NYCPHP Meetup

[ophir prusak]

In a perfect world :
1. No one would use software they didn't pay for or use it beyond the
licesnse agreement they purchased.
2. Everyone could distribute source code with their application.

But, we don't live in a perfect world.
We live in a world where the majority of napster users honestly think
they're not doing anything wrong.
We live in a world where most people don't think much of copying a program
from a friend, or downloading a crack, serial, etc.

I'm a strong believer of open source, and I think it makes sense (even
business sense) for many types of software and projects.

I'm also a strong beleiver in people getting paid for their work.
When I'm doing a project there's a difference if I'm selling my (source)
code or I'm selling a solution.

As long as their are people using software they didn't pay for (or in
a way/amount they didn't pay for) - we'll need ways to help protect people
who write software from being abused. This includes products like Zend
Encoder (and others).


---- "louie" <louie at zibi.co.il> wrote:
> greetings !
> 
> protecting code  in open source is kinda lame,
> every line of code sould be publish.
> knowlage sharing, and coding expirance 
> is the only plus in Advance web development.
> is used to code in asp.
> now i'm using LAMP to almost any project i got.
> i do think php is going to overcome anythin' out there.
> and zeev rocks ^-^ (but just cuz he's from israel.)
> 
> chap chap,
> louie.
> 
> -Marilyn Monroe had six toes.  
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kyle Tuskey" <ktuskey at exostream.com>
> To: "NYPHP Talk" <talk at nyphp.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 8:49 PM
> Subject: RE: [nycphp-talk] testers wanted - phpguardian.com
> 
> 
> > 
> > Charles,
> > 
> > I don't respond to people who are narrow minded and need to curse
> to
> > make a point.  Protecting code is a valid practice.  I'm sorry you
> don't
> > agree, but please don't bring it to an infantile level. Thanks.
> > 
> > Kyle
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: charles at softwareprototypes.com
> > [mailto:charles at softwareprototypes.com] 
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 11:43 PM
> > To: NYPHP Talk
> > Subject: Re: [nycphp-talk] testers wanted - phpguardian.com
> > 
> > Kyle, at the risk of lacking subtility,
> > 
> > if I loosed some extremely sophisticated search engines (and I've
> > written AI code and articles for AI Expert) on the intenet on a
> > hundred PCs and let those search enines run for a year, do you thing
> > I could find a SINGLE fuckin' competitor of yours who'd even want
> to
> > see your fuckin' code? Really now.
> > 
> > You're just fuckin' your clients over and fooling yourself. Try it
> > with a free-ware, GPLed release of the previous version of your
> > product and you'll be disgusted at the complete and utter lack of
> > interest EXCEPT by your existing client base, maybe, if you're lucky.
> > 
> > Code obfuscation is pointless and you'd be surprised how it HURTS
> you
> > and HELPS your competitors since they have to reverse engineer with
> a
> > clever way of doing what they see your code doing without your own
> > prejudices. 
> > 
> > They probably come up with shit you never thought of. Much more
> > clever than anything you came up with in the first place. (I made
> a
> > MISTAKE reverse engineering an expert system inference engine and
> > ended up with a complete enterprise modeling engine which then went
> > nowhere because the managers of the firm were great real-estate sales
> > men but couldn't manage an MIS project at gun point. Utter
> > dick-heads.)
> > 
> > Obfuscation is a mechanical process and if YOU can obfuscate it,
> it
> > can be UN-obfuscated almost as fast as you can muddy the waters.
> > (there were viri written for M$ XL BEFORE XL was even available on
> > CD-ROM.) And by ditching the variable and function names, (unless
> the
> > DDE/OLE maps are available,) the un-obfuscation gets rid of your
> own
> > internal slants and just shows things as they really are.
> > 
> > Stop with the code obfuscation BS.
> > 
> > The business and the money is NOT in the product but in the process
> > of building the product. HOW your company got the product spec in
> the
> > first place is much more important than the product to because life
> > is a moving target and whatever you deliver TODAY is obsolete before
> > you even deliver it.
> > 
> > Obfuscation is for long-term losers. phpguardian is a sham, a waste
> > of time and money and utterly counter-productive. AND NOBODY needs
> it.
> > 
> > -Ch-A.
> > 
> > > From: "Kyle Tuskey" <ktuskey at exostream.com>
> > > Organization: New York PHP
> > > Reply-To: talk at nyphp.org
> > > Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 19:55:06 -0400
> > > To: NYPHP Talk <talk at nyphp.org>
> > > Subject: RE: [nycphp-talk] testers wanted - phpguardian.com
> > > 
> > > I don't necessarily think this product is amazing, but I think
> > saying
> > > that code obfuscation isn't needed because "it isn't open source
> > > friendly" is a bold statement.  Some of us develop commercial
> > > redistributable software that needs obfuscation to protect the
> > code.  It
> > > is also a valuable tool for certain contracting circumstances.
>  I do
> > > feel that the zend encoder is the best obfuscator on the market,
> but
> > > then again I'm jaded since I know zeev and support his company.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -- Kyle
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: charles at softwareprototypes.com
> > > [mailto:charles at softwareprototypes.com] 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 2:00 PM
> > > To: NYPHP Talk
> > > Subject: Re: [nycphp-talk] testers wanted - phpguardian.com
> > > 
> > > uh, php runs on the server side. It never gets off of the server
> > > because that's pointless.
> > > 
> > > Just who are we shielding the code from exactly? 
> > > 
> > > - Ourselves? Get real.
> > > - The "competition"? It entirely defeats the purpose and spirit
> of
> > > open source. 
> > > - "Crackers?" They just stress test your back-up and recovery
> > > procedures. 
> > > 
> > > Use CVS or SourceSafe or some other file versioning system and
> put
> > > checked-out copies of the the files in a tree under a shared
> > > directory or under the various home directories.
> > > 
> > > This abomination entirely defeats the purpose and spirit of open
> > > source. I say ignore it. If you're really in a snit, boycott it.
> > > 
> > > Its a __bad__ idea. ON par with charging for your OS.
> > > 
> > > -Ch-A.
> > > 
> > >> From: Hans Zaunere <zaunere at yahoo.com>
> > >> Organization: New York PHP
> > >> Reply-To: talk at nyphp.org
> > >> Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 10:29:14 -0400
> > >> To: NYPHP Talk <talk at nyphp.org>
> > >> Subject: [nycphp-talk] testers wanted - phpguardian.com
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> There's been some talk lately of source protection.  This package
> > > looks
> > >> very nice after a quick glance.
> > >> 
> > >>> From: "ade_inovica" <mrwowza at hotmail.com>
> > >>> 
> > >>> Hi there
> > >>> 
> > >>> We're just about ready to release an application called
> > > phpguardian -
> > >>> an application which will protect php source code.  We are really
> 
> > >>> keen to get some people to try it, so if anyone is interested,
> 
> > >>> please visit http://www.phpguardian.com and go to the download
> > link
> > >>> 
> > >>> All the best to everyone!
> > >>> 
> > >>> Ade
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> __________________________________________________
> > >> Do You Yahoo!?
> > >> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> > >> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
> > >> 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
>