Sturla Molden, 11.04.2014 11:17:
> Joshua Landau wrote:
>
>> However, if this really is your major blocker to using Python, I
>> suggest compiling with Cython.
>
> Cython restains all the code as text, e.g. to readable generate exceptions.
No, it actually doesn't. It only keeps the code in C com
On Saturday, April 12, 2014 8:07:57 AM UTC-4, Sturla Molden wrote:
> CM wrote:
>
>
>
> > You're saying that fear of patent trolls is yet another bad reason to
>
> > obfuscate your code? But then it almost sounds like you think it is a
>
> > justifiable reason. So I don't think I understand
CM wrote:
> You're saying that fear of patent trolls is yet another bad reason to
> obfuscate your code? But then it almost sounds like you think it is a
> justifiable reason. So I don't think I understand your point. Whether a
> patent troll has your original code or not has no bearing on t
On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 18:29:21 -0700, Wesley wrote:
> Currently our company wanna release one product developed by python to
> our customer. But dont's wanna others see the py code.
Your business model is fucked.
--
Denis McMahon, denismfmcma...@gmail.com
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listi
On Friday, April 11, 2014 12:13:47 PM UTC-4, Sturla Molden wrote:
> Mark H Harris wrote:
>
> > Obfuscation (hiding) of your source is *bad*, usually done for one
> > of the following reasons:
>
> > 1) Boss is paranoid and fears loss of revenues due to intellectual
> > property theft.
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 16:27:27 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
>
> > Another reason I've heard of is to try to reduce support efforts.
> >
> > If you distribute something that's easy to modify, then people will.
>
> The majority of people will treat your app as a black box. O
On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 16:27:27 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
> Another reason I've heard of is to try to reduce support efforts.
>
> If you distribute something that's easy to modify, then people will.
The majority of people will treat your app as a black box. Of course, a
small minority (either ou
On 11 April 2014 10:17, Sturla Molden wrote:
> Joshua Landau wrote:
>
>> However, if this really is your major blocker to using Python, I
>> suggest compiling with Cython.
>
> Cython restains all the code as text, e.g. to readable generate exceptions.
> Users can also still steal the extension mo
On 2014-04-11, Sturla Molden wrote:
> alister wrote:
>
>> Concentrate on making the product (even) better rather than trying to
>> hide the unhideable.
>
> I think the number one reason for code obfuscation is an ignorant
> boss.
>
> Another reason might be to avoid the shame of showing crappy c
On 2014-04-11, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Sturla Molden
> wrote:
>> The only way to protect your code is never to ship anything.
>
> It's worth noting, as an aside, that this does NOT mean you don't
> produce or sell anything. You can keep your code secure by runnin
On 2014-04-11, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Wesley wrote:
>> Umm, just wanna make all .py files not human readable.
>>
>> Or, maybe need a tool like zend in php.
>
> The only reliable way to prevent a customer from reverse-engineering
> your software is to not give them the
Mark H Harris wrote:
> Obfuscation (hiding) of your source is *bad*, usually done for one
> of the following reasons:
> 1) Boss is paranoid and fears loss of revenues due to intellectual
> property theft.
> 2) Boss is ignorant of reverse engineering strategies available to
> folks
Mark H Harris wrote:
> This is the age of open source in computer science.
>
> It is far better to develop a strategy and culture of openness.
> Everyone benefits; especially your customers. I recommend the GPLv3
> license. I also advocate for copyleft.
I would not use GPL in a comme
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Michael Torrie wrote:
> Most end users will never know or care what you build the app with, even
> if you have a directory full of open .py files. 99% of the users of a
> popular ebook app called Calibre never know or care that it's made of
> python and that you c
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 1:09 AM, Mark H Harris wrote:
>This is the age of open source in computer science.
>
>It is far better to develop a strategy and culture of openness. Everyone
> benefits; especially your customers. I recommend the GPLv3 license.
While I wholeheartedly agree with th
On 04/10/2014 07:29 PM, Wesley wrote:
> Hi all, Does python has any good obfuscate?
>
> Currently our company wanna release one product developed by python
> to our customer. But dont's wanna others see the py code.
>
> I googled for a while but mostly just say using pyc. Any better one?
>
> Our
On 4/10/14 8:29 PM, Wesley wrote:
Does python has any good obfuscate?
Others have answered this well, but I thought I would give you
another opinion, perhaps more direct.
Obfuscation (hiding) of your source is *bad*, usually done for one
of the following reasons:
1) Boss is pa
alister wrote:
> Concentrate on making the product (even) better rather than trying to
> hide the unhideable.
I think the number one reason for code obfuscation is an ignorant boss.
Another reason might be to avoid the shame of showing crappy code to the
customer.
Sturla
--
https://mail.p
On 11/04/2014 14:06, Sturla Molden wrote:
wrote:
It's worth noting, as an aside, that this does NOT mean you don't
produce or sell anything. You can keep your code secure by running it
on a server and permitting users to access it; that's perfectly safe.
Perfectly? :-)
Unless you have a h
On Thu, 10 Apr 2014 18:29:21 -0700, Wesley wrote:
> Hi all,
> Does python has any good obfuscate?
>
> Currently our company wanna release one product developed by python to
> our customer. But dont's wanna others see the py code.
>
> I googled for a while but mostly just say using pyc. Any bet
wrote:
>> It's worth noting, as an aside, that this does NOT mean you don't
>> produce or sell anything. You can keep your code secure by running it
>> on a server and permitting users to access it; that's perfectly safe.
>>
> Perfectly? :-)
Unless you have a heartbleed :)
Sturla
--
https:/
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 10:32 PM, wrote:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Sturla Molden
>> wrote:
>> > The only way to protect your code is never to ship anything.
>>
>> It's worth noting, as an aside, that this does NOT mean you don't
>> produce or sell anything. Yo
Ian Kelly wrote:
> How is that last statement different from the one I made above, that
> you disagreed with?
Who says I disagreed?
But to answer you question, it depends on the level of safety you need:
Total secrecy or just enough protection to make it not worthwhile to access
the code?
St
Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Sturla Molden
> wrote:
> > The only way to protect your code is never to ship anything.
>
> It's worth noting, as an aside, that this does NOT mean you don't
> produce or sell anything. You can keep your code secure by running it
> on a s
On Fri, 11 Apr 2014 04:22:49 -0600, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 3:17 AM, Sturla Molden
> wrote:
>> Ian Kelly 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
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 3:17 AM, Sturla Molden wrote:
> Ian Kelly 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 wrote:
> It depends on the threa
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Sturla Molden wrote:
> The only way to protect your code is never to ship anything.
It's worth noting, as an aside, that this does NOT mean you don't
produce or sell anything. You can keep your code secure by running it
on a server and permitting users to access i
Joshua Landau wrote:
> However, if this really is your major blocker to using Python, I
> suggest compiling with Cython.
Cython restains all the code as text, e.g. to readable generate exceptions.
Users can also still steal the extension modules and use them in their own
code. In general, Cython
Wesley wrote:
> Does python has any good obfuscate?
>
> Currently our company wanna release one product developed by python to
> our customer. But dont's wanna others see the py code.
>
> I googled for a while but mostly just say using pyc. Any better one?
It depends on the threat and how co
Ian Kelly wrote:
> The only reliable way to prevent a customer from reverse-engineering
> your software is to not give them the software.
Not really. You just need to make it so difficult that it is not worth the
effort. In that case they will go away and do something else instead. At
least if
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Joshua Landau wrote:
> But I do warn that it's adding another abstracting step that
> doesn't improve - it probably harms - the overall usability of the
> product. Further, a determined hacker can circumvent it, much as they
> can circumvent everything else.
I had
On 11 April 2014 02:29, Wesley wrote:
> Does python has any good obfuscate?
Most other people on the list will point out why such a thing is
mostly pointless and you don't really need it.
However, if this really is your major blocker to using Python, I
suggest compiling with Cython. There are
On 11/04/2014 04:12, Ben Finney wrote:
Wesley writes:
Umm, just wanna make all .py files not human readable.
(Please don't top-post; instead, use interleaved replies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style> to
make the conversation legible.)
Further would you please
Wesley writes:
> Umm, just wanna make all .py files not human readable.
(Please don't top-post; instead, use interleaved replies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style> to
make the conversation legible.)
You want the code not readable by which humans? Any code which is
re
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 8:17 PM, Wesley wrote:
> Umm, just wanna make all .py files not human readable.
>
> Or, maybe need a tool like zend in php.
The only reliable way to prevent a customer from reverse-engineering
your software is to not give them the software. For example, instead
of giving
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Tobiah wrote:
> On 4/10/2014 6:29 PM, Wesley wrote:
>> Hi all, Does python has any good obfuscate?
>>
>> Currently our company wanna release one product developed by python
>> to our customer. But dont's wanna others see the py code.
>>
>> I googled for a while but
Umm, just wanna make all .py files not human readable.
Or, maybe need a tool like zend in php.
在 2014年4月11日星期五UTC+8上午9时41分11秒，Ben Finney写道：
> Wesley writes:
>
>
>
> > Hi all,
>
> > Does python has any good obfuscate?
>
>
>
> Define “good obfuscate”. What is your goal?
>
>
>
> If it i
pyc has weakness:
1. easy to decompile
2. python version related, e.g. pyc from py2.5 cannot be used to py2.7 bed
在 2014年4月11日星期五UTC+8上午9时48分04秒，Tobiah写道：
> On 4/10/2014 6:29 PM, Wesley wrote:
>
> > Hi all, Does python has any good obfuscate?
>
> >
>
> > Currently our company wanna release
On 4/10/2014 6:29 PM, Wesley wrote:
> Hi all, Does python has any good obfuscate?
>
> Currently our company wanna release one product developed by python
> to our customer. But dont's wanna others see the py code.
>
> I googled for a while but mostly just say using pyc. Any better one?
Does that
Wesley writes:
> Hi all,
> Does python has any good obfuscate?
Define “good obfuscate”. What is your goal?
If it is to hide your program's secrets from others, then obfuscation
isn't going to help: no matter how good it is, it still needs to be
readable by the runtime on the machine.
Moreove
40 matches
Mail list logo
