NetNews Offline 2/NetNews Offline Volume 2.iso/news/comp/sys/amiga/programmer/3377

Internet Message Format | 1996-08-05 | 5.8 KB

Path: grafix.xs4all.nl!john.hendrikx
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 21:11:00 GMT+1
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Distribution: world
Subject: Re: Copy Protection
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: [e-mail] (John Hendrikx)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Grafix Attack BBS Holland

In a message of 01 Feb 96 Darius Taghavy wrote to All:

 DT> I am seriously considering to copyprotect my application before release.
 DT> I have strong reasons for doing so, but I hope to start a technical
 DT> threat, not a philosophical one.

 DT> In taking this step I do not wish to create any hassles for my users,
 DT> but to protect my and their investment to be able to offer continued
 DT> support and development as I am very serious about this product.

 DT> Runtime
 DT> -------
 DT> Requirements:
 DT> - executable must run from hard disk
 DT> - no key disk required

Let me just point out that dongle-protection is as bad, maybe even worse as a
key disk.

 DT> - no manual look up
 DT> - no DOS protection

 DT> Considerations:
 DT> - secret data/code in block that is then mapped as bad block

If I had such a program it would get killed immediately. Messing with the HD is
not something a program should be doing.  How would you map a block as bad
anyway?  Not all HD's have got RDB, and not all HD's use FFS.  For all you know
the program is run from a network, there is no way you can directly access the
HD in that case.

 DT> - username encrypted in executable (during installation)

Good, I would have no problems with that.  The only problem with this scheme is
what to do if you actually find a copy spread all over the Amiga world which
belongs to a specific user... What legal action can be taken, and can this name
encryption hold up in court?

 DT> - environment variable

There are too many ENV variables as it is, and once discovered this kind of
protection is easily avoided (well, almost any protection can easily be
disabled).

 DT> - CDROM only, span entire 600MB space, so pirates would have to
 DT>   dedicate a 600MB hard disk if they want to steal (unlikely scenario)

That would probably work best.  All other protection schemes can easily be
disabled.  Even though it is possible to make copies of CD-ROMs this is
something only small portions of users have access to.

 DT> Installation:
 DT> -------------
 DT> Anything goes, including
 DT> - DOS protection with install counts (like many MAC music apps)
 DT> - username encryption in executable
 DT> - manual lookup
 DT> - customized copies for each customer with encrypted
 DT>   serial number, name and environment variable

How about letting the customer call voice or via modem to 'unlock' their copy
of your program after installation?  Not an optimal protection scheme either
for the legitimate users, but with some work this might be a way of protecting
the software.

Note though that I didn't say a 'reliable way of protecting software'.  This is
simply not possible.

 DT> Hardware Protection (Dongle)
 DT> I would strongly prefer hardware protection, as it seems to present the
 DT> safest, quickest and least messy way to protect my application. Cubase
 DT> and Logic (Mac/Windows) use this with great  success. I am aware of
 DT> these options:

Hardware protection is useless.  Just like software protection it can easily be
disabled by removing/disabling the part of the -software- which checks for the
dongle. Storing vital information within the dongle is an option, but even that
can be avoided.  Also, the more annoying the protection the sooner you'll find
a version which has the protection disabled.  As a legitimate user you should
not be punished for having bought the software.

 DT> - joystick port
 DT>   Examples: Pro 24 and Brilliance; have they been cracked?
 DT>             what do they contain? A PAL? How do I build and
 DT>             support one?

And lose a joystick port?  What if I want to use Brilliance and your program at
the same time?  Do I look through my 'box' of dongles to find the one marked
'Brilliance' and plug it in when the system prompts me to?  I sincerely hope
this isn't a future scenario.

 DT> - parallel port (with pass thru)
 DT>   Seen ads in PC related mags, I believe they use PALs, but
 DT>    seemed very expensive

I have my doubts if a parallel port dongle 'with pass thru' will ever work
reliably with all parallel software.  There have been reports of dongles not
working with printers or ParNET.  Having a dongle with a program would make me
seriously consider not buying it at all.

I like to add one more thing.  Some software publishers look at how badly some
of their products are pirated and then think how much money they would have
made if those people hadn't pirated it.  What they however forget is that,
given there is no way to pirate their product, that not even half of those
people would actually be using it.  In other words software manufacturers get a
wrong view of the market for their product.  What they are seeing is the market
for their product if it was free.  The market for their product if it was $50
is much, much smaller -- this curve is certainly not linear, so if 1 million
users would have used your product for free only 10000 might have used it if it
was $50.

I think the number of people who would have bought the product if they couldn't
pirate it isn't that high as some software manufacturers like to think.  For
example, if a game on the clones like 'Heretic' could not be pirated than the
pirates would have just left the game alone and moved on to other software...
they still wouldn't have bought it.

Grtz John

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
 [e-mail]   TextDemo/FastView/Etc... development
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Via Xenolink 1.981, XenolinkUUCP 1.1