decompilation protection - 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
no protection
--
it's possible to make it more difficult - but still have executable code to break.
there are a lot of serious commercial programs - on the Internet there are a lot of crack codes
--
there's another way.
create a server - give the client a program that goes to your server for signals.
more control!
1. That's a very categorical answer...
(I think they create first what they break later)
2. The point is not to circumvent decomp (there are many ways, for example, not to distribute), but rather to understand how to fight.
I'm well aware that for any poison, there is an antidote...the question is how quickly
YuraZ писал(а) >>
no protection
--
it's possible to make it more difficult - but still have executable code to break.
There are a lot of serious commercial programs - on the Internet a lot of crack codes for them
--
there's another way.
create a server - give the client a program that goes to your server for signals.
more control!
Yep. Already offered))). And the signals do not have to be pure trading signals. You may open the very logic. But this, of course, is more exotic.
You can also twist it like this :-).
Metatrader has a smart protection - Themida or something...
Then everything will look like this: MetaTrader - Mql - Dll <-> Exe = application-server
Then this will be protection from quite peculiar pioneers
If you have a Faust-gun of Ilda Pro type, not even every pro will dive into assembler.
1. That's a very categorical answer...
(In my opinion, first they create what they break later).
2. The point is not to bypass decomp (there are many ways, e.g. not to distribute), but rather to understand how to fight.
I comprehend perfectly well that for any poison there will be an antidote... the question is how quickly
you ask the problem you've probably created something - now you want to sell it
- you ask for advice, you get answers.
--
Yes, that's a categorical answer, because having an executable code
with some plug that checks the owner's rights if you want to.
--
1 give me an example of widespread software!
that doesn't have a broken protection.
2 the speed depends on the degree of demand for what's broken
there won't be any other criteria - see point 1 - there is no answer.
--
how quickly it's broken depends on the demand for it
--
perhaps the best way is the server - then the client goes to the server and gets the signals
and the server is under your control.
the client can even give you the source code - the hedgehog that will access the server
and here's the password to the server! If it gives out
you'll immediately see parallel requests from different addresses
1 give me an example of widespread software!
who has an unbroken defence
2 the speed depends on the degree of demand for what is broken
other criteria are unlikely - see point 1 - there is no answer
No, I'm not arguing... it's just that software comes out first and then (of course) gets broken later.
And the more complicated, the later...the more necessary, the earlier.
You can of course go the way of making things harder for the crackers, but sometimes the solutions are in the simple. This is just my opinion...
No no, I'm not arguing...it's just that first the software comes out, and then (of course) they break it later.
And the more complicated, the later...the more necessary, the earlier.
You can of course go the way of making things harder for the crackers, but sometimes the solutions are in the simple. This is just my opinion...
I finished above...
--
I think the server solution is the best protection at the moment.
the server is where all the logic is.
the client only has the password to the case! and the source code which just copies the signals to his account
---
again!!! there is nothing you can do if the client just keeps broadcasting your
PERFECT SIGNALS! ( of your product ) i.e. won't give out the password to your server
but just broadcast them
--
for example by simply copying to other accounts with an ordinary copier.
or handing out the password to the investor
---
well there is no protection !!! no
make it hard through DLL's and anything else you can get away from the boys with the fauspatrons
you can't get away from the pros.
--
the easiest thing to get away from is simple deal copying!
Write a stackable virtual machine in mql4 without code and data separation and different command lengths (i.e. transfer the problem of x86 code decompilation to EA code). Nothing difficult, though, you'll probably have to write a small compiler capable of generating code for the implemented virtual machine (at the same time adding rubbish, changing logic, etc.). This would be much cooler than a bunch of non-obvious mql4 code (which still needs to be invented).
I finished above...
--
I think the server solution is the best protection at the moment.
the server is where all the logic is.
the customer has only a password to the case! and a source code that simply copies the signals to his account
---
again!!! there is nothing you can do if the client will just keep broadcasting yours
PERFECT SIGNALS! ( of your product ) i.e. won't give out the password to your server
but just broadcast them
--
for example by simply copying to other accounts with an ordinary copier.
or giving away the password to the investor
---
well there is no protection !!! no
make it hard through DLL's and anything else you can get away from the boys with fauspatrons
from the pros - you can't get away.
Thanks for the detailed reply...it's all clear.
Write a stackable virtual machine in mql4 without code and data separation and different command lengths (i.e. transfer the problem of x86 code decompilation to EA code). Nothing difficult, though, you'll probably have to write a small compiler capable of generating code for the implemented virtual machine (at the same time adding rubbish, changing logic, etc.). This will be much cooler than a bunch of non-obvious mql4 code (which still has to be invented).
You can also do it this way
void start()
{
op = YZDLLSIGNAL( array, ... ); // all logic here
MQL4Trade( op );
}void MQL4Trade( op )
{
if ( op = OP_BUY)
{
if ( IF SELL TRADE )
close
OrderSend( OP_BUY...
}
if ( op = OP_SELL )
{
if ( IS BUY )
close
OrderSend( OP_SELL...
}
}
// in this form with source mq4 . give to client + password + DLL
//take out all the logic in the DLL
The problem is solved by expanding consciousness, cutting off attachments to the world in general and to the created code in particular. For the latter, we can recommend the ritual "tshed" from the Tibetan branch of Buddhism. You performed the ritual, and whatever - let them break it!))). There is also the principle of "uvei" in Taoism - "doing nothing. It also helps. ))))))))))
In general, if you want to protect something, you thereby automatically become vulnerable to hacking. I don't even sign my codes - I cut off attachments!!! ))) And I don't distribute the ones I'm tied to.
====
Guys, I'm not shifty on this subject - I was just doing history of religions. You can learn a lot of interesting and useful things there.))