Re: obfuscating source code

in reply to obfuscating source code

The main reason these companies don't want anyone not bound to their contracts getting ahold of the source is that changes require re certification, and amateurs changing the code without knowing what they are doing can have some rather bad side effects.

I can see how obfuscating the source would help with that, but what says that they have to change anything in the first place? If they find a version of your code that they like, there's no reason that they have to accept the next version in order to stay with the version that has been certified.. There's a reason that mainframes still exists; it's called legacy software.

thor

Feel the white light, the light within Be your own disciple, fan the sparks of will For all of us waiting, your kingdom will come

Comment on Re: obfuscating source code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: obfuscating source code by snacktime (Sexton) on Dec 25, 2004 at 18:20 UTC
An end user could almost always use an older version and still be fine. Processors rarely make changes that cause older api's to not work. More frequently the transactions processed using an older api do not qualify for the best rates. When an upgrade is required, the merchant's bank will usually tell the merchant they have to be using the most recent version, or they can't process transactions.	[reply]
Re^3: obfuscating source code by thor (Priest) on Dec 26, 2004 at 03:42 UTC
And so the question that the bean counters have to answer is "which would cost us more: the upgrade or the lost revenue due to having the old version?". Sometimes, it just doesn't pay to upgrade. thor `Feel the white light, the light within Be your own disciple, fan the sparks of will For all of us waiting, your kingdom will come`	[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom