On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 04:22:49 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 3:17 AM, Sturla Molden <sturla.mol...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> The only reliable way to prevent a customer from reverse-engineering >>> your software is to not give them the software. >> >> Not really... > > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 3:17 AM, Sturla Molden <sturla.mol...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> It depends on the threat and how competent persons you want to protect >> your code from. If this comes from your boss, chances are he does not >> know that even x86 machine code can be decompiled. So as many has said, >> this is mostly futile business. The only way to protect your code is >> never to ship anything. > > How is that last statement different from the one I made above, that you > disagreed with?
Isn't it obvious? When *you* say something, you're making a knee-jerk reaction without considering all the circumstances, so even if you're right you're right for the wrong reasons and hence wrong. But when *I* say the same thing, I've made a deep and careful consideration of all the nuances and therefore am right for the right reasons and hence right. :-) -- Steven D'Aprano http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/ -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
