- Apr 9, 2018
- 240
- 65
I see your point, yet its "Security by Obscurity" and it has very little effectiveness:Fair, but as an example, if I was going to write a game in a cleartext language that I didnt want people snooping through, I would remove all author comments and documentation, and change function and variable names to generic nondescriptive things, at least for the public release. "Function23", that I internally know the purpose of, is of a lot less help to a would be cracker than "CodeVerification". n_47 is a lot less descriptive than var_codeHash, especially when n_40-n_50 are similar length numbers. This can be done with a simple text replacement script, and raises the cost in time and skill to trace through the actual code to the point where most would find it easier to buy the code. I personally wouldnt have been able to crack this code without such clues and the commented debug function left in by the dev.
Any such obfuscation is futile since all you have to do is look where the code is entered and trace everything from there. It's all visible since it's plaintext.Fair, but as an example, if I was going to write a game in a cleartext language that I didnt want people snooping through, I would remove all author comments and documentation, and change function and variable names to generic nondescriptive things, at least for the public release. "Function23", that I internally know the purpose of, is of a lot less help to a would be cracker than "CodeVerification". n_47 is a lot less descriptive than var_codeHash, especially when n_40-n_50 are similar length numbers. This can be done with a simple text replacement script, and raises the cost in time and skill to trace through the actual code to the point where most would find it easier to buy the code. I personally wouldnt have been able to crack this code without such clues and the commented debug function left in by the dev.
This, so much this. Obfuscating in an HTML game is like putting doors to the field. Funny enough, the code in my game is ON THE CHANGELOG and nobody reads itAny such obfuscation is futile since all you have to do is look where the code is entered and trace everything from there. It's all visible since it's plaintext.
That's a genius place to hide the code.This, so much this. Obfuscating in an HTML game is like putting doors to the field. Funny enough, the code in my game is ON THE CHANGELOG and nobody reads it
Interesting argument, since according to that article, even with a foot in the door of booting custom code, it still took a hacking team stealing a dev kit to break, and another several years to fully reverse engineer. From the linked article that mentions the theft, "Had that Katana SDK never been stolen, the entire Dreamcast piracy and homebrew scenes would likely never have materialized." Clearly, "security through obscurity" was working just fine until that point.I see your point, yet its "Security by Obscurity" and it has very little effectiveness:
made me remember about this articleYou must be registered to see the links.
Its always all or nothing with those who make this argument. When I "look where the code is entered" by rightclicking and viewing source on that frame, I get over 12.5K lines of html. Saying obfuscation is futile or that security through obscurity has low effectiveness, are logical fallacies known as a hasty generalization, or jumping to a conclusion without having or considering all the details. Echo chambering "So much this" does not make a logical fallacy any less fallacious.Any such obfuscation is futile since all you have to do is look where the code is entered and trace everything from there. It's all visible since it's plaintext.
Ah this was driving me crazy. Al approves off this, just a little hint.Okay, so when trying, I found it hard to speed up the title music to sound like the original except when using Media Player Classic (which is the media player I normally use), so I'm attaching the title track with its original speed. Many of you should recognize it.
It probably served for enough time in that case, I concur.Clearly, "security through obscurity" was working just fine until that point.
If you read the second Veritatis entry before the second tasting event with the monks, I believe this lockout occurs. Because the game logic is looking for the second entry being read here, for the first time, and it cannot happen.
It continues one quest and starts a new. Why would it require a restart? Not unless you've found a bug.Does this extend any of the quests that ended as open quests from the previous version? Or does it add content that would have been seen before that point? If it's supposed to extend content from the previous version's " This is the end of this quest in this version of the game. " , then it's going to require a restart.
You shouldn't have that much corruption without cheating. Like scarfer said, if you read the second chapter already, you're stuck. If you didn't cheat, it's a bug.Stuck like this, is there a way to return to the room?
Can you send me a save please?ok i am stuck with 3 quests (that dont have a "thats all for this version flag")
one is
"Investigate sister dana"You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
the other is Julia: The troubled studentYou don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
the lustful nun is the last non flagged quest i haveYou don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.
are those quests over and done with in this release and are just missing the "thats all folks" tag... or did i miss something
The quest it continued still showed it was at the end for the current version. I found the new one after I posted this, so it's good.It continues one quest and starts a new. Why would it require a restart? Not unless you've found a bug.
That save doesn't work. Only 2kb, like you haven't started the game. But I have found the bug. You played from the start right? Or at least before reaching the end of the last version. I thought I didn't need to update the quest checks for older saves but apparently I must.here you go
Damn, I thought I had figured out a way to avoid having to update quest info manually on all quests to avoid having the same reporting problem I had with Paradise Found where it often said 99% completed when it really was 100%. But I didn't test it well enough. :/The quest it continued still showed it was at the end for the current version. I found the new one after I posted this, so it's good.