Does PureBasic insert an identifier in your executables?

[toledo]

Microsoft Visual Basic inserts an identifier into the header of each executable it compiles so that anyone who knows where to look can see it was written in Microsoft Visual Basic. Microsoft Visual C++ does the same thing. Does PureBasic also insert an identifier into the header of it's executable when they are compiled?

[Nituvious]

The only thing I am aware of is when you use PureBasic Constants you can usually find them within the executable by using a hex editor.
Like, #PB_Window_SystemMenu will appear in ASCII.

[UserOfPure]

Like, #PB_Window_SystemMenu will appear in ASCII.

No it doesn't. Where did you get that idea? None of my executables have it.

[c4s]

Programs like Exeinfo PE are able to detect executables that are created by PureBasic (but version number is wrong) through a signature - but I don't know exactly how this works.

[JCV]

PB does not insert identifier in exe.
But you can identify it easily if you can see PB_ prefix on some PB functions used.

[Nituvious]

No it doesn't. Where did you get that idea? None of my executables have it.

Yeah.

[UserOfPure]

Don't "yeah" me. I was referring to what I directly quoted; that which you mentioned, the text: #PB_Window_SystemMenu. :roll: Do a search for that and it's not there. In fact, NO PureBasic constants are there (search for #Red, #PB_Gadget_BackColor, etc) and you'll see. Because you did say (bold mine):

The only thing I am aware of is when you use PureBasic Constants you can usually find them within the executable by using a hex editor.

What say ye now?

[Trond]

No it doesn't. Where did you get that idea? None of my executables have it.

Yeah.

Those are not constants, they are functions. :roll:

[UserOfPure]

Exactly my point. Thank you.

[Nituvious]

I pulled an all nighter, you have to excuse my mistakes. That was what the "Yeah." was about. I was acknowledging my own mishap.

[UserOfPure]

I thought the "yeah" was "yeah, you're wrong". No problem. It's cool. These things happen.

[greyhoundcode]

UserOfPure, Nituvious, shall we have a group hug?

[freak]

No it doesn't. Where did you get that idea? None of my executables have it.

Yeah.

Those are not constants, they are functions. :roll:

Nope, they are window property names


PB does not insert any signature for identification. But there is no attempt to hide the fact that the program is written in PB either, so it should be easy to detect trough strings like these which are prefixed with "PB_" to avoid any conflicts.

[c4s]

PB does not insert any signature for identification.

Do you know how these signature scan tools work? Why does for example "exeinfo PE" (see my post above) know that an application was build using PureBasic, C++, etc.

[eesau]

ExeInfo probably just scans the executable for PB_* strings.