Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!cs.umu.se!dvljhg
From: dvljhg@cs.umu.se (J|rgen Holmberg)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Copy protection (was Re: Awesome! No I am Pi**ed!) (LONG)
Message-ID: <1990Dec8.131350.20323@cs.umu.se>
Date: 8 Dec 90 13:13:50 GMT
References: <1990Dec5.041002.453@sbcs.sunysb.edu> <1990Dec5.205822.216@evax.arl.utexas.edu> <1366@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
Sender: news@cs.umu.se (News Administrator)
Organization: Dep. of Info.Proc, Umea Univ., Sweden
Lines: 59

In article <1366@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au> U3364521@ucsvc.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Lou Cavallo) writes:
>G'day,
>
>I'm interested in *only* the technical merits of copy protection schemes and
>I am offering my thoughts below in the hope of raising the bandwidth for the
>thread  in discussion.
>
>Adam Hill (hill@evax.arl.utexas.edu ) writes:
>
>> Ok how about this scheme:
>> A program is encrypted. The program is DECRYPTED by a program who searches
>> [...]
>
>I've read the followups to this posting and I agree with their objections of
>the possibility of tracing/using the DECRYPTING code to circumvent this type
>of copy protection ...
>
>if you can get at the code that does the decrypting *or* you can get at some
>form of the decrypted program (eg with a C64 like freeze machine, there is 1
>on the market no?).
>
>In this thread an earlier posting stated that the poster had never seen any
>form of protection that had not been cracked, which set me to thinking ...
>
>1. I've not seen or heard of pirated versions of Superbase for the Amiga. I
>   believe that this program is dongle protected. {I do not use and hence I
>   do not seek out pirated s/w so I may be merely ignorant of the facts of
>   the matter here.}
>
>   Question{s}: is it very easy (or hard) to overcome dongle protection?
>
There are pirated versions of Superbase out there. Xcad too ( I think that's
dongle protected too ). Dongle protection is usually very easy to crack but
you do have to crack it, you can't just use a h/w copier.

>2. If a decryption scheme was placed into a dongle device with a CPU it may
>   be possible (although I cannot think of a way) to execute the decrypting
>   code from the "dongle" and to not allow tracing of the code.  {I believe
>   this would be way too slow for practical use however it illustrates the
>   question I am thinking of phrasing.}
>
>   Question: if one has decryption code that does not reside in Amiga RAM
>   (and hopefully not accessible by an Amiga run program) is it necessary
>   to have all of the *decrypted* program reside in AmigaRAM?
>

I don't see why it couldn't be done. I don't think it would solve the problem
though. "Good" crackers are well versed in hardawre hacking too and would
either bypass or emulate the outside encryption. I also think that a quality
protection device of this kind would be expensive.

[ deleted stuff about which I have no opinion ]

Regards, Jorgen
-- 
*******************************************************************************
email dvljhg@cs.umu.se - other ways to communicate are a waste of time.
Everything I say is always true, just apply it to the right reality.
"Credo, quia absurdum est."