By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
448,784 Members | 1,182 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 448,784 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Looking for good Stunnix-like obfuscators

P: n/a
For some reason I have a problem with Stunnix, are there any other
similar obfuscators?
Nov 29 '07 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
7 Replies


P: n/a
On Nov 29, 2:40 pm, Sharon <2goo...@gmail.comwrote:
For some reason I have a problem with Stunnix, are there any
other similar obfuscators?
You want people to suggest other obfuscators that you would have
problems with?
Nov 29 '07 #2

P: n/a
On Nov 29, 6:17 pm, Henry <rcornf...@raindrop.co.ukwrote:
On Nov 29, 2:40 pm, Sharon <2goo...@gmail.comwrote:
For some reason I have a problem with Stunnix, are there any
other similar obfuscators?

You want people to suggest other obfuscators that you would have
problems with?
Hehe, yes :)
I need something a little better than Jasob and the rest of these guys
-
a program that will have several iterations of "encrpytion-like"
obfuscation (with the unescape/eval scheme)
Nov 29 '07 #3

P: n/a
Michal wrote:
On Nov 29, 6:17 pm, Henry <rcornf...@raindrop.co.ukwrote:
>On Nov 29, 2:40 pm, Sharon <2goo...@gmail.comwrote:
>>For some reason I have a problem with Stunnix, are there any
other similar obfuscators?
You want people to suggest other obfuscators that you would have
problems with?

Hehe, yes :)
I need something a little better than Jasob and the rest of these guys
-
a program that will have several iterations of "encrpytion-like"
obfuscation (with the unescape/eval scheme)
Any encryption can be broken; it is just a matter of time and effort. You
are wasting your time, and what is far worse, that of the subscribers of
this newsgroup.
PointedEars
--
var bugRiddenCrashPronePieceOfJunk = (
navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') != -1
&& navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac') != -1
) // Plone, register_function.js:16
Nov 29 '07 #4

P: n/a
On Nov 30, 1:26 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...@web.de>
wrote:
Michal wrote:
On Nov 29, 6:17 pm, Henry <rcornf...@raindrop.co.ukwrote:
On Nov 29, 2:40 pm, Sharon <2goo...@gmail.comwrote:
For some reason I have a problem with Stunnix, are there any
other similar obfuscators?
You want people to suggest other obfuscators that you would have
problems with?
Hehe, yes :)
I need something a little better than Jasob and the rest of these guys
-
a program that will have several iterations of "encrpytion-like"
obfuscation (with the unescape/eval scheme)

Any encryption can be broken; it is just a matter of time and effort. You
are wasting your time, and what is far worse, that of the subscribers of
this newsgroup.

PointedEars
--
var bugRiddenCrashPronePieceOfJunk = (
navigator.userAgent.indexOf('MSIE 5') != -1
&& navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mac') != -1
) // Plone, register_function.js:16
Any lock can be broken, so why do you bother locking your front door?
Dec 1 '07 #5

P: n/a
On Dec 1, 4:00 pm, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...@web.de>
wrote:
Sharon wrote:
On Nov 30, 1:26 am, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...@web.de>
wrote:
Michal wrote:
On Nov 29, 6:17 pm, Henry <rcornf...@raindrop.co.ukwrote:
On Nov 29, 2:40 pm, Sharon <2goo...@gmail.comwrote:
For some reason I have a problem with Stunnix, are there any
other similar obfuscators?
You want people to suggest other obfuscators that you would have
problems with?
Hehe, yes :)
I need something a little better than Jasob and the rest of these guys
-
a program that will have several iterations of "encrpytion-like"
obfuscation (with the unescape/eval scheme)
Any encryption can be broken; it is just a matter of time and effort. You
are wasting your time, and what is far worse, that of the subscribers of
this newsgroup.
[...]
Any lock can be broken, so why do you bother locking your front door?

This is rather a philosophical question that would lead to a discussion
about to what extent people can be trusted. Suffice it to say that one
major reason for locking your front door is because you deem some or all
of the content of your home valuable enough to at least one other person
that would be therefore willing to take possession of it, even if only
temporary, without your explicit consent.

However, in the case of client-side scripting, that possibility is heavily
overestimated.
I am pretty sure this is the case with some people's homes
Anyways - yes I do think my code will be valuable to others, and yes I
would appreciate a good stunnix-like obfuscator.
Dec 2 '07 #6

P: n/a
Sharon meinte:
I am pretty sure this is the case with some people's homes
Anyways - yes I do think my code will be valuable to others, and yes I
would appreciate a good stunnix-like obfuscator.
(99% percent of the programmers out there think, they're the best in the
world. The remaining 1% think, they are still exceptionally good.)

Well, I doubt that your JS code is that valuable. so far I've never seen
any obfuscated JS, worth the effort of stealing. After all, you're not
even able to deal with your obfuscator - what terrific JS can I expect?

And *if* it is really worth stealing, one can easily get around the
obfuscation. However, understanding and adapting your sensational piece
of JS to the needs of the thief is - I suppose - much more work, than
writing the thing from scratch.

Gregor

--
http://www.gregorkofler.at ::: Landschafts- und Reisefotografie
http://www.licht-blick.at ::: Forum für Multivisionsvorträge
http://www.image2d.com ::: Bildagentur für den alpinen Raum
Dec 2 '07 #7

P: n/a
On Dec 2, 5:13 am, Gregor Kofler <use...@gregorkofler.atwrote:
Sharon meinte:
I am pretty sure this is the case with some people's homes
Anyways - yes I do think my code will be valuable to others, and yes I
would appreciate a good stunnix-like obfuscator.

(99% percent of the programmers out there think, they're the best in the
world. The remaining 1% think, they are still exceptionally good.)

Well, I doubt that your JS code is that valuable. so far I've never seen
any obfuscated JS, worth the effort of stealing. After all, you're not
even able to deal with your obfuscator - what terrific JS can I expect?

And *if* it is really worth stealing, one can easily get around the
obfuscation. However, understanding and adapting your sensational piece
of JS to the needs of the thief is - I suppose - much more work, than
writing the thing from scratch.

Gregor

--http://www.gregorkofler.at::: Landschafts- und Reisefotografiehttp://www..licht-blick.at ::: Forum für Multivisionsvorträgehttp://www.image2d.com::: Bildagentur für den alpinen Raum
I think that the code does not need to be exceptionally good to be
kept away from other people's eyes. I could mean some business rule
or something important to your client... and you want to assure to
your clients that that piece of logic or data structure is kept
secret... but until that level of discretion is achieved in the
browser... if you have something worth hiding... you better put it
server side.

Ernesto
Dec 4 '07 #8

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.