Re: [Dev-C++] Split code in public/private parts - Help please

[Per W. <pw...@ia...>]

If the program will only export a single algorithm() function, there are
no need to bother with changing names of all internal variables and
functions. It is - as I said in an earlier mail - enought to declare them
static. These symbols will then be hidden from the linker - no symbol
names to be found in the object - or library - file. It is enough to make
sure the object file is built without debugging information and that it is
stripped.

Anyway - are you sure that your algorithm are really so revolutionary that
you need to take the time to protect it? There are really a huge set of
available algorithms for performing routing, flow optimizations etc. The
biggest trick is to decide which algorithm to use. Then a large set of
these algorithms are available with free source code.

What I'm trying to say is that in most cases, it costs more to try and
protect code than what is to be gained. Unless really drastic measures are
taken, a competent hacker will most probably walk through your algorithm
in a very limited time. The question is: does he/she have a reason to?

/Per W

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, OROSZI Bal=E1zs wrote:

> Jean-Marc Godart wrote:
> > I thank you all for your advice/comments.
> >
> > You are right about my intents, Haakon. I am marketing a kinda complex
> > "mathematical" algorithm for planning trips/tours. Since this algorithm=
 has
> > to be interfaced by customers, once compiled, I want the source code of=
 the
> > algorithm to be "hidden" (as far as the customers don't try to do
> > decompilation or reverse engineering). I definitely do not want custome=
rs to
> > see what the algorithm does but also not the names of "private"
> > functions/variables, except for the main function (called "algorithm()"=
) and
> > its parameters, of course.
> >
> > Any additional advice/reference on this topic ? Also, if you have
> > ideas/references about how I can make decompilation and reverse enginee=
ring
> > more difficult, I would be very pleased to know them.
>
> Well, this is theoretically impossible. Nearly everything can be
> cracked/reverse engineered nowadays.
>
> However, you may try writing a small program that scans all of your
> source code, and then renames everything inside: variable, function
> names, except what you specify not to rename. Then you compile that.
> That way, you won't get lost in your sources, as you develop the
> "readable" version, but compile the "renamed" one.
> That may help some, though you will have to write a new program, the
> code parser/renamer.
>
> --
> Greetings,
>    Bal=E1zs
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Perforce Software.
> Perforce is the Fast Software Configuration Management System offering
> advanced branching capabilities and atomic changes on 50+ platforms.
> Free Eval! http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html
> _______________________________________________
> Dev-cpp-users mailing list
> Dev...@li...
> TO UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys/devcpp/ub.htm
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dev-cpp-users
>