Browse thread
Re: Reverse-Engineering Bytecode: A Possible Commercial Objection To O'Caml
-
Michael Donat
-
Thorsten Ohl
-
Vitaly Lugovsky
-
Markus Mottl
- Thorsten Ohl
-
Markus Mottl
-
Vitaly Lugovsky
-
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: | 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]