Re: software protection and licensing question

From: Dominic Haigh (NoSpam_at_thanks.net)
Date: 01/30/04 

Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 16:45:08 GMT

I think your perception may be colored by your experience with PCGuard.
There's no fundamental reason for this restriction.

We offer the EasyLicenser license manager (www.easylicenser.com):

(a) Today, for both C++ and Java: our digital signature mechanism will
prevent tampering and spoofing but won't prevent read-only reverse
engineering. Will work in SDK deployment environments.

(b) Coming up, for Java only: jar encryption will prevent reverse
engineering as well. Will allow applications using the encrypted jars to be
debuggable.

Also, on anti-debugging of C/C++ DLL's: usually, this is achieved by doing a
"production" build which strips the binary of debug symbols. That is,
usually, reverse-engineering of C/C++ binary isn't a concern.

Best of success with your product.

Regards,

Dominic Haigh

Agilis Software

"Howard" <do_not_use_this_address_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5cbfad6b.0401090843.765b2251@posting.google.com...
> I am currently looking at the various packages that are available for
> software protection. I have a particular question that I'd welcome
> your feedback on.
>
> Background info:
> I work for a company that develops software, and typically releases
> software SDKs. Development is in C++ using MS Visual C++. We need to
> apply software encryption/protection to achieve:
>
> 1) Time-limited versions (e.g software expires after X days)
> 2) Machine-locking (once activation key entered, software will only
> run on the machine it was installed on)
> 3) Anti-debugging/reverse-engineering protection
>
> We had been using PCGuard, which can cover all these aspects. However,
> we have a particular problem due to the fact that our software is
> released as an SDK.
>
> 3rd party developers using our SDKs access the core functions using a
> supplied dll, and it is the dll which needs to be protected. We do not
> want them to be able to debug the dll we supply, but we *do* want them
> to be able to debug the code that they write!
>
> The encryption/anti-debugging employed by PCGuard means that they are
> not able to debug their own code, which is a major problem.
>
> My question is: is it possible (using another package) to apply
> protection which covers all 3 aspects above yet still allows 3rd-party
> developers who use our SDK to debug their own code?
>
> My feeling is that protection options 1+2 (time limited versions,
> machine locking) can be achieved without blocking the debugging of
> 3rd-party code, but I'm not sure if protection option 3 can also be
> included without blocking all debugging.
>
> Any thoughts or info on this greatly appreciated. Comments on the
> pros/cons of the various protection packages available also welcome!
>
> (please post replies to newsgroup *not* via email)
>
> many thanks,
>
> Howard Wright
>

Relevant Pages
Loading