Browse thread
Re: Reverse-Engineering Bytecode: A Possible Commercial Objection To O'Caml
-
Michael Donat
- Thorsten Ohl
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Thorsten Ohl <ohl@h...> |
| Subject: | Signatures (was: Reverse-Engineering Bytecode) |
Michael Donat <donat@intergate.bc.ca> writes: > I don't see a benefit in having an OCaml module encryption system. But a cryptographic O'Caml module _signature_ system could be useful for checking the integrity of applications. I always distribute my work as source, but it would be useful if there was a way to check that the sources have not been modified if someone sends in a bug report. Even better would be a fixed point condition that would allow to print a warning message: ``The sources have been modified, you can do anything you want, but don't blame me or the results.'' Cheers, -Thorsten -- Thorsten Ohl, Physics Department, TU Darmstadt -- ohl@hep.tu-darmstadt.de http://heplix.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de/~ohl/ [<=== PGP public key here]