Protecting the source code before compilation - page 15
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
something about the stylizer didn't work for me )
NppAStyle plugin for Notepad++
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 him eh4?
What problem are you solving now and in the future ? You can't protect the eh4 file itself like third party services or marketplace encryption.
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.
Many local people demanded and poured into desk service with requests to increase the protection, which eventually happened. And fortunately the developer of that very program suffered from similar ones, his program was also hacked (he did not manage to get rich 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 encryption of source code. I protected my programs using DLL, but I gave it up after the last changes. And your encryption after compilation and decompilation may look more readable than the 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 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.
Yuri, thank you for your participation!
Please tell me please encrypted compiled file .ex4 you with the same ease run through a styler?
Or, like some others, think that you will have decompiled native source code for easy work with code?
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 does not mention) 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!
Best wishes for success in all your endeavours!
for especially gifted ones
write source code, compile, run it - central processing unit executes command 01
write source, encrypt, encrypt, three bags of nails in the same, and especially do not forget to say "crax pex fex", compile and run the exe-compile - the CPU executes the command 01
Tell me please, can you run an encrypted compiled .ex4 file through a styler with the same ease?
It's not about the compiled file, it's about the supposedly protected source code.
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and strategy testing
Source code protection before compilation
Pavel Izosimov, 2015.10.15 17:01
We are developinga softwaresolution that will help any code developers and their customers to protect their source code from unauthorized research, modification, renaming and resale.
It's not about the compiled file, it's about the supposedly protected source code.
Then you misunderstood the first post.
Excerpt:"Every skilled programmer can see by himself/herself from the given example that later compilation of such encrypted source code into the *.ex4 formatmakes it very hard to study and analyze".
As everybody knows compiled .ex4 files are used in terminals
It is about encrypting the source code before compilation to implement additional protection measures against investigating the logic in the compiled .ex4 files.
We could publish the results of encryption only in compiled .ex4 without .mq4, but then, most forum users would not know what's inside.
For this reason, all the clever tricks in notepads and editors that many people here demonstrate by editing our deliberately posted open source .mq4 code are inappropriate when working with compiled .ex4 files
for the very gifted
write source code, compile it, run it - CPU executes command 01
write source, encrypt, encrypt, three bags of nails in the same, and especially do not forget to say "crax pex fex", compile and run the exeşnik - CPU executes the command 01
Good afternoon!
It was said before that everything created by one person tends to be broken by another.
What you are describing is topical for releasing restrictions but it doesn't make it any easier to analyze and investigate the code to find out the nuances of the trading logic in order to steal its algorithm.
We suggested initiating a survey (as this is different for everyone):
What is more important to you?
1. Protect the logic embedded in the source code from scrutiny
2. Protect your code from cracking restrictions (use bytime,account number, etc.)
Then you misunderstood the first post.
Excerpt: "Every experienced programmer can see by himself or herself that recompiling such an encrypted source code into the *.ex4 format makes it extremely difficult to study and analyze it".
Several experienced programmers have already tried to convince you that you are lost.
As everybody knows, all the terminals use exactly compiled .ex4 files
Stably working only in MT4.
It is about encrypting the source code before compilation in order to implement additional protection measures against investigating the logic in compiled .ex4 files.
No matter how you decrypt after decompilation all the encryption will be reversed by the decompiler.
For this reason, all the smart tricks in notepads and editors, which many people here demonstrate while editing our deliberately posted public .mq4 code, are inappropriate when dealing with compiled .ex4 files
All these neat tricks can be used when working with the decompiler.
Sorry, I couldn't resist, I hope our argument will be useful to all readers ; - )
Several experienced programmers have already tried to convince you that you are lost.
Stable working only in MT4
No matter how you encrypt after decompilation all encryption will be twisted by the decompiler.
All these neat tricks can be used when working with the decompiler.
Sorry, I couldn't resist, I hope our argument will be useful to all readers ; - )