Wow! Thinstall really has increased their price. I got it for less than %25 of that price! Did a little trading a few years ago when Thinstall was just getting started. It is an EXCELLENT software for developers!
If you can ever roll the cost into a project - do so! You won't be disappointed!
There is Codelock, ASProtect, Armadillo, and many other lower cost protection softwares..
Secretly tracking number of uses
-Mitchell
Check out kBilling for all your billing software needs!
http://www.k-billing.com
Code Signing / Authenticode Certificates (Get rid of those Unknown Publisher warnings!)
http://codesigning.ksoftware.net
Check out kBilling for all your billing software needs!
http://www.k-billing.com
Code Signing / Authenticode Certificates (Get rid of those Unknown Publisher warnings!)
http://codesigning.ksoftware.net
Below are some URL's (click on their names), prices and blurbs for various programs. I've include the renewal rates where i could find them, since these programs are rather expensive it comes into play (at least for me!)
Armadillo (SoftwarePassport) - Price: $149 for basic V3 (free upgrade to V4)
[quote]TBYB- Try Before You Buy Full support for time based (example: 30 days) and metered or usage-based trials (example: 10 free uses). Time intervals and uses fully customizable for each file protected.
Limited Usage, Multi-Level Usage Supports capability to enable and disable access to application functionality and/or “levelsâ€
Armadillo (SoftwarePassport) - Price: $149 for basic V3 (free upgrade to V4)
[quote]TBYB- Try Before You Buy Full support for time based (example: 30 days) and metered or usage-based trials (example: 10 free uses). Time intervals and uses fully customizable for each file protected.
Limited Usage, Multi-Level Usage Supports capability to enable and disable access to application functionality and/or “levelsâ€
Mat
-
localmotion34
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2003 10:40 pm
- Location: Tallahassee, Florida
i think just about every one you posted has been cracked. there are de-protectors out there for so many systems out there. what was it ---PElock that Team Orion cracked and distributed the de-protector. man did that end up costing alot of companies some money--all who had bought and used PE lock to protect their apps. you cant stop the crackers. you can only slow them down. using one of these just means that when Orion cracks anopther app using these, someone can just apply that to your software.
Code: Select all
!.WHILE status != dwPassedOut
! Invoke AllocateDrink, dwBeerAmount
!MOV Mug, Beer
!Invoke Drink, Mug, dwBeerAmount
!.endw
Is it really that bad? 
I found some unpackers for Armadillo, ASPack/ASProtect and PECompact but they're for old versions and i'm not sure if an unpacker is the same as a crack (sounds like it just removes the decompression routines).
The code-lock site seems to contain the boldest statement about it being uncracked in 4 years, along with a list of groups that have tried and failed, but it looks like it is difficult to integrate with PureBasic and it's a bit expensive for me.
I like the sound of EXECryptors technique but top of my list is ASProtect (if i can get the trial working with PureBasic and if future upgrades are cheap).
I found some unpackers for Armadillo, ASPack/ASProtect and PECompact but they're for old versions and i'm not sure if an unpacker is the same as a crack (sounds like it just removes the decompression routines).The code-lock site seems to contain the boldest statement about it being uncracked in 4 years, along with a list of groups that have tried and failed, but it looks like it is difficult to integrate with PureBasic and it's a bit expensive for me.
I like the sound of EXECryptors technique but top of my list is ASProtect (if i can get the trial working with PureBasic and if future upgrades are cheap).
I found this on a newsgroup posting from the author of ASProtect:using one of these just means that when Orion cracks anopther app using these, someone can just apply that to your software.
I suppose it would be foolish to think any method is fool proof but the longer it takes for cracks to appear has to mean better sales for the author.Hello,
All ASProtect registered users have special builds and "universal crackers"
don't work
--
Alexey Solodovnikov
Mat
-
localmotion34
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2003 10:40 pm
- Location: Tallahassee, Florida
Code-Lock boasts to have not been cracked for over 4 years. im not so sure about that. i am pretty sure i know of one medium-classed program that used code-lock, and there is a crack out there for it. the author issues a "challenge" to crackers to see if they can crack it, but the "challenge" i think is really to see what methods are used to crack it, then update and defend against them. there are no crack-proof methods. if there were, Microsoft would be crack free. they employ ex CIA, DIA, Military, IRS, and NSA crypto experts.
Code: Select all
!.WHILE status != dwPassedOut
! Invoke AllocateDrink, dwBeerAmount
!MOV Mug, Beer
!Invoke Drink, Mug, dwBeerAmount
!.endw
> there are no crack-proof methods
Very true. It's interesting to note that all these apps can be found on p2p
networks, along with a crack to use them... so if they can't even protect
themselves, then why would you pay to use them with your own apps?
Very true. It's interesting to note that all these apps can be found on p2p
networks, along with a crack to use them... so if they can't even protect
themselves, then why would you pay to use them with your own apps?
I compile using 5.31 (x86) on Win 7 Ultimate (64-bit).
"PureBasic won't be object oriented, period" - Fred.
"PureBasic won't be object oriented, period" - Fred.
Code-lock's claim is bold, but they are backing it up..
http://www.chosenbytes.com/challenge.php
I notice that they carefully say "code-lock" hasn't been cracked. Doesn't seem to mention any other software *protected* by code-lock!
http://www.chosenbytes.com/challenge.php
I notice that they carefully say "code-lock" hasn't been cracked. Doesn't seem to mention any other software *protected* by code-lock!
-Mitchell
Check out kBilling for all your billing software needs!
http://www.k-billing.com
Code Signing / Authenticode Certificates (Get rid of those Unknown Publisher warnings!)
http://codesigning.ksoftware.net
Check out kBilling for all your billing software needs!
http://www.k-billing.com
Code Signing / Authenticode Certificates (Get rid of those Unknown Publisher warnings!)
http://codesigning.ksoftware.net
Re: Secretly tracking number of uses
> Code-lock's claim is bold, but they are backing it up..
> http://www.chosenbytes.com/challenge.php
And if it did get cracked, I bet they wouldn't post it there. Why should they?
The page makes great advertising for them, and they sure as hell wouldn't
want to change that.
> Doesn't seem to mention any other software *protected* by code-lock
That pretty much says it all, if they can't mention even one single app.
I just took a closer look at Code-Lock and it's written in Visual Basic! I've
got nothing major against VB, but for an anti-piracy app it's a poor choice of
language...
As for their claim of "uncracked for 4 years", well the Internet Archive shows
that their web site has only been around since 2003:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.chosenbytes.com
Something fishy going on. I'd say they're just great at marketing themselves,
and nothing more. Until they can name ONE SINGLE APP that is protected
by them, then I won't believe their claims. All talk and no proof so far.
> http://www.chosenbytes.com/challenge.php
And if it did get cracked, I bet they wouldn't post it there. Why should they?
The page makes great advertising for them, and they sure as hell wouldn't
want to change that.
> Doesn't seem to mention any other software *protected* by code-lock
That pretty much says it all, if they can't mention even one single app.
I just took a closer look at Code-Lock and it's written in Visual Basic! I've
got nothing major against VB, but for an anti-piracy app it's a poor choice of
language...
As for their claim of "uncracked for 4 years", well the Internet Archive shows
that their web site has only been around since 2003:
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.chosenbytes.com
Something fishy going on. I'd say they're just great at marketing themselves,
and nothing more. Until they can name ONE SINGLE APP that is protected
by them, then I won't believe their claims. All talk and no proof so far.
I compile using 5.31 (x86) on Win 7 Ultimate (64-bit).
"PureBasic won't be object oriented, period" - Fred.
"PureBasic won't be object oriented, period" - Fred.
It could be -> this <- CodeLock, from 1998. The entry at archive.org shows his http://members.aol.com/AlexDover site ended and the http://www.chosenbytes.com site started at the same time so he probably moved sites.
It might be worth asking in their forums to see what software uses CodeLock for protection.
It might be worth asking in their forums to see what software uses CodeLock for protection.
Mat
-
localmotion34
- Enthusiast
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2003 10:40 pm
- Location: Tallahassee, Florida
i think they are talking about code-lock ITSELF never being cracked. like, he's challenging cracking groups to crack his own software, and then telling people that his protection on his own software is so good, that no one will be able to crack THEIRS. the trouble is, that he probaly protected his OWN software with multiple sources, and claims the same protection will be available to them.
the best protection i have ever seen is DPLOT by hydesoft computing. TSRH, orion, and a number of others have keygenned cracked and used loaders to crack it, but the software will detect even keygenned serials and disable further installations on that computer. INSIGHT did crack DPLOT 1.6 perfectly, but they acknowledged that hydesoft contacted them and ask that they not release their works anymore.
the best protection i have ever seen is DPLOT by hydesoft computing. TSRH, orion, and a number of others have keygenned cracked and used loaders to crack it, but the software will detect even keygenned serials and disable further installations on that computer. INSIGHT did crack DPLOT 1.6 perfectly, but they acknowledged that hydesoft contacted them and ask that they not release their works anymore.
Code: Select all
!.WHILE status != dwPassedOut
! Invoke AllocateDrink, dwBeerAmount
!MOV Mug, Beer
!Invoke Drink, Mug, dwBeerAmount
!.endw
Problem is that sometimes there is no need to "crack" it.
There are loaders, there are drivers/emulators.
That is how Half-Life2's steam system was cracked.
The "crack" is basically a virtual steam (or emulator).
So HL2 thinks it's chatting with the real thing, HL2's "protection"
is still intact.
Thats the problem with every software (and many hardware) systems.
The developer has no control what happens to the software when it's out "there".
There are thousands of ways to protect software,
and equally many ways to circumvent/crack/trick those protections.
It's a endless race for both sides.
The problem is that it only takes ONE "cracked" copy, and the protection is useless as everyone will be using the cracked one instead of re-cracking
the original all the time.
At best protections only buy the developer a few weeks.
(or if they are lucky, a few months) time before the cracks appear.
The question I've been asking myself is, what is the point?
Wasting time and money on temporary solutions that I'd rather spend
on improving my software.
Another interesting thing is that 90% of all those that use the cracked copies,
are normally people that never would buy the software in the first place.
And IF a protection system DID work, they would simply look elsewhere
as there is always alternatives for just about any software out there.
Crackers and warez people are usually not the clientele developers intend to sell to.
So why waste all that time and money on non-buyers in the first place.
Instead I've dropped the idea of protection fully.
It saves me time and possibly money,
there is less software and hardware conflicts.
And instead I can focus on added value for legal/registered users.
For many of my upcoming projects I'll be providing forums,
special member/registered users sections.
A great update system for registered users.
Additional bonus content, etc etc etc.
Being a legal user will hopefully outweigh the "benefit" of a "free" copy
floating around in the warez scene.
And only purchasers will be able to get access.
At purchase a unique serial/id is given by the server,
these serials can not be "guessed" nor generated by key generators etc.
As they are created on a buyer per buyer basis.
There only exist as many serials as there is buyers.
A fake serial would therefore fail.
And if one existing serial start popping up all over,
it would be easy to ban it and email the owner of that serial.
In other words, the software is NOT protected, but the "purchase" is.
and short of someone breaking into the database and putting in fake serials, there is no way to "cheat" that solution.
Fred has something similar going with PureBasic.
PureBasic is cheap so NOT paying for such a great product is silly or even stupid.
Free upgrades forever. see, even more worth for your money.
Forums, beta versions. (more value)
Compilers for other platforms are free. (mega value)
He isn't in it just for the money. (tough I'm sure he don't mind money
But actually cares for the product personally.
That is probably the greatest value right there, a developer that
really cares about his own work. And not JUST as a means to easy cash.
I'm pretty sure there are "cracked" PureBasic versions out somewhere. (didn't check but, PureBasic is popular so...probably)
Question tough is, whats the point of cracking PureBasic?
IMO! There is no point, as the cost for it gives you so much as a buyer.
This is the angle I'll be taking on all my future software.
There are a few companies out there, even game makers,
that take this approach, where being a legal owner don't just grant
you the right to use the software, but also access to a plethora
of bonuses. There exist no "cracks" that can counter THAT *laughs*
So if you can't beat them. Make sure that they (the crackers) no longer matter at all. Ignor'em, freeze'em out.
Make their "achievements" not count, if their cracking ability becomes "useless" they have no reason to mess with your software.
And I'd be willing to bet that the piracy would remain the same,
or possibly less than if you had used a protection system.
Don't quote me on this, but I suspect that the cracker motto is:
"If it's worth protecting, it's worth cracking!"
Ignore them, I do. If I happen to catch some I'd obviously report them
to the authorities. Stealing is stealing after all.
Another interesting side effect tough.
A lot of those protection systems (particularly games but also other software)
Is that many of those systems are inconvenient for the legal user.
So they often end up in bad circuits, looking for NoCd cracks,
or NoInternet cracks etc.
This is one of the reasons I'm against protection systems,
it just gives legal users a valid excuse to look for circumvention solutions,
which eventually will lead to them "finding free copies" of a lot of software they have been drooling on for ages.
In the states I've heard there is something called the Induce Act or something.
It is a legal defense against anyone that directly or indirectly induces/encourages illegal behaviour.
This can be anything from links, or talk about cracks (like this post? er..)
to direct tips on where an how to get illegal copies.
Which I find kinda ironic, since protection systems in a way induce illegal behaviour.
(searching for NoCD or NoInternet cracks etc)
So instead of trying to prevent illegal use of the software,
try to encourage legal use of the software instead.
It's time and money well spent and not wasted like with protection systems.
You get loyal and devoted users, that will happily help test Beta versions
give suggestions and feature requests, help other users,
and stick with you and maybe buy other software you make as well.
And best of all, loyal users are the best advertisement there is,
they will tell their friends and anyone they meet how cool this or that is.
And once those become users, they will tell others, who tell others.
word of mouth is powerful and often underestimated.
All the above can easily be used to reflect i.e PureBasic.
Just about anyone even remotely interested in programming
I constantly mention how great PureBasic is,
and I happily recommend it to anyone I meet etc.
Don't be as single minded as crackers and warez people,
things broad and think far. Think outside the box.
(ok, I know, I'm sounding silly here but you get the point I hope hehe)
Make having a legal copy way more desireable than a illegal copy,
and you have a unbreakable "protection" against piracy/cracks etc.
Regards...
There are loaders, there are drivers/emulators.
That is how Half-Life2's steam system was cracked.
The "crack" is basically a virtual steam (or emulator).
So HL2 thinks it's chatting with the real thing, HL2's "protection"
is still intact.
Thats the problem with every software (and many hardware) systems.
The developer has no control what happens to the software when it's out "there".
There are thousands of ways to protect software,
and equally many ways to circumvent/crack/trick those protections.
It's a endless race for both sides.
The problem is that it only takes ONE "cracked" copy, and the protection is useless as everyone will be using the cracked one instead of re-cracking
the original all the time.
At best protections only buy the developer a few weeks.
(or if they are lucky, a few months) time before the cracks appear.
The question I've been asking myself is, what is the point?
Wasting time and money on temporary solutions that I'd rather spend
on improving my software.
Another interesting thing is that 90% of all those that use the cracked copies,
are normally people that never would buy the software in the first place.
And IF a protection system DID work, they would simply look elsewhere
as there is always alternatives for just about any software out there.
Crackers and warez people are usually not the clientele developers intend to sell to.
So why waste all that time and money on non-buyers in the first place.
Instead I've dropped the idea of protection fully.
It saves me time and possibly money,
there is less software and hardware conflicts.
And instead I can focus on added value for legal/registered users.
For many of my upcoming projects I'll be providing forums,
special member/registered users sections.
A great update system for registered users.
Additional bonus content, etc etc etc.
Being a legal user will hopefully outweigh the "benefit" of a "free" copy
floating around in the warez scene.
And only purchasers will be able to get access.
At purchase a unique serial/id is given by the server,
these serials can not be "guessed" nor generated by key generators etc.
As they are created on a buyer per buyer basis.
There only exist as many serials as there is buyers.
A fake serial would therefore fail.
And if one existing serial start popping up all over,
it would be easy to ban it and email the owner of that serial.
In other words, the software is NOT protected, but the "purchase" is.
and short of someone breaking into the database and putting in fake serials, there is no way to "cheat" that solution.
Fred has something similar going with PureBasic.
PureBasic is cheap so NOT paying for such a great product is silly or even stupid.
Free upgrades forever. see, even more worth for your money.
Forums, beta versions. (more value)
Compilers for other platforms are free. (mega value)
He isn't in it just for the money. (tough I'm sure he don't mind money
But actually cares for the product personally.
That is probably the greatest value right there, a developer that
really cares about his own work. And not JUST as a means to easy cash.
I'm pretty sure there are "cracked" PureBasic versions out somewhere. (didn't check but, PureBasic is popular so...probably)
Question tough is, whats the point of cracking PureBasic?
IMO! There is no point, as the cost for it gives you so much as a buyer.
This is the angle I'll be taking on all my future software.
There are a few companies out there, even game makers,
that take this approach, where being a legal owner don't just grant
you the right to use the software, but also access to a plethora
of bonuses. There exist no "cracks" that can counter THAT *laughs*
So if you can't beat them. Make sure that they (the crackers) no longer matter at all. Ignor'em, freeze'em out.
Make their "achievements" not count, if their cracking ability becomes "useless" they have no reason to mess with your software.
And I'd be willing to bet that the piracy would remain the same,
or possibly less than if you had used a protection system.
Don't quote me on this, but I suspect that the cracker motto is:
"If it's worth protecting, it's worth cracking!"
Ignore them, I do. If I happen to catch some I'd obviously report them
to the authorities. Stealing is stealing after all.
Another interesting side effect tough.
A lot of those protection systems (particularly games but also other software)
Is that many of those systems are inconvenient for the legal user.
So they often end up in bad circuits, looking for NoCd cracks,
or NoInternet cracks etc.
This is one of the reasons I'm against protection systems,
it just gives legal users a valid excuse to look for circumvention solutions,
which eventually will lead to them "finding free copies" of a lot of software they have been drooling on for ages.
In the states I've heard there is something called the Induce Act or something.
It is a legal defense against anyone that directly or indirectly induces/encourages illegal behaviour.
This can be anything from links, or talk about cracks (like this post? er..)
to direct tips on where an how to get illegal copies.
Which I find kinda ironic, since protection systems in a way induce illegal behaviour.
(searching for NoCD or NoInternet cracks etc)
So instead of trying to prevent illegal use of the software,
try to encourage legal use of the software instead.
It's time and money well spent and not wasted like with protection systems.
You get loyal and devoted users, that will happily help test Beta versions
give suggestions and feature requests, help other users,
and stick with you and maybe buy other software you make as well.
And best of all, loyal users are the best advertisement there is,
they will tell their friends and anyone they meet how cool this or that is.
And once those become users, they will tell others, who tell others.
word of mouth is powerful and often underestimated.
All the above can easily be used to reflect i.e PureBasic.
Just about anyone even remotely interested in programming
I constantly mention how great PureBasic is,
and I happily recommend it to anyone I meet etc.
Don't be as single minded as crackers and warez people,
things broad and think far. Think outside the box.
(ok, I know, I'm sounding silly here but you get the point I hope hehe)
Make having a legal copy way more desireable than a illegal copy,
and you have a unbreakable "protection" against piracy/cracks etc.
Regards...
> I've dropped the idea of protection fully.
> It saves me time and possibly money
I know what you mean, but you should at least have some type of simple
protection. Yes, it'll be cracked, but there's always those who don't know
about cracks and will be motivated to pay due to your protection. If you
don't have any protection then that market will just use your app for free.
What you're doing is like not watching a customer in a shop, and letting
them know there's no security cameras. Of course some of them will
steal as a result of that. By having a simple protection in your app, it's
like letting the customer know there's a camera in the shop. Some will
still steal anyway, but it will also stop many from doing it...
> It saves me time and possibly money
I know what you mean, but you should at least have some type of simple
protection. Yes, it'll be cracked, but there's always those who don't know
about cracks and will be motivated to pay due to your protection. If you
don't have any protection then that market will just use your app for free.
What you're doing is like not watching a customer in a shop, and letting
them know there's no security cameras. Of course some of them will
steal as a result of that. By having a simple protection in your app, it's
like letting the customer know there's a camera in the shop. Some will
still steal anyway, but it will also stop many from doing it...
Last edited by PB on Thu Feb 24, 2005 8:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I compile using 5.31 (x86) on Win 7 Ultimate (64-bit).
"PureBasic won't be object oriented, period" - Fred.
"PureBasic won't be object oriented, period" - Fred.
-
NoahPhense
- Addict
- Posts: 1999
- Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2003 8:30 pm
- Location: North Florida