Protecting intellectual property

I was hoping to get some insight from all of you on how you protect your software from being stolen if you are using Java.
I know that .class files can be reverse engineered very easily. I know someone is bound to tell me that you can reverse engineer .exe files as well....but the difference in ability needed is not even comparable. When I looked at this concern a couple years ago the only thing we could do was use an obfuscator. The most widely used obfuscators have reverse obfuscators now. The other option now available are programs like Excelsior JET that will compile the code to an .exe. I know this renders the ability of Java to be "write once, use anywhere" useless...but I know the platform it will be used on.
My questions is pretty simple. I have a Swing stand-alone application that I would like to release, but I want to protect the code as best as I can. I know I am not the only person to have this question. So what do you guys use to protect your intellectual property? Is there something in Java I besides the two methods I mentioned above that will work to protect my code? Is there another alternative besides Excelsior JET?

You mention staying a step ahead of the crackers.
That was the crux of the question: How do you stay a
step ahead of the crackers?
I realize it is futile to try and stop reverse
engineering completely. However, leaving it as class
files takes absolutely no skill to reverse engineer
the files. I would atleast like to stop some people
from getting the source.I think a lot of it coes down to pragmatism.
What's your goal? Is it to make sure that not even one cracker can possibly ever get even one single illegal copy of your code? No, probably not. That's not a reasonable goal.
Is your goal to provide some reasonable level of protection against loss of revenue or theft of intellectual property? I assume it's something along those lines.
If a craker or two or ten uses your idea and claims it as their own, it sucks, but, oh well.
If they make a little money from it, it sucks, but oh well.
The world's not perfect. Accept it and move on.
If they make a bunch of money from it and/or get published somewhere with the claim that it's their own work, then it's worth some attention.
In this case, you use the law. If you've done the due diligence to document and maybe even register this as your work before releasing it, then you have solid legal grounds on which to argue, should it come to that.
But to back up a step, and throw that pragmatism in there again: There's a shitload of software available online. Honestly, what's the probability that yours is so good and so unique that you're going to find yourself in the above "worst case" situation? Note: I don't mean that in an insulting sense at all. just an attempt to inject a little reality.

Similar Messages

How do I protect intellectual property in my PDF?

Situation: I have several (qty 50-100) PDF documents that get released to customers as part of their final product. I need to protect these documents, and prevent others from copying and/or uploading PDFs into CAD programs.
One way is to save it as a TIFF, then re-save it back to a PDF. This results in a rasterized (not vector) PDF, and makes it nearly impossible to upload into CAD. However, I need a way to do 50-100 at a time, and ideally to reduce this to a single step.
The other way, I am told, is to encrpyt and apply a security when saving. So far I have not been able to get this to work successfully, and again, I will have an issue with being able to do large qtys at once.
I am sure that other firms must have these same issues. I have not found a solution through the forums, Google, or Adobe.
Please Help!

Hi George,
I am not concerned about the text as much as the design. It is possible (though maybe not kosher) to take a vector-based PDF and copy it into a CAD program, therefore stealing our engineers' designs and effort. I don't know exactly how this is done, as I am not an engineer, but it is possible.
It is much harder, if not impossible, to do this when the PDFs are rasterized.
For example, create something in Illustrator, and save it as a PDF. You can open it back in Illustrator and change it, you can zoom in on the PDF and everything is very clear. Take that PDF and save it as a TIFF, then take that TIFF and save it back as a PDF.
The final file is pixelated if you zoom in, and you are unable to open it and change it as a vector. Does that make sense?
We want to present our cusotmer with PDF files as the final, and again, the large qty is a major issue.
Regarding your response, how do I apply security with a batch sequence? Will this achieve the result I am looking for?

Flex 4 protecting intellectual property

I am building kind of a cms which is a normal flex 4 project. Lets say I have 1 application and 2 modules: the website itself and the control panel. The website itself module will be presented to the end users as a template which they can modify. But the control panel module will be compiled in swf and then deleted from the project so no source will be available. The project will still load that module and use it as the system requires it.
So I have a few questions regarding this:
1) is it possible to hack the exported swf module and retreive the source files from it?
2) is it possible to protect it from that?
3) should i set licenses on every source code I have?
4) I use module for the control panel since there are less restrictions, but would setting the control panel in a separate application and load it as trusted or not trusted application work for me better in this case?
I would be very happy if someone with experience or adobe employee could take a few minutes to guide me a bit of what should I do. Thanks a lot in advance!

check out this post -
http://www.nitrolm.com/blog/2009/06/23/how-to-hack-an-air-app-swf/
It is always possible to "unofficially" decompile an swf file. I believe this company nitrolm also sells an swf obfuscation solution but i havent check it out yet.

Flash Intellectual Property Protection

Hi,
I wanted to find out how my intellectual property, such as graphic designs, photos, tweens designs, etc can be protected in a .swf flash file?.
This is because there are .swf file decompliers which can very easily convert my files into .fla and so access can be gained to my jpeg designs, photos, etc.
Is there a best practise which can be followed whereby some form of security measures can be taken within flash code, etc? And if so does anyone know what these measures are?
Also is there a way to then monitor and search for my design materials online such as through google?
Thanks
Dan

Once it's on the web - and mainly relies on your files to be download to the client/user machine, they've got your stuff ;-) They can take images and use them, take a SWF and decompile and harvest your code, etc. But, this has been stuff people hav ebeen able to do for decades...since the invention of the web, really, so it's not a new issue. Now, is it ethical to do so, is another issue.
I'm not up to date on how to prevent a SWF file from being decompiled (if there even is a 100% secure way)... But soembody would have to be really ambitious to go after YOUR product...and for what purpose? I think it's a good conversation, one that deserves some info,.
As for audio/video.images, this has a tried-n-true mechnism: copyright law. Search for it, learn about how the material/art you create is automatically copyrighted. But also learn that you can't take somebody to court for infringement unless you took further steps.
This issue, an kind of a fortunate way, has nothing to do with Flash - it's about code & content in general. That means there is a wealth of free info out there, you just have to search for it. Within an hour perooid of searching in Google, you'd be well versed and quite knowledgable. Go forth ;-)

SWF Decompilers & intellectual property

Hi.
I just learn that there are exist many SWF decompilers that
can take a SWF file and create from it the FLA file, as it is
before compilation with Actionscript libraries and everything. Till
now, I was thinking that my intellectual property was hidden in the
compiled swf file that no-one could exploit for his benefit. Now I
learn that when I publish a .swf file, anyone can retrieve from it
the .FLA file and all actionscript / libraries that I have used to
create it,
even if I have lock my .fla file with password (using the
'protect from import' option).
The funny think is that some decompilers even create the
comments I have in the actionscript! (are those compiled too in the
.swf file???)... Also the decompilers produced my personal
libraries-code as is from the .swf file!!!...
I am curious... Aren't those SWF decompilers illegal, as they
provide the oportunity to anyone to re-use foreign intellectual
property for his own?... Shouldn't they be locked at least to
decompile only projects that with a password you verify them that
you are the owner of the .swf file, and not a code-thief?....
I have already tested a few "google-popular" swf-secure
software, and they CAN'T create playable .swf files in big projects
(as a full-flash complicated web-site).. Thus actually there is no
protection against swf decompilers and intellectual property
stealing...
Your opinion on the subject?....

There is no such thing as encrypted computation; it doesn't exist, nor will it ever. Any file on any platform in existance that contains "instructions" for a computer to read are exposed. It doesn't matter whether it's plain old source code or CPU op-codes... instructions are instructions.
Although it's more difficult for a human to make sense of a huge list of op-codes than it is to make sense of source code, the instructions are still there, plain as day, and they have to be so the computer can read them and run them. Decompilers just take a list of op-codes (or ActionScript Byte Code in this instance) and perform some pattern recognition on them to make sense of them, turning them into source code. They are not illegal (no program can be illegal; that would be moronic), because they are performing a create/interpretive act. It's like if you wrote "3.14159265..." in a file, and the decompiler is like "Oh, that's just PI". So all it's doing is taking a bunch of op-codes that you published on the public internet and it's recognizing that a particular pattern is equivalent to an "if" statement or a method call, etc., and then it's formatting it to ActionScript syntax or whatever language it chooses.
Intellectual property is a joke, and by hiding information and processes, all you do is set humanity back a step, and inadvertently shoot yourself in the foot by not allowing other to use what you've created and improve upon it so there is every better stuff for you to use and improve upon. This pretty much sums it up:
"The problem with the analogy (of some girl having her exercise video distributed online for free) is that you are making false assumptions concerning morality.
The first false assumption is that because you spent a lot of time or money on something you have to right to profit from it. Ergo, if someone else takes any action that cuts into your profit margin, said action constitutes "theft".
Secondly, you are assuming that someone can "own" an idea. Imagine what a hindrance on progress it would have been if Sir Isaac Newton could have acquired a copyright for his ideas (Calculus, among others) and charged royalties for anyone wanting to utilize them.
To put these two false assumptions into perspective, imagine that child A wants to earn some summer cash and comes up with a business plan to do so. He decides to invest some of his money (as well as time) learning magic tricks with the intentions of putting on neighborhood magic shows shows and charging a modest admittance fee, thereby earning a profit. After buying several books on magic tricks he becomes proficient enough to begin putting on magic shows, even coming up with several of his own unique tricks. After the first show he begins to recoup his initial investment. However, child B cleverly figures out how to perform all of child A's tricks (even the ones child A came up with himself). child B loves illusions and decides to put on a nearly-identical magic show of his own. However, child B is not motivated by the prospect of earning money and allows free admittance to his shows. This action puts child A out of business before he was even able to recoup his initial investment (to say nothing of his the time he spent).
Child B is not in the wrong for taking action that eliminated child A's prospects of earning a profit as no one has the "right" to earn profits in the first place. If you have an idea that is economically viable you might earn a profit, but you never have the right to earn a profit. Furthermore, Child B did not "steal" child A's tricks because no one can own an idea. By not telling anyone you can possibly keep an idea to yourself, but never can you own it. Did Daniel Bernoulli own Bernoulli's Principal? Did David Hughs own the radio? Did Einstein own the theory of relativity? Would we owe royalties to their families for building an airplane, or using wireless communication or nuclear energy? Certainly not. Such a system would absolutely stifle progress. Civilization, as we know it, is possible because of building off of the ideas of others. As such, theft can only apply to tangible objects and not to concepts or profits. The problem with stealing is not that someone gains something, but rather that someone loses something."

OneNote and Corporate Intellectual Property Security - How?

I am trying to understand how OneNote can be used in a Corporate environment, and maintain some control over intellectual property. As I understand it, OneNote syncs to SkyDrive, which is a PERSONAL Live account. That means even if the IT Department
creates a SkyDrive account for that user, the user could then easily move corporate intellectual property to the account (which OneNote is designed to do and very adept at doing), and then change the password. The IT Department would have no way of knowing
what was uploaded, and the data could reside in someone's personal OneNote account for years.
If there was a way of setting up a corporate SkyDrive account in which the users were managed (password changes locked, and content could be reviewed), I think I would feel more comfortable with OneNote. Right now I don't see a way to do that, and
one Microsoft document says that is not possible.
If someone has a solution, please let me know.
Michael

The company does have policies for IP, but the threat with cloud servers is increasing the risk of moving large amounts of data offsite. If you put a program in front of an employee which invites cloud server use, you are inviting misuse of data.
The company would like to try out OneNote, but this product is obviously not designed for the Enterprise. I say that, because there is no easy way to disable web access in it. I want it off the menus. As someone else mentioned, "Out
of sight, out of mind." There are supposedly a couple of keys you can change which will turn off web integration, but I'll be darned if I can find them.
Here are the ones suggested.
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Office\Common\WebIntegration\WebIntegrationEnabled=0
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Office\Common\WebIntegration\WebIntegrationEnabled
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Policies\Microsoft\Office\14.0\OneNote\WebServiceProvider\DisableSkydriveSetupOnFirstBoot=1
People have also mentioned using the Group Policy Management Console, but the company has many remote offices, so there is no central domain controller.
Right now all I can do is block it at the firewall, which is not a great solution.
Michael

We're Hiring! - Intellectual Property Analyst

Please see the posting below. If you are interested in the position, please get in touch with us at janet at eclipse.org. Thanks!
Job Description
Description: Reporting to the Director of Intellectual Property, Legal Counsel and Secretary of the Foundation, the incumbent will be responsible for performing due diligence on inbound software contributions and maintaining well-documented records of the provenance of all source code in the Eclipse projects.
Duties:
This position requires managing multiple software reviews at any given time. These reviews will have both a "heads down" review component as well as a high level of interaction with software developers from both within and outside the Eclipse community. The review component will require focus and ananalytical and research perspective. In performing the research on any given package, it is likely that you will be interacting quite heavily in writing with software developers from around the globe.
Desired Skills & Experience:*
A) Required:
- Excellent time-management skills and multi-tasking ability; able to effectively manage competing priorities in a fast paced environment
- Strong interpersonal and communication skills;
- Client focused
- Strong attention to detail;
- Demonstrates sound judgment by taking appropriate actions;
- Dependable and responsible; willing to take initiative in the workplace;
- Team player
- Very comfortable with email, instant messenger, and more generally a computing environment.
- Strong keyboarding skills;
B) Preferred: *
- Demonstrable hands-on experience with copyright law and software licensing.
- Experience with open source licensing issues.
- Background in software development with knowledge of how software is built, managed and distributed.
- Experience with open source software development.
- Knowledge or a willingness to learn HTML
- Experience with process and project management
* We really need (A). While preference will be given to candidates with (B) skills, those who don't have those skills but a demonstrated inclination and ability to dig in and learn (with our help of course) will also be considered. If you think you fit that bill, we would love to hear from you.

This position has now been filled.

Creative: Defending intellectual property from their own stupidi

Creative was right in defending their intellectual property, the only one who can't see that are little kids.
Here's a question though, if you have to go defend your intellectual property from people adding what you said was supposed to be their originally, what does that do for you?
Not only that, but doesn't that make you legally liable as well?
If Vista is so hard to program for as alot have said, then how come some random dude can make software work in a matter of months while a group of developers can't in YEARS?!
Creative, your defending your illectual property from your own stupidity. You brought this on yourself.
Whats even sadder is how this is turning out.
I love Creative products. But this reminds me of the Commodore 64.
The makers of Commodore had made the awesome Commodore 64. Then they came out with the Amiga, far ahead of it's time. But it and the company died due to bad marketing.
It doesn't matter how good your product is, it matters how people like it
This day makes me sad. I'm not gonna take a piss on Creative like alot of the spammers are doing. But Creative has dug their own grave.
Message Edited by GodofDestructon on 04-0-2008 05:06 AM

Creative was right in defending their intellectual property, the only one who can't see that are little kids.
Here's a question though, if you have to go defend your intellectual property from people adding what you said was supposed to be their originally, what does that do for you?
Not only that, but doesn't that make you legally liable as well?
If Vista is so hard to program for as alot have said, then how come some random dude can make software work in a matter of months while a group of developers can't in YEARS?!
Creative, your defending your illectual property from your own stupidity. You brought this on yourself.
Whats even sadder is how this is turning out.
I love Creative products. But this reminds me of the Commodore 64.
The makers of Commodore had made the awesome Commodore 64. Then they came out with the Amiga, far ahead of it's time. But it and the company died due to bad marketing.
It doesn't matter how good your product is, it matters how people like it
This day makes me sad. I'm not gonna take a piss on Creative like alot of the spammers are doing. But Creative has dug their own grave.
Message Edited by GodofDestructon on 04-0-2008 05:06 AM

How do I report stolen intellectual property being sold on the app store? (ie. someone stole my friend's code)

Someone has stolen my friend's app wholesale (code, graphics, even the name) and is now selling it on the iTunes store, along with the android store.
I also think the same 'developer' may have done this to other people and would like to flag it to apple as I don't think they would be happy if small developers are being ripped off like this.
My friend has full development notes, etc. The info he stored online was broken into one day, and registered with both the Android and Apple stores a few days later. Is there anything I can do about this?
Any help is very much appreciated!

Email:
<www.apple.com/itunes/go/itunesconnect/contactus>
iTunes Connect Support <[email protected]>
[email protected]
Contact [email protected] to investigate signup issues.
iPhone Developer Program/Review Team <[email protected]>
https://developer.apple.com/appstore/resources/approval/contact.html
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Apple Developer Relations:
(800) 633 2152
(408) 974 4897
App Review Board:
https://developer.apple.com/appstore/resources/approval/contact.html
Developer Technical Support (\) Requests:
http://developer.apple.com/support/resources/technical-support.html
To request player scores be removed due to abuse or cheating, contact
<[email protected]>.

Default setting of the Work Protect Mode property

Hi,
can we set the default work protect mode to a particular value for every user in portal.
Where we would have to make the changes in Portal.
Best Regards
Sid

Hi Sid,
You can set the default work protect mode in the epcfloader service configuration.
Go to System Administration -> System Configuration -> Service Configuration, and edit the epcfloader service configuration.
Change the workprotect.mode.default to the setting you like:
1 = Protect unsaved data by opening a new browser window (standard setting)
2 = Unsaved data is lost
3 = Required behavior can be selected each time the popup appears
If you don't want your users to be able to override this setting in personalization dialog, set workprotect.mode.personalize=off.
See also http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/37/50fb5066f9db43b3b5d5fc8de0c051/frameset.htm.
Best regards,
Johan

HTML5 - securing intellectual property

Hi,
Currently when I publish in Captivate project then the content and how we created it is hidden from view (unless someone decompiles it) .
With HTML5 my understanding is that everthing is in plain text and there is no way of doing DRM or hiding content.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_HTML5_and_Flash
Is this right ?
Is this really an issue ?
regards Renovator

Thank-you Rod.
So its a big worry then because we like to support widget developers and protect our own stuff and html5 makes this harder
On the other hand html5 means that it would be easier to debug some captivate issues
I found this discussion on stack exchange
http://gamedev.stackexchange.com/questions/32435/html5-game-obfuscation
The options were
- hide code on the server
- accept that things will get stolen and concentrate on making them better
- embrace open source
- use copyright notices
- obfuscate variables at the expense of making bug tracking harder
- use native code objects
- leave some code on the server- I know this means the user has to be connected
There is also some talk that google, ms etc may get together to do DRM

Intellectual Property Management - Business Functions for SAP Customer Relationship Management - SAP Library

To add a comment, please log in or register on the top of this page and choose Reply. Please write your comment in English.
You can also go back to the SAP help page.

Hi,
It is a CRM Addon: Desktop Connection for SAP CRM – SAP Help Portal Page
Best Regards,
Sigrid

Is it unlawful to sell my used final cut studio version 3 software?

I had listed my software at eBay after deauthorizing it from my Mac Pro. Was I under a contract with Apple that prevented me from reselling the software?(I'm afraid I don't have time to read pages of fine print.) Here's the message I just received from eBay after the closed my auction:
You recently listed the following listing:
300791938347 - Apple Final Cut Studio Version 3 (Version 2 Retail plus Version 3 Upgrade)
Your listing has been removed.
Your item was removed because of a request we received from BSA (Business Software Alliance) (US), a member of our Verified Rights Owner Program (VeRO), asking us to remove the item for:
- Software offered for sale is in violation of an enforceable license agreement, which constitutes a copyright infringement.
If you have additional questions or concerns on why your item was removed, please contact BSA (Business Software Alliance) (US) directly at:
[email protected]
Please allow 7 days for BSA (Business Software Alliance) (US) to reply to you.
All listing fees associated with the removed item(s) have been credited back to your account.
The rights owner or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the rights owner, BSA (Business Software Alliance) (US), notified eBay that this listing violates intellectual property rights. When eBay receives a report of this type of violation, we remove the listing to comply with the law.
Copyright infringement is unlawful and against eBay policies. Copyright is the protection provided by law to the authors of creative works, such as movies, music, software, photographs, and books, both published and unpublished. Copyright owners have the exclusive right to reproduce the copyrighted work, to distribute copies of the copyrighted work, and to perform or display the copyrighted work publicly.
eBay doesn't allow the listing of unauthorized copies of copyrighted works. Unauthorized copies include backup, pirated, duplicated, or bootlegged copies.
If the product you are selling is a copy of another work that you aren't authorized to copy, don't list the item. eBay doesn't allow the sale of software if this violates the manufacturer's copyright license. Some common types of software with license agreement restrictions include:
-- Academic software: Software that is sold at discounted prices to students, faculty members, and educational institutions
-- Beta software: Early copies of software that are distributed by software developers for evaluation, testing, and troubleshooting purposes
-- Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) software: Software that is included with the purchase of new equipment such as a computer, digital camera, or printer
You may need to obtain the manufacturer's consent to sell this software.
For more information, please visit:
http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/replica-counterfeit.html
You may need to take a tutorial. The next time you sell, you may be asked to take the tutorial, if it's required. Once you've completed the tutorial successfully, please review your account status for any other possible concerns. If there are no other issues, you should be able to sell again.
To take the intellectual property tutorial, please visit:
http://pages.ebay.com/help/tutorial/verotutorial/intro.html
Please be aware that any additional violations of this policy may result in the suspension of your account. eBay understands that you may be concerned about this situation. We encourage you to contact BSA (Business Software Alliance) (US) directly if you have any questions.
You can send an email to: [email protected]
For more information on how eBay protects Intellectual Property, or for additional information if you believe that your listing has been removed as a result of an error or misidentification, please visit the following Help page:
http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/programs-vero-ov.html
For more information on why eBay may remove a listing, please visit:
http://pages.ebay.com/help/sell/questions/listing-ended.html
Please be assured that your listings have not been targeted in any way. Although there may be similar items currently listed on eBay, we review all listings that are reported to us by eBay members or Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) program participants. We rely on reports from our members to help maintain the safety and security of our Community. We encourage you to report any items by using the REPORT THIS ITEM button on the listing so we can quickly remove any other items that should be removed.
If you have additional questions, contact our policy experts. Get started by clicking the link below:
http://contact.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ContactCS&Query=1337&Domain=Homer_EOA&F rom=5265
We appreciate your understanding.
Thanks,
eBay
Please don't reply to this message. It was sent from an address that doesn't accept incoming email.
H5265

eBay heavily "overprotects" copyright owners.
The BSA is hired by Apple to look out for copyright violations. They simply go after everything without any investigation. eBay plays along and so you are the one with the problem to do something completely lega.
Here is the relevant section of FCS's SLA:
3. Transfer. You may not rent, lease, lend, sell, redistribute or sublicense the Apple Software. You may, however, make a one-time permanent transfer of all of your license rights to the Apple Software to another party, provided that: (a) the transfer must include all of the Apple Software, including all its component parts, original media, printed materials and this License; (b) you do not retain any copies of the Apple Software, full or partial, including copies stored on a computer or other storage device; and (c) the party receiving the Apple Software reads and agrees to accept the terms and conditions of this License. All components of the Apple Software are provided as part of a bundle and may not be separated from the bundle and distributed as standalone applications.
This means that you are allowed to sell the package if you are the original owner of the software.

How to hide not all but a specific database on a SQL Server 2008 R2 instance?

Hello everyone,
I need help from all the SQL Server database security experts out there. Any solution/help or work-around will be really appreciated. Here is the scenario; our client is using our application which is a windows forms application
having in backend as a database under SQL Server 2008 R2 instance. We have successfully installed the SQL Server software with mixed mode authentication on client side, our application is running smoothly and everything is working fine. Our database on which
application is running is quite intuitive, in the sense, all employees information is stored in EmployeeMaster and all departments information is stored in DepartmentMaster and so on. It consists of more than 500 such tables, stored-procedures and views. We
have encrypted stored-procedures and views, problem is only with tables.
We don't want table structure to be visible to anybody in SSMS (or tables must be hidden from all the users) but at the same time the tables should be accessible from the application. And we don't want to go with the option of encrypting
the tables data and changing the names of all the tables to T001,T002..etc. as that is not feasible. And one last thing, we cannot restrict 'sa' login's password, it has to be shared with the client.
Regards,
Sumit R. Santani

Also, will you please enlighten me more on what you said as "couple of choices" if I want to lock out plain users only?
Assuming that you are selling a solution to a client, it's more an issue for your client's IT department, that do want their users to connect with Excel or SSMS.
Anyway, I have a brief overview here:
http://www.sommarskog.se/grantperm.html#Othermethods
Again my question on that is how much reliable will be that license agreement?
That depends on the lawyer you engage to write the license agreement.
How would I come to know what they are doing with our database?
Trust. Trust is extremely important. It is very difficult to make business if you don't trust people.
That said, there are basically two reasons you want to hide the application from the client. One is protecting intellectual property. To this end, I know of nothing else than trust. And maybe after all, your application is not so fantastic that it is worth
stealing anyway.
The other reason is that you don't want the client to change it, and then open a free support case when he has messed up. To this end there are some technical approaches you can take to detect such tampering. For instance, you can sign all stored procedures
with certificates using ADD SIGNATURE WITH SIGNED BLOB, and then ship only the public key of the certificate. This permits SQL Server to verify the signature, but the client cannot change the signature and sign it with that certificate, because the private
key is not available to them.
Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, [email protected]

Complaint re: North America sales / service

Adobe doesn't seem to have a place to register a complaint, so I'll just post it here. I'm a US citizen, permanent residence in the US, etc but I'm on sabbatical in Europe for a year. While trying to buy Lightroom, neither the N America or the Europe web stores of Adobe were working properly for me. So, I tried calling N America sales on the phone to explain the situation and make the purchase. Basically, I was transferred around 3 people for 20 minutes. For the most part, I was greeted with suspicion and basically made to feel as if I were engaging in some kind of fraud. I understand their need to protect intellectual property, but I'm a normal person, playing by the rules, trying to buy their product, but just in a slightly unusual situation. In response to questions about what my options were and how to even get the sale to occur, I was basically told "you have to go through the Italian store" (despite having a US address and at least one credit card with a US billing address). Other reasonable questions were greeted gruffly. All told, it took 5 people and two hours to finally make the purchase. What gives?

I can't agree with Lee Jay. My experience buying product direct from Adobe has been extremely good. I even ordered the wrong product ( an Adobe font set) and was able to call back two hours later an get the order cancelled and downloaded the correct font package with no issues.
Doing business in other countries has different licensing restrictions, taxes, duties, and higher business operations cost. Here's a good example:
http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/it-at-work/2010/04/12/uk-users-pay-a-premium-for-adobe-cs5-400 88600/
Adobe US customer service is probably instructed not to accept orders for product being physically shipped to another country. If you had ordered a Lightroom 3.0 download product using a credit card with a US address, Adobe wouldn't even know you were in Italy.

Protecting intellectual property

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for