Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!wuarchive!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!alchemy!ptavoly
From: ptavoly@cs.ruu.nl (Peter Tavoly)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.games
Subject: Re: Chessamster 2100 patch
Message-ID: <1991May13.144530.9370@cs.ruu.nl>
Date: 13 May 91 14:45:30 GMT
References: <1991May06.155345.17107@cs.ruu.nl> <1991May7.002909.17186@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> <1991May07.103100.12997@cs.ruu.nl> <1991May7.185944.118@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
Organization: Utrecht University, Dept. of Computer Science
Lines: 61

In <1991May7.185944.118@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> gfm@mole.gnu.ai.mit.edu (George) writes:
>>
>>PS.: Manual protection schemes *cannot* be removed by commercial programs
>>     like Project D etc. since they are embedded in the program code itself,
>>     sometimes they are encoded as well (uhh.. from my 64 days :).
>>
>	Wrong, many commericial programs can and do take out the protection 
>schemes, all it requires in most cases is a couple of changes of bits on the 
>disk itself (Instead of modifying the program, they will look at the original
>disk, find on the disk where the manual routine is, and find away to 
>just jump over it by altering some raw disk data)..Go out and buy
>or just look at ads/reviews for the better amiga copiers, you will see that
>it can be done...Also I am a former C64 user, and KJ (Kracker Jax) did have
>some programs with parameters that would do this...Of course it wont always
>work 100% because the software companines can always just rerelease a new
>version of the software where the manual protect lies in a different part of 
>the disk...But they hardly ever do this (at least to my experiences)

Don't tell me, I owned a 64! BTW, you are misunderstanding me, what I meant
is, that a program cannot *find out* where a protection scheme resides
except when some parameter or brainfile exists for that particular disk
or one that resembles it enough.

Manual protection schemes are an entirely different beast from disk protection
schemes. I was talking about manual protection embedded in programs. When
a new program comes out, there is no way to find where the manual protection
is located, unless the programmer has been stupid enough to use an old routine
that has been incorporated in smart copy programs already. Please don't try
to tell me that manual protection is all about two branches (was that you,
or somebody on this thread?), (though I came across this once), usually
they are black and blue from XOR's and other brainkilling stuff. (DES?)

Aside from this, there are already some companies, who want your cheque
first, then they incorporate your name in the program so that you cannot
spread it.. That is a somewhat disturbing development, though it might
prove effective.

>	Persoanlly I find software protection annoying, they cannot protect
>a game 100% at all, no matter what they do some pirate will be able to undo it...

That's what I said too, annoying but necessary.

>
>PS. About the 'security through complexity' this is no longer security either
>1) Its relativly cheap to get a text scanner that can scan in long manuals

Sure, just cash out $500 or so...

>2) alot of pirates will spend loads of time typing in paper docs just to
>   get thier name on it

Some people are just nuts :)

 -ThomasT.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~          ____
Thomas Tavoly, Commercial Computer Science - HEAO Utrecht, NL.           / / /
"Whoever talks too much, has no time to think." - Peter Tavoly.       AMIGA /
Favourite quote: "The Mac OS is amazingly complex,               ____  / / /
 .sig v3.0e       given how little it does." - Peter da Silva    \ \ \/ / /
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~>> ptavoly@praxis.cs.ruu.nl <<~~~~~~~~~  \_\_\/_/