On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 00:36:47 -0700, norman.ives wrote: > Hello list > > Python 3.4 applies. > > I have a project that involves distributing Python code to users in an > organisation. Users do not interact directly with the Python code; they > only know this project as an Excel add-in. > > Now, internal audit takes exception in some cases if users are able to > see the source code. > > So I'm wondering if anyone has clever suggestions in this regard... > > My current plan is to modify the bdist_wheel setuptools extension so > that it can produce distributions with only the .pyc files, laid out so > that they will be importable in the normal way. This will be sufficient > to satisfy internal audit, and will not negatively impact our users. > > However there are obvious downsides, including the overhead of > maintaining separate wheels for different architectures and (in the > future) Python versions. Not to mention that this plan seems to go > against the grain of how Python wants to use byte code files... > > Is there a better solution?
For an internal app. I would suggest it is only necessary to protect user- names & passwords to back end services (databases etc.). storing these in a separate file in an encrypted format should be enough to discourage internal users from digging deeper. This will not stop a determined hacker but neither will any other forms of obfuscation. -- new, adj.: Different color from previous model. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list