Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
17 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
My program (built with LC 9.6.1 Indy Windows) contains a large number of references to fields by variables. For example, instead of refering to [fld "abc"] I refer to [fld tName] where tName is a variable containing "abc" (no quotes).

This has worked perfectly until I *encrypted* the stack (through the standalone settings). The standalone itself works with no problem; only when I encrypt it does it fight back. Here's a simplified example of what I'm doing:

create group "grpTree"
...
copy fld "baseBox" to grp "grpTree"
set the name of it to tName
set the visible of fld tName to true
...

This gives me a "no such object" error on the "set the visible" line. Through testing, I've determined that
- tName holds the correct value 
- a field named with the value of tName has been correctly created
- but it still seems to be the reference to [fld tName] that is the problem

This is about building family trees on-the-fly. The largest I've worked with so far has over 450 boxes (fields) in the tree all with connecting lines and all based on the ability to use variables to refer to the fields. At the moment I'm just leaving the stack unencrypted. But inquiring minds would like to know what the problem is. I know others have used this syntax for naming and am sure some of them must have encrypted their stacks. Clearly I'm missing something. 

Thanks for any brilliant suggestions you may have.

... Ron
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
Ron Noice wrote:

? My program (built with LC 9.6.1 Indy Windows) contains a large number
 > of references to fields by variables.
...
 > only when I encrypt it does it fight back. Here's a simplified example
 > of what I'm doing:
 >
 > create group "grpTree"
 > ...
 > copy fld "baseBox" to grp "grpTree"

^ that's your issue.

Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course
once an object is copied it could be pasted into an unencrypted stack,
and thus expose the source.

You might consider moving the code from the encrypted stack to an
encrypted behavior object, leaving the stack where copying must be done
unencrypted.

But if these objects are being copied only by script for the purpose of
automatically building out a UI, without a need to alter the user's
clipboard, you might consider using the clone command instead.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Rick Harrison via use-livecode
Hi Ron,

About ‘it’ — is that supposed to be the name of the new field or something else? You can always use “last” to refer to a new control, “the last field” is “any object whose number property is equal to the number of objects of that type." ‘It’ might have been changed to something else in the meantime…

Peter

> On Dec 13, 2020, at 12:15 PM, Ron Noice via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> My program (built with LC 9.6.1 Indy Windows) contains a large number of references to fields by variables. For example, instead of refering to [fld "abc"] I refer to [fld tName] where tName is a variable containing "abc" (no quotes).
>
> This has worked perfectly until I *encrypted* the stack (through the standalone settings). The standalone itself works with no problem; only when I encrypt it does it fight back. Here's a simplified example of what I'm doing:
>
> create group "grpTree"
> ...
> copy fld "baseBox" to grp "grpTree"
> set the name of it to tName
> set the visible of fld tName to true
> ...
>
> This gives me a "no such object" error on the "set the visible" line. Through testing, I've determined that
> - tName holds the correct value
> - a field named with the value of tName has been correctly created
> - but it still seems to be the reference to [fld tName] that is the problem
>
> This is about building family trees on-the-fly. The largest I've worked with so far has over 450 boxes (fields) in the tree all with connecting lines and all based on the ability to use variables to refer to the fields. At the moment I'm just leaving the stack unencrypted. But inquiring minds would like to know what the problem is. I know others have used this syntax for naming and am sure some of them must have encrypted their stacks. Clearly I'm missing something.
>
> Thanks for any brilliant suggestions you may have.
>
> ... Ron
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Rick Harrison via use-livecode
On 12/13/20 6:02 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:

> Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course once an object is copied
> it could be pasted into an unencrypted stack, and thus expose the source.

Except, copying via script using "copy x to y" doesn't involve the clipboard. I think this
could be categorized as a bug, the original script should work.


--
Jacqueline Landman Gay         |     [hidden email]
HyperActive Software           |     http://www.hyperactivesw.com

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
On 2020-12-14 06:03, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode wrote:
> On 12/13/20 6:02 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
>
>> Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course
>> once an object is copied it could be pasted into an unencrypted stack,
>> and thus expose the source.
>
> Except, copying via script using "copy x to y" doesn't involve the
> clipboard. I think this could be categorized as a bug, the original
> script should work.

Its not the copy that will be failing - but the create. In general you
can't do anything to an encrypted stack which might cause a script to
move from where its encrypted to somewhere else or vice-versa. (The
reason create is disallowed is that you could create a new script via
setting props of the template object).

Warmest Regards,

Mark.

--
Mark Waddingham ~ [hidden email] ~ http://www.livecode.com/
LiveCode: Everyone can create apps

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
Mark Waddingham wrote:

On 12/13/20 6:02 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote:
 >>
 >> Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course
 >> once an object is copied it could be pasted into an unencrypted
 >> stack, and thus expose the source.
 >
 > Its not the copy that will be failing - but the create. In general you
 > can't do anything to an encrypted stack which might cause a script to
 > move from where its encrypted to somewhere else or vice-versa. (The
 > reason create is disallowed is that you could create a new script via
 > setting props of the template object).

Would the copy action not fall under the rubric of "anything to an
encrypted stack which might cause a script to move from where its
encrypted to somewhere else or vice-versa"?

If I receive a protected stack and copy an object out into an
unprotected stack, I would then have access to the object's script.

--
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems
  Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
  ____________________________________________________________________
  [hidden email]                http://www.FourthWorld.com

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Rick Harrison via use-livecode
Thanks everyone for your suggestions and help. I _guess_ I see the problem as creating fields inside an encrypted stack and referencing them to set properties, etc. So the new plan is to have an unencrypted stack in which I build the tree and connectors using code from the encrypted stack. This has turned into a mini-nightmare of its own -- but it keeps me off the street. Thanks.
... Ron
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Rick Harrison via use-livecode
What he said. The promise of creating standalones and encrypted stacks containing code sounds promising, but there are caveats. It begs the question, how do we encrypt script only stacks or libraries? I don’t use encrypted stacks because my code is for internal use only, but if I ever went commercial, this would be something I would need.

Bob S


> On Dec 13, 2020, at 4:02 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Ron Noice wrote:
>
> ? My program (built with LC 9.6.1 Indy Windows) contains a large number
> > of references to fields by variables.
> ...
> > only when I encrypt it does it fight back. Here's a simplified example
> > of what I'm doing:
> >
> > create group "grpTree"
> > ...
> > copy fld "baseBox" to grp "grpTree"
>
> ^ that's your issue.
>
> Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course once an object is copied it could be pasted into an unencrypted stack, and thus expose the source.
>
> You might consider moving the code from the encrypted stack to an encrypted behavior object, leaving the stack where copying must be done unencrypted.
>
> But if these objects are being copied only by script for the purpose of automatically building out a UI, without a need to alter the user's clipboard, you might consider using the clone command instead.
>
> --
> Richard Gaskin
> Fourth World Systems
> Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 3:23 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> What he said. The promise of creating standalones and encrypted stacks
> containing code sounds promising, but there are caveats. It begs the
> question, how do we encrypt script only stacks or libraries? I don’t use
> encrypted stacks because my code is for internal use only, but if I ever
> went commercial, this would be something I would need.


It is possible to convert script only stacks to binary, encrypted stacks
and save them using the same file name. The Levure app packaging  scripts
will do this when you package up an app. So you get the benefit of script
only stacks during development and the protection of encrypted when you
distribute.

--
Trevor DeVore
ScreenSteps

>
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Rick Harrison via use-livecode

Bob:

 > The promise of creating standalones and encrypted stacks
 > containing code sounds promising, but there are caveats.

Just like anything else - you have to learn the ropes. First time at any
task can present some challenges. For those in the habit of encrypting
stacks, it comes more naturally.

Script-only would require the most discipline, so start with UI+script
projects and work your way up from there.

(Bug-reporting as you go, if necessary. The history of LC protection,
like LC everything else, has not been without hiccups along the way.)

Also....

No idea if it happened in this particular case, but I see plenty of
similar problems people have due to the copy/paste LC coding culture.

By which I mean: How do I do X in LC? Ah, here's some code - presto!

The problem SEEMS solved. Learning SEEMS to have happened.

The perfect Acme solution. Then a different context comes along, maybe a
different OS, or an encrypted stack and - wham - coyote hits a wall.
Road runner zooms away.

People don't realize (and someone may pipe up and argue against) the
fact that just because code works once, in one context, doesn't mean
it's good code that should be liberally pasted. Or promoted as sample
code. There is so much sample code out there, but the quality really
varies. Bad sample code can hurt people.

So to all coders in general and Livecoders in particular - be careful
what you paste. Have realistic expectations and a cautious approach.
Take the time to understand the code you're working with and the LC
keywords involved.

Good code has some extra qualities, such as: robust, efficient, modular,
easy to maintain, and widely applicable. Bonus for heavily tested.

Likewise, copy/paste coding does not result in the same level of coding
proficiency as fluency to think and write in the LC language. You have
to exercise your LC-cep just like any other muscle.

(Here I would anticipate a smart aleck asking why don't I post all the
perfect samples; there is always some pushback against both common sense
and less-frequent posters on this list. But as usual, I've already
answered that question before it was asked. Sorry coyote. Beep beep.)

Hope everyone is doing well!

Best wishes,

Curry Kenworthy

Custom Software Development
"Better Methods, Better Results"
LiveCode Training and Consulting
http://livecodeconsulting.com/

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Rick Harrison via use-livecode
Unless you specifically need text files for git or some other reason, you
don't really need script-only stacks. Put the script in a button and then
put it in use or use it as a backscript. It will be encrypted when the
stack is. Another advantage to keeping scripts in the stack is that they
work with remote debugging, unlike text based scripts.

Brian Milby's script tracker is also a way to get the best of both worlds.
It saves scripts out to text files for uploading to github while keeping
the advantages of stack-based scripts.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | [hidden email]
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On December 22, 2020 3:24:11 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> What he said. The promise of creating standalones and encrypted stacks
> containing code sounds promising, but there are caveats. It begs the
> question, how do we encrypt script only stacks or libraries? I don’t use
> encrypted stacks because my code is for internal use only, but if I ever
> went commercial, this would be something I would need.
>
> Bob S
>
>
>> On Dec 13, 2020, at 4:02 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Ron Noice wrote:
>>
>> ? My program (built with LC 9.6.1 Indy Windows) contains a large number
>> > of references to fields by variables.
>> ...
>> > only when I encrypt it does it fight back. Here's a simplified example
>> > of what I'm doing:
>> >
>> > create group "grpTree"
>> > ...
>> > copy fld "baseBox" to grp "grpTree"
>>
>> ^ that's your issue.
>>
>> Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course once
>> an object is copied it could be pasted into an unencrypted stack, and thus
>> expose the source.
>>
>> You might consider moving the code from the encrypted stack to an encrypted
>> behavior object, leaving the stack where copying must be done unencrypted.
>>
>> But if these objects are being copied only by script for the purpose of
>> automatically building out a UI, without a need to alter the user's
>> clipboard, you might consider using the clone command instead.
>>
>> --
>> Richard Gaskin
>> Fourth World Systems
>> Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode




_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
Hmmm… Isn’t Levure almost completely based on script only stacks?

Bob S


> On Dec 22, 2020, at 4:09 PM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Unless you specifically need text files for git or some other reason, you don't really need script-only stacks. Put the script in a button and then put it in use or use it as a backscript. It will be encrypted when the stack is. Another advantage to keeping scripts in the stack is that they work with remote debugging, unlike text based scripts.
>
> Brian Milby's script tracker is also a way to get the best of both worlds. It saves scripts out to text files for uploading to github while keeping the advantages of stack-based scripts.
> --
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | [hidden email]
> HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
> On December 22, 2020 3:24:11 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> What he said. The promise of creating standalones and encrypted stacks containing code sounds promising, but there are caveats. It begs the question, how do we encrypt script only stacks or libraries? I don’t use encrypted stacks because my code is for internal use only, but if I ever went commercial, this would be something I would need.
>>
>> Bob S
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 13, 2020, at 4:02 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ron Noice wrote:
>>>
>>> ? My program (built with LC 9.6.1 Indy Windows) contains a large number
>>> > of references to fields by variables.
>>> ...
>>> > only when I encrypt it does it fight back. Here's a simplified example
>>> > of what I'm doing:
>>> >
>>> > create group "grpTree"
>>> > ...
>>> > copy fld "baseBox" to grp "grpTree"
>>>
>>> ^ that's your issue.
>>>
>>> Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course once an object is copied it could be pasted into an unencrypted stack, and thus expose the source.
>>>
>>> You might consider moving the code from the encrypted stack to an encrypted behavior object, leaving the stack where copying must be done unencrypted.
>>>
>>> But if these objects are being copied only by script for the purpose of automatically building out a UI, without a need to alter the user's clipboard, you might consider using the clone command instead.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Richard Gaskin
>>> Fourth World Systems
>>> Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
Trevor uses git, which is why script-only stacks were invented. The LC team
uses git too.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | [hidden email]
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On December 22, 2020 6:24:22 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hmmm… Isn’t Levure almost completely based on script only stacks?
>
> Bob S
>
>
>> On Dec 22, 2020, at 4:09 PM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Unless you specifically need text files for git or some other reason, you
>> don't really need script-only stacks. Put the script in a button and then
>> put it in use or use it as a backscript. It will be encrypted when the
>> stack is. Another advantage to keeping scripts in the stack is that they
>> work with remote debugging, unlike text based scripts.
>>
>> Brian Milby's script tracker is also a way to get the best of both worlds.
>> It saves scripts out to text files for uploading to github while keeping
>> the advantages of stack-based scripts.
>> --
>> Jacqueline Landman Gay | [hidden email]
>> HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
>> On December 22, 2020 3:24:11 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> What he said. The promise of creating standalones and encrypted stacks
>>> containing code sounds promising, but there are caveats. It begs the
>>> question, how do we encrypt script only stacks or libraries? I don’t use
>>> encrypted stacks because my code is for internal use only, but if I ever
>>> went commercial, this would be something I would need.
>>>
>>> Bob S
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Dec 13, 2020, at 4:02 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ron Noice wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ? My program (built with LC 9.6.1 Indy Windows) contains a large number
>>>> > of references to fields by variables.
>>>> ...
>>>> > only when I encrypt it does it fight back. Here's a simplified example
>>>> > of what I'm doing:
>>>> >
>>>> > create group "grpTree"
>>>> > ...
>>>> > copy fld "baseBox" to grp "grpTree"
>>>>
>>>> ^ that's your issue.
>>>>
>>>> Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course once
>>>> an object is copied it could be pasted into an unencrypted stack, and thus
>>>> expose the source.
>>>>
>>>> You might consider moving the code from the encrypted stack to an encrypted
>>>> behavior object, leaving the stack where copying must be done unencrypted.
>>>>
>>>> But if these objects are being copied only by script for the purpose of
>>>> automatically building out a UI, without a need to alter the user's
>>>> clipboard, you might consider using the clone command instead.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Richard Gaskin
>>>> Fourth World Systems
>>>> Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>>> subscription preferences:
>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode




_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
Rather, I didn't mean the team invented script-only stacks for Trevor in
particular, but rather than they moved to git and needed text files.

English is such a positional language.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | [hidden email]
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On December 22, 2020 8:51:36 PM "J. Landman Gay via use-livecode"
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Trevor uses git, which is why script-only stacks were invented. The LC team
> uses git too.
> --
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | [hidden email]
> HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
> On December 22, 2020 6:24:22 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hmmm… Isn’t Levure almost completely based on script only stacks?
>>
>> Bob S
>>
>>
>>> On Dec 22, 2020, at 4:09 PM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Unless you specifically need text files for git or some other reason, you
>>> don't really need script-only stacks. Put the script in a button and then
>>> put it in use or use it as a backscript. It will be encrypted when the
>>> stack is. Another advantage to keeping scripts in the stack is that they
>>> work with remote debugging, unlike text based scripts.
>>>
>>> Brian Milby's script tracker is also a way to get the best of both worlds.
>>> It saves scripts out to text files for uploading to github while keeping
>>> the advantages of stack-based scripts.
>>> --
>>> Jacqueline Landman Gay | [hidden email]
>>> HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
>>> On December 22, 2020 3:24:11 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What he said. The promise of creating standalones and encrypted stacks
>>>> containing code sounds promising, but there are caveats. It begs the
>>>> question, how do we encrypt script only stacks or libraries? I don’t use
>>>> encrypted stacks because my code is for internal use only, but if I ever
>>>> went commercial, this would be something I would need.
>>>>
>>>> Bob S
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 13, 2020, at 4:02 PM, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode
>>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ron Noice wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ? My program (built with LC 9.6.1 Indy Windows) contains a large number
>>>>> > of references to fields by variables.
>>>>> ...
>>>>> > only when I encrypt it does it fight back. Here's a simplified example
>>>>> > of what I'm doing:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > create group "grpTree"
>>>>> > ...
>>>>> > copy fld "baseBox" to grp "grpTree"
>>>>>
>>>>> ^ that's your issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Copying objects is disallowed in an encrypted stack, since of course once
>>>>> an object is copied it could be pasted into an unencrypted stack, and thus
>>>>> expose the source.
>>>>>
>>>>> You might consider moving the code from the encrypted stack to an encrypted
>>>>> behavior object, leaving the stack where copying must be done unencrypted.
>>>>>
>>>>> But if these objects are being copied only by script for the purpose of
>>>>> automatically building out a UI, without a need to alter the user's
>>>>> clipboard, you might consider using the clone command instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Richard Gaskin
>>>>> Fourth World Systems
>>>>> Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>>>> subscription preferences:
>>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> use-livecode mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>>> subscription preferences:
>>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode




_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
I chose the more likely of the two possibilities. :-)

Bob S


On Dec 22, 2020, at 9:38 PM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode <[hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

Rather, I didn't mean the team invented script-only stacks for Trevor in particular, but rather than they moved to git and needed text files.

English is such a positional language.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | [hidden email]<mailto:[hidden email]>
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com<http://www.hyperactivesw.com/>

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Encrypting Stack Breaks Field References

Rick Harrison via use-livecode
In reply to this post by Rick Harrison via use-livecode
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 6:23 PM Bob Sneidar via use-livecode <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hmmm… Isn’t Levure almost completely based on script only stacks?


You can use binary or script only stacks with Levure. It doesn’t care one
way or the other.  It’s just reading in stack files you add to your app
folder.

--
Trevor DeVore
ScreenSteps

>
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Birthday Shoutout...

Rick Harrison via use-livecode

... to my friend and colleague Josh. Amazing coder (godlike skills),
generous with his knowledge, and highly available. Thanks Josh. Enjoy
your day, you earned it! ;)

Also,

LiveCoders: holiday greetings. May you give and receive the best gifts
this year. (Not the virulent dirty gift that keeps on giving - i.e. bad
sample code.) Always KISS, and practice safe syntax every single time.

LC Ltd: nice bug fixes recently! Much appreciated. Cheers, and many
returns por favor.

Clients: thanks for another wonderful year of fantastic projects. (And
for understanding my shortness of breath thus avoidance of phone/audio
conversations after COVID.) Loved the emails, chats, and coding.

Asthmatics: I've found that a low-pressure 0.4 psi air pump beats an
albuterol inhaler in my own case for urgent breathing difficulty, so now
I always keep one within reach plus a battery backup.

Video chatters: "Fans" (admirers) of my many fans (air-blowing devices
and HEPA units) will be pleased to know that I've added two more to the
collection, a small but powerful in-my-face desktop fan and a roughly
equivalent wheelchair fan. Yes, my hair really is blowing. Hopefully I
can demo those soon in '21.

Addon users: I hoped to announce a big year-end addon update and promo,
but was sick a little too often; still catching up. Work continues. I'll
try to aim for an Easter/Spring event.

Critics: National Socialism went out of style a while back, but ah well.
The good guys win in the end!

Code and LC enthusiasts: I'm gradually building up new equipment and
next-gen code to overcome my own health limitations (a necessity) and in
the process, hopefully revolutionize several coding areas. I'll share
this toolset when it's sufficiently mature. Including what I hinted
about (but did not spell out completely, to avoid copycats) in a recent
conference presentation.

Cancel culturists: My sincere wishes for an uplifting and very
traditional Christ-mas and other holy-days. :D

Back to work/lurk....

Best wishes,

Curry Kenworthy

Custom Software Development
"Better Methods, Better Results"
LiveCode Training and Consulting
http://livecodeconsulting.com/

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode