On Aug 29, 1:17�am, Eric Jacobsen <eric.jacob...@ieee.org> wrote:> On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:58:40 -0400, Randy Yates <ya...@ieee.org> > wrote: > > > > > > >vcar <hi...@hit.edu.cn> writes: > > >> On Aug 25, 2:56�pm, "Greg" <G...@nospam.ca> wrote: > >>> Hello vcar, > > >>> What would you suggest ? > >>> Let's assume I am an engineer hooking up with a Logic Analyser to your SPI > >>> interface. > >>> Afterwards I play the recorded code into a non protected board booting my > >>> DSP with the same code. > >>> Now I can analyse everything disregarding what you've scrambled while > >>> loading. > > >>> � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � Regards, Greg. > > >>> "vcar" <hi...@hit.edu.cn> schrieb im Newsbeitragnews:c8fcf81a-4417-4d37-9994-5041b583fc8c@z11g2000prl.googlegroups.com... > > >>> > Is there anybody who can give some advice? I think this is very common > >>> > problem in product design.- Hide quoted text - > > >>> - Show quoted text - > > >> As you have said, you can read the content of SPI EEPROM, so you can > >> get everything you want. Even I will check the DSP Chip ID in my > >> program, you can crack it away by disassembling the program code. So > >> this is the typical situation. > >> The problem is what could I do to prevent this kind of matter happen. > >> Althought it is very hard to be protected completedly, I want to > >> increase the crack cost as much as possible. > > >This sort of protection would have to be built into the DM648 itself, > >Since it's not, you can't use the usual methods (encryption, e.g.). > > >You _could_ obfuscate your code at the source level, though. > > There are some automated code obsfuscators out there that are pretty > hilarious to use. � You put your code in and the comments come out > translated into your choice of Muppets Swedish Chef speak or a wide > variety of difficult-to-read accents. � They're actually pretty > effective, but also highly silly. � We've considered using them a > couple of times, but pretty much chicken out when it comes down to it. > > Eric Jacobsen > Minister of Algorithms > Abineau Communicationshttp://www.ericjacobsen.org > > Blog:http://www.dsprelated.com/blogs-1/hf/Eric_Jacobsen.php- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -I think the obsfuscators could be a good choice for me. It is similar to the shells in PC software. Even there will be the shell unlocker one day serveral years later, It could be a tough job for the hackers when the appropriate shell unlocker has not be published and manual work is required. Could anyone recommend some free obsfuscators for DSP platforms? Especially for TI C6000?
Program intellectual property protection on DM648
Started by ●August 21, 2008
Reply by ●August 29, 20082008-08-29
Reply by ●August 30, 20082008-08-30
On Aug 29, 9:18�am, Jim Thomas <jtho...@bittware.com> wrote:> Eric Jacobsen wrote: > > There are some automated code obsfuscators out there that are pretty > > hilarious to use. � You put your code in and the comments come out > > translated into your choice of Muppets Swedish Chef speak or a wide > > variety of difficult-to-read accents... > > That makes me think of the language preferences available at Google. �Go > to google, click "Preferences", and change the Interface language to one > of these: > > Bork, bork, bork! > Elmer Fudd > Hacker > Klingon > Pig LatinKlingon doesn't belong on that list. It's a full language with a distinct grammar and vocabulary, not something like Pig Latin that can be produced by an automated text filter. We now return to the comp.dsp newsgroup, already in progress. -- Alan Anderson, professional programmer and amateur Klingonist proud member of the Klingon Language Institute since 1995 qo'mey poSmoH Hol <> language opens worlds <> http://www.kli.org/
