
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode