Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
Re: Reverse-Engineering Bytecode: A Possible Commercial Objection To O'Caml
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Thorsten Ohl <ohl@h...>
Subject: Re: Signatures (was: Reverse-Engineering Bytecode)
> 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.''

Vitaly Lugovsky wrote:

> But it don't need a core support from OCaml - you just can use MD5
> checksum or something like this....

I'm not so sure.  I woudl liek to access a checksum of the actual
sources that have been used to compile the module implementations in
the currently running program, just like Dynlink does for module
types.

One can play games with MD5 and a `Signatures' module in the Makefile,
but this is not 100%ly secure, because the code could be compiled by
hand, without updating the checksums.

Or am I missing something here?

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]