Re: [OT] x86 assembler question

[Jonathon McKitrick <jcm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 12:36:30PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
: :I'm doing some research on dongle software protection, and one site referred
: :to response codes being 'impossible to recover because you'll sometimes end up
: :with TEST [ESI+38],1 as a check.'
:     I have no idea what the ',1' means, or what register it is ANDing

I think I figured it out.  Basically, the code is testing just one bit of the
result here.  Somewhere else, it might test another bit.  And so on.  So there
isn't just one place where the test occurs, comparing the returned value with
the go/no-go value.

:     The place where I worked for many years had to deal with dongled software
:     all the time (back when dongles were in vogue).  After loosing dongles

Remember SuperBase on the Amiga?

:     for the Nth time or having to constantly switch them out to run different
:     software, we finally just put our foot down and refused to purchase any
:     software that used physical dongle devices.  It's just too much of
:     a hassle.

We're moving away from dongles, but I have to find something else to use
instead.  It's an expensive package we have to protect, but I think dongles
are out of the question for this round.  Round 1 had them, round 2 will not.


Jonathon McKitrick
--
Hoppiness is a good beer.