On 20 January 2011 06:16, Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 2011-01-19, geremy condra <debat...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:31 AM, Octavian Rasnita <orasn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> Would it be hard to introduce the possibility of adding encryption of > the > >> bytecode similar to what the Zend encoder does for PHP or Filter::Crypto > for > >> Perl? > > > > The iron law of cryptography: there is no cryptographic solution to a > > problem in which the attacker and intended recipient are the same > > person. > > > > Schemes like this are at most an annoyance to people willing to > > reverse engineer your code. > > And they somehow usually end up being an annoyance to customers who > are not trying to reverse engineer your code but are merely trying to > use it legally. Absolutely. If you feel you absolutely *must* obfuscate your object code more than the python bytecode, just put it all into a separate module and compile it with Cython <http://cython.org/>. Then you end up with machine-specific object code which is somewhat harder to reverse engineer for most people (but quite a few people are experts at doing so). As a bonus, Cython might speed it up too. Tim Delaney
-- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
