I'm not well versed in this area, but it seems that the quote along the lines of "Whatever man can hide through obfuscation, another man can uncover with sufficient intelligence, knowledge, sweat, research, time, and a good beer."
(OK, I don't have the quote handy, but that was the gist of it.)
I can't think of any absolutely secure way of distributing code that can't be reverse engineered. Sure, if the author could come around and type in a password to decrypt it, and the machine was in a known state so that keystroke grabbers and image snatchers were known not to be present, that would be PDS [Pretty Damn Secure]. Short of that (and I'm sure someone will argue with even that concession), we're all just fooling ourselves, maybe occasionally buying time through indifference, the limited resources of interested folks, and the huge number of interesting projects for those interested folks to attack.
So what do you consider secure?
-QM
--
Quantum Mechanics: The dreams stuff is made of
In reply to Re^9: Perl 6 ... dead? (no, just convalescing)
by QM
in thread Perl 6 ... dead?
by hartwig
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |