| ??? 10/07/05 15:19 Read: times |
#102102 - hardware??? Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Erik Malund said:
Well these are really rude, stealing other's work... http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sps32/mcu_lock.html Erik Malund said:
This is the classics. Comes from the same group as the first (they are obviously head-hunting all over the world). http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tamper.html Erik Malund said:
The only way I know to protect software is by hardware. If nobody can copy your hardware, a copy of your software is worthless. How do you think you can make your hardware copy-resistant? "Everything can be copied" applies not only to software. Erik Malund said:
PLEASE do not post something about disassembly. Working from disassembled C takes 5 times longer than coding from scratch. The goal of "intruder" is not always to make a copy with new functionality. To make a 100% copy you don't need to rework anything. To find out a key algorithm which might be 1% of the whole bunch but makes 90% of the cost might also be the motivation. Even if the lengthy rework is needed, on too many places on the earth the cost of 5 times anything is less than the cost of the original work in for example the US or western Europe. That's life. Sorry. Jan Waclawek |
