by MusicMan3001 » March 29th, 2012, 12:34 pm
Sure, I know that a determined cracker will get what he wants.
But it just seems to me that naming the dynamic library something generic that's not easily trackable on Google, and something completely unrelated to licensing, like "Data.dll/.dylib", would be a very quick and easy way to add just a bit more protection.
If I Google "TurboActivate", your web site is the first result, and then I can download all your SDK code to investigate further -- which I assume would be helpful to any cracker.
Again, not a big deal, but just a suggestion to consider.
Sure, I know that a determined cracker will get what he wants.
But it just seems to me that naming the dynamic library something generic that's not easily trackable on Google, and something completely unrelated to licensing, like "Data.dll/.dylib", would be a very quick and easy way to add just a bit more protection.
If I Google "TurboActivate", your web site is the first result, and then I can download all your SDK code to investigate further -- which I assume would be helpful to any cracker.
Again, not a big deal, but just a suggestion to consider.