Re: What is ClickOne?

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

Glad you agree. And yes, i dont mean to come across as an open source hater.

Open source samples really help others to improve their code and learn from
mistakes without it the programming world would progress far slower i feel.
My concern is the subject matter here, on the security front. Its the
authors choice if they want to spend hours on some code and then freely give
it away.

My personal view is i appreciate open source code and thank those that do
it. But for me, i went to univeristy and worked hard to get qualified and i
spend every day staying on top of the ever changing coding world and as
harsh as it sounds, i didn't do all that just so i could give it away for
someone else to benefit from lol. (Though i do like helping people on
forums)

It's the reason the guy that invented DOS sits in some crummy flat while
Bill Gates made billions.


"rowe_newsgroups" <rowe_email@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1170429820.057254.118530@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
As i said before its about making it harder for the hackers so they have
to
spend more time than its worth. No security is inpenetrable, its just
made
hard enough to match the reward.

I agree completely with you, if a hacker is going to rip apart my
program, I at least want to make his job as hard as possible!

I think we all know and accept that there are always people who can
break into anything - be it our house, car, or programs. Personally, I
don't worry about those people, I worry about the other ones. If
locking my door stops a drunk from wandering into my house and
stealing my TV, then I consider it worth all the effort. Likewise, if
obfuscating my programs stops them from being ripped off by the
average Joe, then it was worth all the effort.

As far as the open source / not open source argument goes, I'm
somewhere in the middle. I believe that most large, complete programs
should be kept private, and not shared with the public, or at least
not immediately. I also feel that many individual components, like the
ones you'll find on codeproject.com, should be published for
everyone's benefit.

Just my opinions though...

Thanks,

Seth Rowe


On Feb 2, 8:08 am, "PokerMan" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I didnt mean offence but people come on these newgroups to ask advice
from
people in the know. In my HO advising open source is not right and should
never be advised to anybody.

As i said before its about making it harder for the hackers so they have
to
spend more time than its worth. No security is inpenetrable, its just
made
hard enough to match the reward.

I agree with ppl that advise to protect their code, how they can do it
but
also mention that it can always be cracked so take precautions. I just
cannot agree with anyone who says, why bother they'll crack it anyway
just
make it open source.

If we all had your attitude the industry would perish.

"Laurent Bugnion [MVP]" <galasoft...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
messagenews:ejoOZGkRHHA.4744@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Hi,

PokerMan wrote:
"For most developers, I believe that openly publishing the source code
is
the best way to go"

I think this is absurd! A comparison is, why bother locking your house
when you go out?

I stand by my point, which was: .NET is an open house anyway.
Obfuscators
are not efficient enough to protect code. If it's OK for you, then you
do
have my blessing :-)

If they want to get in they will, why bother locking your car?
They'll just smash a window and so on. Just because they can and
undoubtebly would succeed if they really wanted to, making it harder
lowers the chance of your code being ripped. If you have to spend
hours,
days, weekes maybe to crack code how many will truly bother if the end
result is they can make their own hacked version of say msn? On top of
this obfuscating the code itself and having obfuscated variable names
and
method names etc, really will make deciphering the code a huge pain.

Not so much. What has been obfuscated can be de-obfuscated. There are
deobfuscatores out there. My opinion after careful consideration is
that
obfuscating the code only makes hackers want to crack it even more.

Many may just give up in a very complex app. To say just make it open
source is rediculous.

You're entitled to your opinions as I am to mine. Saying it's
ridiculous
is a bit extreme, don't you think?

HTH,
Laurent
--
Laurent Bugnion [MVP ASP.NET]
Software engineering:http://www.galasoft-LB.ch
PhotoAlbum:http://www.galasoft-LB.ch/pictures
Support children in Calcutta:http://www.calcutta-espoir.ch




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What is ClickOne?
    ... In my HO advising open source is not right and should ... cannot agree with anyone who says, why bother they'll crack it anyway just ... If they want to get in they will, why bother locking your car? ... obfuscating the code only makes hackers want to crack it even more. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: What is ClickOne?
    ... then I consider it worth all the effort. ... obfuscating my programs stops them from being ripped off by the ... As far as the open source / not open source argument goes, ... As i said before its about making it harder for the hackers so they have to ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: Fix for wrong OOM killer trigger?
    ... >> It didn't worth an answer IMHO, he's ignoring lots of efforts going on, ... > using open source for in everything that you use each day. ... >> So where's the source to the BIOS of your machine? ... Do you drive a car? ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: checkpoint vs isa server
    ... > Besides that using open source components can save you a lot of money. ... > The security of your network should be worth it. ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: [Full-Disclosure] Coding securely, was Linux (in)security
    ... I just said "it is possible", i never said "it is a good idea" oder "it ... is well worth the expenses". ... But if you see open source software analogous to math, ...
    (Full-Disclosure)