![]() |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
the protection is secondary to OS
Those guidelines are good, and could be great, if not running
on the underlying Micro$oft Windows OS. The OS is the biggest weakness aside from sloppy protection design. Even protectionists who try to write there own underlying system calls with special drivers, sys and vxd's are not safe. If it runs on windows, you can make it no fun to reverse, but if someone wants to take the time, windows will let them take it apart. I honestly think many of the highly regarded folks who visit this board know more about the internal workings of Windows than most of Bill Gate's wage slaves who sit in there cubicles and write convoluted code all day long with no sense of direction. If you put many of those protection mantra's in place in a secure OS, or even better, an embedded OS, THEN they may be sufficient to fend off all but the occasional government sponsered agency & honest or not "corporation". ![]() my 2 cents, -BG |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| DREAM++ decompiler: no more gotos | chants | General Discussion | 0 | 12-28-2017 14:57 |
| Request for a good protection scheme in Java | DaGoN | General Discussion | 7 | 02-20-2014 04:42 |
| Good Protection (Password Reminder) | anorganix | General Discussion | 6 | 11-22-2005 04:42 |