On Sun, Nov 16, 2003, Nadav Har'El wrote about "Re: [OT???]Re: protecting one's IP
[CLOSED TOPIC]":
> Check out your favorite dictionary or encyclopedia what a "patent" means,
> or at least what it was supposed to mean before unscrupulous companies
> star
On Sunday 16 November 2003 15:35, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
> On Sunday 16 November 2003 12:51, Omer Zak wrote:
> > Actually, Ilan has a point here.
> >
> > 1. His salesmanship skills could use a small upgrade - by presenting the
> >argument of avoiding MS-Windows in the first place, he'd get mor
On Sunday 16 November 2003 12:51, Omer Zak wrote:
> Actually, Ilan has a point here.
>
> 1. His salesmanship skills could use a small upgrade - by presenting the
>argument of avoiding MS-Windows in the first place, he'd get more
>cooperation than flames.
I don't think so. I couldn't care l
Quoting Ilan Finci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi,
> The company I work with is creating executable code we give to potential
> clients to test.
>
The are 2 methods that I am thinking right now.
One method is is to use some external plugin, like the one from Aladin.
You can just encrypt your librar
I changed the Subject line to emphasize the point which I tried to make.
There were actually three separate issues:
1. Is it on-topic to ask about obfuscating code meant to run under Linux?
2. Is it wise to obfuscate code meant to run under Linux?
3. How to actually obfuscate code meant to run und
Omer Zak wrote:
Actually, Ilan has a point here.
1. His salesmanship skills could use a small upgrade - by presenting the
argument of avoiding MS-Windows in the first place, he'd get more
cooperation than flames.
2. If Linus allows use of closed code Kernel modules with Linux and they
proba
Actually, Ilan has a point here.
1. His salesmanship skills could use a small upgrade - by presenting the
argument of avoiding MS-Windows in the first place, he'd get more
cooperation than flames.
2. If Linus allows use of closed code Kernel modules with Linux and they
probably are obfus
Ilan Finci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> on 11/13/2003 05:07 PM Matan Ziv-Av said the following:
> > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Ilan Finci wrote:
> >
>
> >> The company I work with is creating executable code we give to
> >> potential clients to test.
>
> >>
> >> The code comes as either an executable
On Sunday 16 November 2003 10:20, Ilan Finci wrote:
> on 11/13/2003 05:07 PM Matan Ziv-Av said the following:
> > On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Ilan Finci wrote:
> >>The company I work with is creating executable code we give to
> >> potential clients to test.
> >>
> >>The code comes as either an executable
On Sun, Nov 16, 2003, Ilan Finci wrote about "[OT???]Re: protecting one's IP [CLOSED
TOPIC]":
> And as to dissolve the company - why? Can we protect _OUR_ algorithms???
> we don't use OTHERS patented algorithms but _OURS_.
Check out your favorite dictionary or e
Ilan Finci wrote:
on 11/13/2003 05:07 PM Matan Ziv-Av said the following:
This is off topic, as has already been said, but I must add that if
the company tries to hide a patented algorithm, the best thing to do
is to dissolve the company immediately.
Sorry if you see it off topic, I thought tha
on 11/13/2003 05:07 PM Matan Ziv-Av said the following:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Ilan Finci wrote:
The company I work with is creating executable code we give to potential
clients to test.
The code comes as either an executable or a shared library (with a given
API the client use to connect it to
I never tried to hide this fact. The address I'm using is a private one,
since I used it before I came to MobilEye, and will continue (I guess),
even after I leave MobilEye.
And as I already wrote, I didn't see this as off topic, but I might be
wrong and sorry for this.
Trying to show off you (
On 2003/11/15 22:34, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
There was an elegant proof given at one of the HRL seminars last year
that any obfuscator can be beaten.
Are you speaking of the work by Boaz Barak et al.
(http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~boaz/Papers/obfuscate.ps)?
If so, your summary is a bit mislead
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 04:03:23PM +0200, Ilan Finci wrote:
> Is there a way to protect such executable/library, so it will be hard to
> do reverse engineering and find out what the algorithms we use? Of
> course, we protect ourself with patents, but we would like something in
> the level of pr
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
> So Ilan of Mobileye (I assume), here's a little lesson to you, while
> we're already talking about hiding stuff:
No need to assume:
% The data in the WHOIS database of the .il registry is provided
% by ISOC-IL for information purposes, and to a
On Thursday 13 November 2003 16:03, Ilan Finci wrote:
> Hi,
> The company I work with is creating executable code we give to
> potential clients to test.
>
> The code comes as either an executable or a shared library (with a
> given API the client use to connect it to his application).
>
> Is there
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Ilan Finci wrote:
> The company I work with is creating executable code we give to potential
> clients to test.
>
> The code comes as either an executable or a shared library (with a given
> API the client use to connect it to his application).
>
> Is there a way to protec
Hi Ilan,
I think that you are asking the wrong list. The denizens of this list
spend most of their time working to ensure the oposite of what you want.
- yba
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Ilan Finci wrote:
> Hi,
> The company I work with is creating executable code we give to potential
> clients to t
importance of protection of such information.
- Original Message -
From: "Ilan Finci" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "linux mailing list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 4:03 PM
Subject: protecting one's IP
> Hi,
> The company I wo
Hi,
The company I work with is creating executable code we give to potential
clients to test.
The code comes as either an executable or a shared library (with a given
API the client use to connect it to his application).
Is there a way to protect such executable/library, so it will be hard to
21 matches
Mail list logo
