2 ms·

In 2017 it was obfuscated using Arxan's "ProtectIT" (you can view the patent) and did use whitebox cryptography. I didn't look at the dll, but at the .so file f

by zb3 8y ago

In 2017 it was obfuscated using Arxan's "ProtectIT" (you can view the patent) and did use whitebox cryptography. I didn't look at the dll, but at the .so file for linux (for fun). I guess it should be harder now EDIT: If reversing this DLL/so is illegal, how I am supposed to be able to test for a potential security vulnerability? Not that I can do this, just wondering...

bubblethink 8y ago
>how I am supposed to be able to test for a potential security vulnerability? You aren't. There were some amendments made to DMCA recently that added a few more narrow provisions (mainly repairing tractors and such), but I don't think reverse engineering closed libraries was one of them. In particular, things close to DRM were not granted. For example, request for exemptions for tinkering with HDCP or optical drives were denied.