Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister

Re: perl2exe - no more secrets

by indy_singh (Initiate)
on Feb 24, 2003 at 22:55 UTC ( #238280=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to perl2exe - no more secrets

The encryption algorithm in Perl2Exe has been improved. The current version does not use the xor method.

The reverse-engineering method posted on bugtrack does not actually work because it assumes the xor method. It only appears to work because it reads the expected answer from the original source.

Tools of this type are simply packagers, they don't guarantee any security of the source code or offer any speed increase.

Perl2Exe does offer some conveniences in the distribution of applications. Because Perl2Exe is multi-platform and cross-platform it makes it easier to create binary packages for multiple OS's from a single machine.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
•Re: Re: perl2exe - no more secrets
by merlyn (Sage) on Feb 25, 2003 at 02:40 UTC
    Comparing these two statements makes my head spin:
    The encryption algorithm in Perl2Exe has been improved.
    they don't guarantee any security of the source code
    Why? Why? If it's just a bundler, let it be a bundler. It can never be really secure, because I can always single step the program to the point where you call the Perl interpreter's "eval" method with the now-decrypted source code.

    This is looking more and more like snake oil. And since you somehow know it's been improved recently, I suspect you are an insider with the developers.

    So, why did the developers bother to increase the security? Because XOR is something a customer base can understand, but "more security" isn't? Are you only reacting to the public outcry? Would you have fixed it if it didn't show up on bugtraq? Will you upgrade it even more when (not if) it gets broken again?

    If it's truly secure, open up your methods to peer review.

    Until then, I'll stand by my statement that perl2exe is snake oil, being sold to a naive public, and that's unethical to me.

    -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker
    Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.

      Why yes he is! Here is some select output from whois

      Found crsnic referral to ... Administrative Contact: Singh, Indy indy at ... Technical Contact: Singh, Indy indy at ...
      I think there's a point to (possibly trivially) cloaking something so it doesn't show up in "find in files" or other text searches, clog the disk text index with unneeded things, save accidental viewing by other people, etc.

      So my new take on it is to use ROT-13 for this "feature", so it's very clear that it's not supposed to be "encrypted" in any meaningful sence. It's more like turning a page face-down on the desk when you leave the cube, as opposed to locking it in the drawer. That's why ROT-13 was invented! That's its clearly defined purpose.



        Absolutely. And if the vendor presented that feature in that light, we wouldn't be wrapped around the axle of weak (!) "encryption" "hiding" source code in a bundle. (did I use enough gratuitous punctuation there?)


Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://238280]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others pondering the Monastery: (3)
As of 2020-10-22 07:39 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    My favourite web site is:

    Results (225 votes). Check out past polls.