Protecting Maxscripts -> using a bit of C++?

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02 February 2013   #16
Originally Posted by Ruramuq: Old or new .mse files indifferently, doesn't matter. I know for sure, It's a complete disappointment for protection.


I think this is not true .. newer encryption is harder to crack. Old encryption was crackable by any process memory editor/viewer, because after they where loaded, the unencrypted script source was fully visible somewhere in the 3ds Max memory region. AFAIK that's not the case any longer with the new encryption introduced with 3ds Max 2008
__________________

PowerPreview: High Quality Nitrous Previews for 3ds Max 2012|2013|2014

[ Free Download (ScriptSpot) ]

Home of The Frogs | Online Portfolio
 
Old 02 February 2013   #17
I thought the same. But the fact that the new mse is harder, doesn't make it more secure in the end. not at all. I did some tests in the past. I was about to give up but before that I understood..
Anyway and despite of that, I don't see it as a severe problem for most scripted tools.
__________________
may not be following this thread.
.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #18
Correct me if i'm wrong, but this is what i have been told about the old and new encrypting methods:

V1 algorithm used a static key for encryption. Same source code get same encryption result.
V2 algorithm is improved a bit. Introduced dummy data generated by random seed to fill in head/tail of the result file. So the result file is always different even if the source is not modified.
__________________
3D Engineer at MHWirth
Aker Solutions
www.homme3d.com
 
Old 02 February 2013   #19
mmm, there is really no point for me, to talk about .mse files.
My interest was only to prove myself how easy it is.. nothing more.. Just in case I decided to sale or release something..

I suppose many have or are currently trying.. but if they can't solve the problem, then it's a waste of time to even think about it. IMO.
__________________
may not be following this thread.
.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #20
Quote: EDIT: just to add
And in case you still want to go the binary plugin route, don't do it the (legacy) .dlx way. Create a Utilitiy Plugin ( *.dlu ) and use Function Publishing ...


really depends on where and how you want to use the exposed functions, if in, say, a for loop called thousands of times then the "legacy" method has a nearly 3 times performance gain over function publishing. fp also has some short comings with regards object created within fp not been cleaned up with mxs garbage collector (though there are work arounds for this they are not pretty or elegant and beg the question why I didn't use "legacy" anyway). I know dlx is a mess with some nasty quirks and evil #include file order issues, but for performance on often called functions there really is no alternative.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #21
Today I found this in this scriptspot thread.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #22
Originally Posted by miauu: Today I found this in this scriptspot thread.


I love that they're asking for 79 pounds for each decryption
 
Old 02 February 2013   #23
It seems to me that if one charges a fair amount for one's script, then the motivation for cracking it is less...I've just finished writing around 20,000 lines of code, and I realize that I'm going to have to be realistic about what to charge. If it's any good, autodesk may incorporate the system into their UI...who knows?
 
Old 02 February 2013   #24
Originally Posted by floatingworld: It seems to me that if one charges a fair amount for one's script, then the motivation for cracking it is less...I've just finished writing around 20,000 lines of code, and I realize that I'm going to have to be realistic about what to charge. If it's any good, autodesk may incorporate the system into their UI...who knows?

i think that no one can read 20,000 anyone else's code, understand how it works, and be able use it for s/his own
 
Old 02 February 2013   #25
Thread automatically closed

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.
__________________
CGTalk Policy/Legalities
Note that as CGTalk Members, you agree to the terms and conditions of using this website.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.