• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: executable obfuscator?
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: executable obfuscator?


  • Subject: Re: executable obfuscator?
  • From: "Andy O'Meara" <email@hidden>
  • Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 07:30:09 -0500



I've been following this thread, and it seems reminiscent of premature optimization: a lot of work for an unknown benefit. I don't have any hard statistics to support my beliefs (and I don't know that anyone has hard numbers about revenues lost to hackers), but:

You don't have any hard numbers because if you did, you wouldn't be saying this. I'm guessing you also don't sell entertainment software that targets the musical/young/teen/hip community for $30--it's not like we sell and industrial app. If you did, you wouldn't be saying this. When our software checks for updates, we can get stats that lets us infer a lot of info.




- I'm not worried about people who hack software so they can use it for free. Those are a tiny percentage of users. A much, much bigger issue is the practice of posting serial numbers they've hacked on the web for anyone and everyone to use. That only requires one person who is able to hack your application and willing to post hacked serial number and then anyone who lacks integrity can use your product for free.


Our software, when it checks for updates, also grabs what we call a passive (encrypted) blacklist of SNs that are bad. This way, any compromised SNs usually get rejected. Also, this is a passive approach, so we're respecting user privacy. Our SNs.have the user's name baked into them, so when the software starts up, they see their name, keeping honest users honest.



- I'm inclined to believe that the majority of software being used without a valid license does not represent lost revenue. Many people who will use software for free wouldn't use it if they had to pay for it.


This is true in part, but not for everyone--and we have *tons* of hard data (that I don't wish to disclose). Do you think we do the extra work if our stats didn't support it? When I chat with shareware devs that sell to the same community that we do, the ones that aren't concerned about piracy are usually the same ones that don't have any mechanisms for collecting piracy rates of their software. The second that they have something in place, they usually become very concerned overnight (this is what happened to me years ago).

If you told me that you make your living from selling shareware to the community I mentioned above then I'd be more convinced, so please Larry--for once--just stop. For once, try listening more than lecturing.






_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden
  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: executable obfuscator?
      • From: Laurence Harris <email@hidden>
    • Re: executable obfuscator?
      • From: Mike Blaguszewski <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: executable obfuscator? (From: Greg Guerin <email@hidden>)
 >Re: executable obfuscator? (From: "Andy O'Meara" <email@hidden>)
 >Re: executable obfuscator? (From: leenoori <email@hidden>)
 >Re: executable obfuscator? (From: David Alger <email@hidden>)
 >Re: executable obfuscator? (From: Laurence Harris <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: executable obfuscator?
  • Next by Date: Xcode 2.4.1 problem
  • Previous by thread: Re: executable obfuscator?
  • Next by thread: Re: executable obfuscator?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread