Re: Protection/Time Limiting my software

From: Ben Measures (saint_abroadremove_at_removehotmail.com)
Date: 03/06/04 

Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 13:10:19 +0000

pH wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 12:08:53 GMT, RoWsRaIrTiEo <non@esist.eeee> wrote:
>
>
>>On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 15:42:17 +0100, "ViKT0RY" <root@mirror.vikt0ry.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>The most secure one is to give a demo version and when somebody has paid
>>>send him the full version. Note that you shouldn't include the code for the
>>>things that are not part of the demo in the demo version.
>>
>>If the distribution is with cd-rom, and if your program is 300MB?
>>(someone would have slow Internet connection)
>>I think that if I want to protect a program
>>Use the demo like you say + a file.key.cpr with a key + a file.cpr
>>cryptographed that has the whole program.
>>
>>Demo program write in the file.key.cpr information on his system too.
>>
>>If someone want that program, pay, email his key and I send
>>new_key(file.key.cpr) [tuned for his system es: I have hear that the
>>cpus have a unique id. number] for decrypt his file.cpr and
>>to tune the program in the way that only one pc can run that program.
>>(is it possible to build a program that decrypts its .data on the fly
>>and jmp to it?) (yes for *.com)
>
>
> And if the user changed something in his system? No thanks. Speaking as
> a user, here, I would have to need your program reeeaallly really bad before
> I would go to *any* of that bother. My audio stuff is a hardware/software
> kind of thing (DSP card with it's own... "OS" of sorts, and a bunch of other
> stuff), and all its software is keyed to the hardware. Well :
>
> 1 - it was cracked (duh)
> 2 - no third party climbed aboard (or stayed aboard) because of this
> "nuclear strength protection" that was supposed to be so attractive to
> developers.
> 3 - it has caused a unique variety of problems for the users (now ain't that
> shocking...), and let me tell ya: this *** ain't cheap, and problems
> related to something so lame are *not* appreciated.
>
> Such energies are best spent elsewhere, imo.
>
> Jeff
>
> http://www.jefftturner.com

Agreed.

If you are to implement a copy-protection scheme, you need to make sure
you carefully weigh the introduced complications to your legal users
with the likelyhood of it being cracked.

Quite frankly once a copy-protection scheme has been cracked, it should
be abolished for everyone. Since the illegal users are able to use it
anyways (rendering the scheme ineffectual), why not eliminate
unnecessary trouble for your regular users? 

-- 
Ben M.
----------------
What are Software Patents for?
To protect the small enterprise from bigger companies.
What do Software Patents do?
In its current form, they protect only companies with
big legal departments as they:
a.) Patent everything no matter how general
b.) Sue everybody. Even if the patent can be argued
	invalid, small companies can ill-afford	the
	typical $500k cost of a law-suit (not to mention
	years of harassment).
Don't let them take away your right to program
whatever you like. Make a stand on Software Patents
before its too late.
Read about the ongoing battle at http://swpat.ffii.org/
----------------
Quantcast