Craig Ringer schrieb:
On Mon, 2004-11-29 at 18:04, Peter Maas wrote:
I can think of 3 reasons to prevent tampering:
[...]
My understanding is that that's never guaranteed safe, no? Or are
restrictions against reverse engineering now commonly enforcable?
It's not guaranteed but if protection works in 99.9% of all instal-
lations it makes sense, at least if you are not producing highly
visible software like Windows.
Reverse engineering may be possible but in most cases it is a huge
effort. Think of the samba project which builds Windows server
software by analyzing network packets and this is probably easier
than to analyze machine code.
If the "reverse engineering" argument boils down to "protecting source
doesn't make sense" then why does Microsoft try so hard to protect
its sources?
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Maas, M+R Infosysteme, D-52070 Aachen, Tel +49-241-93878-0
E-mail 'cGV0ZXIubWFhc0BtcGx1c3IuZGU=\n'.decode('base64')
-------------------------------------------------------------------
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
