Protecting the source code before compilation - page 14
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
I did a little more poking around, but it's understandable that I haven't understood the logic of this indicator before, and I don't have it in the standard
Haken ashi, I could be wrong.
but the logic is clear
Great job Alexander!
I can say without a slightest irony that you are an experienced programmer!
Now I'd like to know your opinion:
Answer without guile, because all clever people understand that a compiled .ex4 file will be broken and analyzed. Could you do the same with the compiled .ex4 file in the native code with the same ease?
We would also appreciate your opinion on the appearance of encrypted code and implemented protections when we implement many of the planned features
...
Answer without being sly, because all clever people understand that they will break and analyse the compiled .ex4 file. Could you easily do the same with compiled .ex4 file in native code?
...
I'm holding my head with two hands (and two more feet)!
No one will analyze the compiled .ex4 file, they will decompile it first and only then analyze it.
Great job Alexander!
I can say with confidence, without the slightest irony, that you are an experienced programmer!
Now I'd like to know your opinion:
Answer without being sly, because all the smart people understand that a compiled .ex4 file will be broken and analyzed. Could you do the same with the compiled .ex4 file in native code with the same ease?
We would also appreciate your opinion on the appearance of the encrypted code and the implemented protections when we implement the many planned features
it is hard to say since i managed to get into old exeshec files only to peek at strings and parameters and find the source code (they are often found)
I have not dug into new ones, and am not interested)
Hello Pavel!
I see you're getting pinched by the locals in a big way.
Gentlemen, decompiling is becoming a common phenomenon.
There was a case recently on MQL5. A user has posted in freelance the decompiled indicator (where he got it history pass over) and asked to attach trading operations to it. The freelancers have not thought it through, and began to place requests. And lo and behold, you all get banned for 10 years :) https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/65273
Opinion of a highly respected programmer on this resource, and I quote,"Hacking ex4 is always possible. The only question is the cost of hacking"-naturally, I don't cite the source code because of ethical considerations.
Therefore, additional protection of valuable algorithm's source code (not the trash that 90% of current Marketplace consists of) is just necessary. In my opinion, to deny usefulness of what Pavel and his team are doing, is just obtuseness and stupidity (stupidity) as a result of their own inferiority.
To criticize (bespeak) any work is very easy. It's much harder to offer valuable ideas.
If you believe that the blog is useless for the mql-community, don't waste your nerves, move on.
Thanks to Pavel and his team for the work!
I wish success in all endeavors!
Thank you Alexey for your support of our project!
Indeed there are isolated cases of some misunderstanding among forum users due to lack of awareness and / or blind faith in their invincibility.
But it's not a problem for us, because we have users who are aware of the problems and actively participate in testing, for example, it's nice to see really good advice and recommendations from MQL staff, whose capabilities and experience, it should be noted, are much higher than the average forum users.
Alexey, we are implementing this task, regardless of the fact that someone may not like it for various reasons
I'm holding my head with two hands (and two feet as well)!
Nobody will analyse the compiled .ex4, they will decompile it first and only then analyse it.
It's hard to say, because I only dug into old executables to peek at strings and parameters and use them to find the source code.
I haven't dug into new ones, and am not interested)
Then I can assure you it will be quite "uncomfortable" even for decent money :)
You're weird, honestly, building a bike and not listening to those who ride bikes day in and day out.
You are killing time on something that has already been done by the developers themselves. The logic of any decompiled code can be decompiled, yes it may take time and effort, but if you want it is possible and it is not difficult.
In fact you are trying to protect the source code, but what is the point in this? What is the point of giving a human user encrypted source code if you can just give eh4?
What problem are you solving now and in the future? It's not like you can protect the eh4 file itself like third party services or marketplace encryptor do.
I get the feeling that the more they are trying to put you on the right track "Local dinosaurs" the more you become stubborn.
The more you try to take the path of the "Local Dinosaurs" the more stubborn you become.
Luckily the developer of that program got hurt, his program was also cracked (he didn't manage to make money on other people's work).
I am a trader and programmer who mostly trust Renat, and if he says that the level of protection of Ex4 and Ex5 is high, this means that it is tens or even hundreds of times cheaper to order a similar Expert Advisor in freelance than to pay someone you don't know for hacking that may not work. The sense of paying $2000-3000 for the hack if you can buy the Expert Advisor for 200-1000 ??????
I summarize and unsubscribe from the topic: As a trader, I don't see the need for such a software, what for do I need it, as a programmer, any source code can be made readable and its logic can be understood, so I don't need and have never sought out and never needed source code encryption, my programs were protected using DLL, and I gave it up after the last changes. And your encryption after compilation and decompilation may look more readable than author wrote it (exaggerating of course).
I would like you to think carefully whether you are investing your efforts in protecting the eX4 file or not.
There's still too much "cost" of protection, too much slowdown.
There's no protection there :) Just run the text through the styler and all the logic is out there. Now all that's left is to comment outobject creation and verification, and insert a new author, and recompile.
In the example the information block from the supposedly encrypted program from the first post is cut out.
There's no protection there :) It's enough to pass the text through the styler and all the logic is out there. Now all that's left is to comment outobject creation and verification, and insert a new author, and recompile.
In the example the information block from the supposedly encrypted program from the first post is cut out.
something the styler didn't work for me )
maybe i didn't set it right ))
but making it readable simplifies a lot