You're being quite creative with alternative spelling and punctuation. However, if you think that provides sustainable stealth cover against a competent attacker (TLA agencies must by now be really good with linguistic forensics) you're fooling yourself.
For executable binary verification it is obviously necessary to use compilers/linkers which don't write crap into the binary. Speaking of which, given the size of the code blob one could as well use handcrafted assembly. Also, using a standartized build environment is not exactly rocket science, since one can checksum ISO images, too. Platinum Group Linux would be a good name for the distro. On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, cyphrpnk wrote: > Hi all, > Its obvious that some of us here are developers and still others > have never typed make or gcc in their lives. > > > -v and -V options given to various forms of ld caused the embeddment of > version information in the binary(Sunpro does this also, AND early versions > of MSC allowed embeddment of version information also.) > The fact that most environments dont link -Bstatic and instead link > -Bdynamic means that every time you attempt to produce a binary from > 2 different systems that the dynamic link information will > be different checkout link.h link_elf.h link_aout.h in /usr/include > > > in addition MOST modern developement environments include a date field > when compiled and linked in the binary > > > > sheesh > a cypherpunk > BTW. AARG and eugene are idiots nyah nyah nyah!!