Re: [boost] [encrypted strings]

Subject: Re: [boost] [encrypted strings]
From: Raindog (raindog_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-04-28 01:30:59

Sid Sacek wrote:
> Does boost have any compile-time classes for string encryption? Is it
> even possible?
>
>  
>
> When a hacker dumps an executable, they can see all of the strings the
> program might use, and some of those strings may contain sensitive
> information. Does boost have any classes that can encode the strings at
> compile-time? Ideally, the third string in the code below would never
> compile the "secret" string into the final binary.
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
> -Sid
>
>   
Sid,

I made my original suggestion based on being both a virus analyst by 
profession and game hacker by hobby. No offense to the suggestions that 
have been made by others on this mail list[1], but they all appear to 
suffer the same problem in that laymen are suggesting solutions that not 
even professionals have completely solved. I understand that you are 
looking for simple techniques to "thwart noobs from haxxing your 
shizzle", but in reality, anyone unable to bypass the methods suggested 
would be unable to bypass a plain text target. Rolling your own solution 
has so many problems that I cannot even begin to tackle them here. 
You'll be much better off using an off the shelf protection mechanism.

If you're really itching to try your hand, look at pecompact which 
allows you to provide your own decryption/encryption algorithm on top of 
their packer.

[1]. Edouard's suggestion appears to imply that he has at least a 
cursory introduction to the problems faced by anti-piracy/anti-reverse 
engineering experts.