Debugging the DLL? In MT4 and MT5 - page 3
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
That's if lamers did the protection, but in fact (with a competent approach to protection) it's 10 and 100 times more expensive (in terms of time and effort).
In a couple of weeks, right now...
On the web, there are already a pile of articles about how to substitute the certificate for the terminal; about how the network protocol is organized and how to exchange information with the server (without the terminal);
on every corner is information about API (at least "not for trading", but for information analysis); surely everyone knows what is stored in system exe and dll (and the main thing is how to work with it all).
And in conclusion we all have long been trading on our own terminals, and poor MQ and DC...
Don't make me laugh.
It's a simple task - to receive a list of news from the server that sends them to the terminal. I don't know how to use it, I will try to find a solution for MT4 (if you have experience of such cases, create a "news client").
The developers explicitly announced that there will be no debugging of the DLL and why. At least it's not logical to ask them to deliberately degrade their code encryption system, it would immediately lead to attempts to create a decompiler for ex5 (which was EXTREMELY stated).
But the method of hacking ex4 will not work here, because the language is totally different and its object stuffing will not be so easy to bend to the templates "hacking" ex4.
PS
You're right, it's better to talk about the hacking system to the pros who do it. However, I am afraid that they are unlikely to talk to us about it, because (I may be wrong) none of us is competent in this field...See, I'm not called to be a super expert. But I will give you for interest - there are such programs as IDA, there are debuggers of kernel level which can't be seen by any system, by definition.
There are even such special programs like ehe edit or something like that, they allow to dump process memory and if necessary even to restore there all sorts of data.
I'm telling you that the DLL debugging protection is taken over by a standard protection system which is sold commercially.
And there are probably 10 of these systems. Do you believe it's very complicated?
I don't understand your confidence that an experienced hacker can't remove the protection in a week? He will. Believe me. Well, even if you don't believe me, ask someone who's already taken some protection off. Let him tell you. Not me, him.
...................................
One more thing - I do not trust the company that developed the MT system. I'm not sure they don't leak the source code to them if they see the system is very interesting. I don't believe it. May I be paranoid. :))
So for example for me it's princial to put the code in a DLL. And they don't let me - that's another argument.
Yeah, MQ workers sit all day long and try to get the "newbie" GRAAL out of every ex4 and ex5. All the more so, they examine under a microscope every expert sent to the championship. All the more so, they replicate each expert who won a prize and sell it on every corner.
But somehow it seems to me that they are not engaged in it. Sometimes the honest name is more expensive than the possible profit.....
And now for the birds...
I did not believe in ex4 protection either, so I worked with DLL. I'll say more and now if necessary I will work (especially if it turns out that ex5 is hacked and can be easily decompiled). From the current point of view for example I don't really like that the classes and some other things are in a public format and are practically not protected in any way.
Regardingthe DLL - Now answer one simple question - what is easier, to break the protection of the terminal (or its individual module) or the protection of the DLL, which is in fact protected by an order of magnitude less?
Look, I'm not calling myself a super expert. But I will give you a tip for your interest - there are such programs as IDA, there are kernel-level debuggers, which cannot be seen by any system, by definition.
There are even special programs like ehe edit or something like that, they allow you to dump process memory and if you need even to restore there all sorts of data.
I'm telling you that the DLL debugging protection is taken over by a standard protection system which is sold commercially.
And there are probably 10 of these systems. Do you believe it's very complicated?
I recommend to write all calculations in MQL5 and not to bother yourself with DLL.
The speed of MQL5 is already high enough for complex and long calculations. We will finalize the optimizer (this will significantly speed it up) and publish reproducible performance tests with sources.
Our task is to bring the MQL5 language to a self-sufficient state, so that we won't have to worry about moving the code into DLL. DLL is more suitable for integration solutions.Yeah, MQ workers sit around all day trying to get the "newbie" GRAAL out of every ex4 and ex5. They are even more so when they look under the microscope at every expert sent to the championship. All the more so, they duplicate and sell every prize-winning expert on every corner.
But for some reason I don't think they are doing that. Sometimes a good name is worth more than the possible profits.....
And now for the birds...
I did not believe in ex4 protection either, so I worked with DLL. I'll say more and now I will work if necessary (especially if it turns out that ex5 is hacked and can be easily decompiled). From the current point of view for example I don't really like that the classes and some other things are in a public format and are practically not protected in any way.
Regardingthe DLL - Now answer one simple question - what is easier, to break the protection of the terminal (or its individual module) or the protection of the DLL, which is in fact protected by an order of magnitude less?
You probably do not understand that there are systems that really work great and with very good profit. And they will never be sent to any championships.
They earn 10 percent a month or even 10 percent at a catial of say 100,000 and that's not much, they earn 10,000 a month. How much does a programmer earn? How much does a director earn? :))
What's your name worth? Nothing is worth more than money. :)
As soon as they get their EAs for, say, 500 quid, they will crack them and sell them with their protection for 250. That's the whole science. You have to understand that you cannot protect programs. By definition.
Yes, I am aware of IDA, and I am aware of its capabilities. Just answer the final question of my previous post (not for me, for yourself) ....
You DON'T UNDERSTAND !!! :)) I don't need to protect ANYTHING at all - I either sell source code or work for myself.
I recommend to write all calculation things in MQL5 and not to bother with DLL.
The speed of MQL5 is already high enough for complex and time-consuming calculations. Let's bring the optimizer to a fine point (this will significantly speed up the calculations) and publish reproducible performance tests with source code.
Our task is to bring the MQL5 language to a self-sufficient state, so that we won't have to worry about moving the code into DLL. DLL is more suitable for integration solutions.Unfortunately for me this approach is not acceptable. I only trust the logic of the DLL. And all trading is of course not critical - and you can do anything you want. But the logic of the signal - "buy" or "sell". I will NEVER be able to put it in your code.
What should I do, do you think I am the only one?
What should I do, do you think I am the only one?
Unfortunately, I occasionally come across people who view the world solely from their own point of view and demand that others give up their rights.
Take a broader view, please. Reality rarely adjusts to the self.
Unfortunately, from time to time we meet people who view the world only from their own point of view and demand that others give up their rights.
Look wider, please. Reality rarely adapts to "I".
I've thought it over again, and it turns out that YOU ARE TRYING TO REMOVE such functionality as external DLLs from your product?
Who am I asking to give up their rights? Are you referring to yourself, as a company? Or those who want nobody to reassemble their code as binary?
That is, you began to position yourself EXCLUSIVELY as an environment for programmers who make software for trading?
If so, then forgive me for trying to change your mind, I was wrong, because for a programmer this is probably the most important thing. But for a trader it does not matter at all.
Unfortunately for me this approach is not acceptable. I only trust the logic of the DLL. And all trading is of course not critical - and you can do anything you want. But the logic of the signal - "buy" or "sell". I will NEVER be able to put it in your code.
What should I do, do you think I am the only one?
I can't understand your pathological fear of mql and the same pathological (fanatical) trust in the DLL.
If you are so convinced everyone that "everything" can be hacked, what's your reason for excluding DLL from the list of this "everything "?
In my opinion, the DLL is just as easy to break, hence the moral why invent a method to remove the tonsils through the anus.
Write everything in mql and no problem.