Comparing these two statements makes my head spin:
The encryption algorithm in Perl2Exe has been improved.
they don't guarantee any security of the source code
Why? Why? If it's just a bundler, let it be a bundler. It can never be really secure, because I can always single step the program to the point where you call the Perl interpreter's "eval" method with the now-decrypted source code.
This is looking more and more like snake oil. And since you somehow know it's been improved recently, I suspect you are an insider with the developers.
So, why did the developers bother to increase the security? Because XOR is something a customer base can understand, but "more security" isn't? Are you only reacting to the public outcry? Would you have fixed it if it didn't show up on bugtraq? Will you upgrade it even more when (not if) it gets broken again?
If it's truly secure, open up your methods to peer review.
Until then, I'll stand by my statement that perl2exe is snake oil, being sold to a naive public, and that's unethical to me.
-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker
Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.