Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!exodus!stpeter.Eng.Sun.COM!cmcmanis From: cmcmanis@stpeter.Eng.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.games Subject: Re: friendly to what? Keywords: protection, piracy Message-ID: <5831@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> Date: 13 Jan 91 18:07:00 GMT References: <9519@mirsa.inria.fr> Sender: news@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca. Lines: 25 In article <9519@mirsa.inria.fr> jmt@legend.cma.fr (Jean-Marc Tanzi) writes: >So I have a question for the gurus: do you think that a program >that is "OS-friendly" can be seriously protected against piracy? >Isn't such a program an easy prey for the crackers? No more or less so if you aren't OS friendly. The "crackers" don't need to use the OS to run a state analyzer. The only serious cracking stuff for the Amiga I've seen was this guy who had a disk the booted into an analyzer and then watched your program run and checked for various things. >For example, allowing multitasking means (at least) saving the process >state quite often, so it should be easy to trace/look/dump it (almost) any >time. Let's say when the copy-protection comes up. The "process state" you mention is pretty trivial relative to the application. You last statement is the correct one "it should be easy to trace ..." And this holds true with or without the OS. -- --Chuck McManis Sun Microsystems uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: Internet: cmcmanis@Eng.Sun.COM These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you. "I tell you this parrot is bleeding deceased!"