3 ms·

No, strong AI will solve the problem - just ask geohots... The system that is uncrackable has not yet been invented, the best we've been able to do is to make t

No, strong AI will solve the problem - just ask geohots... The system that is uncrackable has not yet been invented, the best we've been able to do is to make the process slower.

mjb 15y ago
I think it comes down to which problem you are trying to solve: 1) Recover enough to understand the program and make small changes (this is the cracking case). 2) Recover the original code of the program or something close to it, that can be 'stolen' and maintained without much more overhead than if you had the original code. (1) is not easy, but is becoming easier. (2) is still a long way off, and isn't solvable without a good understanding of the domain the original code was written for.
- spc476 15y ago
  There are legitimate cases for (2). I've worked in companies that have lost the source code to programs developed. If you're wondering how source code can be lost---think of no revision control, a poor backup policy, and a program that goes a long time between modifications.
demallien 15y ago
Can I ask what the deal is with the downvotes on my parent post? I made the claim that strong AI can solve the decompilation problem, noting that humans - an example of strong AI (well, except we're not artificial...) - can and do decompile successfully, giving geohots (a pre-eminent cracker) as an example. What more do people want???
- grav1tas 15y ago
  I don't think you connected your arguments very well. Just because a human can do something doesn't mean that AI's are the best solution to the task. I'm not sure how your specific example plays to the general case. Both AIs and Humans both attempt to ape some fundamental truism or formalism about logic to compile and decompile programs. To me, it's better off knowing what those formalisms are than aping them with intelligent behavior, though finding formalisms is hard so sometimes we make do.

No, strong AI will solve the problem - just ask geohots... The system that is uncrackable has not yet been invented, the best we've been able to do is to make the process slower.

mjb 15y ago

I think it comes down to which problem you are trying to solve: 1) Recover enough to understand the program and make small changes (this is the cracking case). 2) Recover the original code of the program or something close to it, that can be 'stolen' and maintained without much more overhead than if you had the original code. (1) is not easy, but is becoming easier. (2) is still a long way off, and isn't solvable without a good understanding of the domain the original code was written for.

spc476 15y ago
There are legitimate cases for (2). I've worked in companies that have lost the source code to programs developed. If you're wondering how source code can be lost---think of no revision control, a poor backup policy, and a program that goes a long time between modifications.

demallien 15y ago

Can I ask what the deal is with the downvotes on my parent post? I made the claim that strong AI can solve the decompilation problem, noting that humans - an example of strong AI (well, except we're not artificial...) - can and do decompile successfully, giving geohots (a pre-eminent cracker) as an example. What more do people want???

grav1tas 15y ago
I don't think you connected your arguments very well. Just because a human can do something doesn't mean that AI's are the best solution to the task. I'm not sure how your specific example plays to the general case. Both AIs and Humans both attempt to ape some fundamental truism or formalism about logic to compile and decompile programs. To me, it's better off knowing what those formalisms are than aping them with intelligent behavior, though finding formalisms is hard so sometimes we make do.