Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Developing U++ » Bazaar » Protect packages - split code encryption,client and server
Re: Protect packages - split code encryption,client and server [message #40519 is a reply to message #40518] Thu, 08 August 2013 15:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mdelfede is currently offline  mdelfede
Messages: 1259
Registered: September 2007
Senior Contributor
I think MSC10 is better on speed optimization, not size.
But I think also that speed gain is not so important, with modern machines, at least if you don't code a game or process-intensive applications. Mine is, but I prefere to optimize my code alone than leave it to compliler.

Ciao

Max
Re: Protect packages - split code encryption,client and server [message #40520 is a reply to message #40222] Thu, 08 August 2013 15:14 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Alboni is currently offline  Alboni
Messages: 183
Registered: January 2012
Location: Deventer, Netherlands
Experienced Member
ok. What the purpose of the cpuid call? The results are not used anywhere or so it seems.
Re: Protect packages - split code encryption,client and server [message #40521 is a reply to message #40520] Thu, 08 August 2013 15:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mdelfede is currently offline  mdelfede
Messages: 1259
Registered: September 2007
Senior Contributor
Alboni wrote on Thu, 08 August 2013 15:14

ok. What the purpose of the cpuid call? The results are not used anywhere or so it seems.


It resets che processor cache. It's needed because you're rewriting the code.
Re: Protect packages - split code encryption,client and server [message #40531 is a reply to message #40511] Fri, 09 August 2013 23:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Alboni is currently offline  Alboni
Messages: 183
Registered: January 2012
Location: Deventer, Netherlands
Experienced Member
mdelfede wrote on Thu, 08 August 2013 14:04

I do have many problems with my customers of dumb antivirus reporting my code as suspect or, whorse, as a trojan.
I think that antivirus producers should be sued because of this. They made me loose a couple of customers with their dumb behaviour.


I read up a bit on the topic, and the conclusion is that if you sign the executable (after cryping it) with a valid code certificate then the number of false positives will greatly reduce.
The Microsoft signtool is already included with the compiler.
The certificate costs about 180 euros a year.

Re: Protect packages - split code encryption,client and server [message #40532 is a reply to message #40531] Sat, 10 August 2013 07:37 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mdelfede is currently offline  mdelfede
Messages: 1259
Registered: September 2007
Senior Contributor
Alboni wrote on Fri, 09 August 2013 23:55


I read up a bit on the topic, and the conclusion is that if you sign the executable (after cryping it) with a valid code certificate then the number of false positives will greatly reduce.
The Microsoft signtool is already included with the compiler.
The certificate costs about 180 euros a year.




Thank you, but I absolutely refuse to pay money because of other people's mistakes.
180 Euro for a certificate to be able to sell MY application because of bullshit antivirus ? NEVER.
Re: Protect packages - split code encryption,client and server [message #40540 is a reply to message #40222] Sun, 11 August 2013 03:45 Go to previous message
Alboni is currently offline  Alboni
Messages: 183
Registered: January 2012
Location: Deventer, Netherlands
Experienced Member
I hear ya. I'm still considering it.
If it prevents 1 client from running away then it's worth it for me.
Previous Topic: Broken packages
Next Topic: Encrypted storage with streaming (OpenSSL, AES)
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sat Dec 14 20:43:10 CET 2019

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01306 seconds