Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!uwvax!rutgers!sunybcs!sher
From: sher@sunybcs.uucp (David Sher)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Software Distribution
Message-ID: <1076@cs.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 7 Sep 88 01:38:36 GMT
References: <891@taux01.UUCP> <28200195@urbsdc> <5655@june.cs.washington.edu>
Sender: nobody@cs.Buffalo.EDU
Reply-To: sher@wolf.UUCP (David Sher)
Distribution: na
Organization: SUNY/Buffalo Computer Science
Lines: 15

Out of curiosity since I've not seen this question asked, if the problem
is that source code is too easy to play with, why not distribute encoded
source.  Then one needs only create compilers with decoders built in for
each machine.  Since compilers are purchaseable this seems possible 
(building in a decoder is trivial).  This would be far more secure than 
any intermediate form which can be messed with and redistributed (good 
luck in proving that code x really = code y in court).  I can imagine
all sorts of idempotent program transformations on 3 object code say that
would render the program unrecognizable.  I realize that you can always
play this game with the compiled code (decoders in hardware anyone?).


-David Sher
ARPA: sher@cs.buffalo.edu	BITNET: sher@sunybcs
UUCP: {rutgers,ames,boulder,decvax}!sunybcs!sher