Protecting the source code before compilation - page 7
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
You did not reply.
Unfortunately your encoder gives no advantage, the maximum advantage has already been given by the developers of mt4 and mt5 terminals.
+1
Although I would really like to see a really strong thing.
Excluded
Please note that this thread is not about hacking, but is instead about extra protection for developers and testing of the dynamic encryption algorithm.
Please note that this thread is not about hacks, but rather about additional protection for developers and testing of the dynamic encryption algorithm.
1) The function body is split into several parts (this requires analysis of the execution flow):
2) a global array ExecutePath is declared, which is initialised with some values
3) The body of our function is replaced by a loop with a switch from the ExecutePath array
4) result:
ExecutePath[]={ PART_3,PART_2,PART_1,PART_4, PART_N }; void func() { for(int i=0;;i++) { switch(ExecutePath[i]) { case PART_3: // выполняем часть 1 нашей функции ... case PART_N: // выполняем часть N нашей функции case PART_RET: // выполняем часть с кодом выхода из нашей функции } } }5) in addition to blocks, the original function generates blocks with code in the switch, the execution of which will never reachUnfortunately, it's not clear from the results of the obfuscated code whether or not you are using the following trick:
1) The function body is split into several parts (this requires analysis of the execution flow):
2) a global array ExecutePath is declared, which is initialised with some values
3) The body of our function is replaced by a loop with a switch from the ExecutePath array
4) result:
5) in addition to blocks, the original function generates blocks with code in the switch, the execution of which will never reach
Igor, good day!
All the necessary information, some examples of files, and direct links to primary sources were provided to MQL administrator Renat at the very beginning of this topic.
We don't plan to share our colleagues' grief with everyone who is curious, because the resource we mentioned is still full of freshly cracked products.
We respect our colleagues and will not contribute to illegal distribution of their products!
We also respect Metatrader terminal developers, we believe they do a lot to protect their code and provide all necessary information on their requests.
Please note that this thread is not about hacks, but on the contrary, it is about extra protection for developers and testing of the dynamic encryption algorithm.
Just to protect your products, you need to know the methods used by crackers. I am not asking you to share the methods that you found somewhere, but only what is already publicly available. You said the burglar acted in public. So this information is already on the net and you won't contribute to the dissemination of any secrets. Moreover, you already took the cracker's methods into account in your obfuscator.
As a result, if you shared the link, it would give weight to everything you are talking about here.
Interested specifically as a developer, not a hacker. I would never take the path of hacking someone else's software, because it is a destructive path. It leads in the opposite direction to development.
In order to protect your products, you need to know the methods used by crackers. I'm not asking you to share the methods that you found somewhere, but only those that are already publicly available. You said the burglar acted in public. So this information is already on the net and you won't contribute to the dissemination of any secrets. Moreover, you already took the cracker's methods into account in your obfuscator.
As a result, if you shared the link, it would lend weight to everything you are talking about here.
Igor, don't think I want to offend you, but we don't need weight, we do it also for our own practical use and are sure it will be useful for many developers.
We are not going to convince anyone of anything, we simply carry out the task set, no matter what anyone wants.
Intelligent people understand that to criticize such a solution is in the interest of those who will have to deal with it later - those who are on the other side of the "barricades", i.e. experts in "alien" cracking.
For our part, we will try to do our best to make them as "uncomfortable" as possible to break what does not belong to them :)
Igor, don't think that I want to offend you, but we don't need weight, we are doing this for our own practical use and we are sure that it will be useful for many developers.
We are not going to convince anyone of anything, we simply carry out the task at hand, no matter what anyone wants.
Intelligent people understand that to criticize such a solution is in the interest of those who will have to deal with it later - those who are on the other side of the "barricades", i.e. professionals of "alien" hacking.
For our part, we will try to do our best to make them as "uncomfortable" as possible to break what does not belong to them :)
I will never take the path of hacking someone else's software, because it is a destructive path. It leads in the opposite direction to development.
With what? I am a developer publishing on the market, how is it useful to me?
We also publish on the marketplace, but it is far from always appropriate to publish everything via the marketplace.
For example, we organise public open testing of our developments on the web, give out trials, and license specific accounts of users who cooperate with us before we publish the final products.
Or, for example, we create a product for a certain group of users.
These are not all cases where it is not appropriate to publish on the market.