Obfuscating Python code

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Chris Angelico wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:59 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> <PointedEars at web.de> wrote:
>> That said, not distributing the source code of a program as well (or at
>> least making it available to users in some way) strikes me as unpythonic
>> since Python is at least Open Source software, and Python 2.0.1, 2.1.1
>> and newer are GPL-compatible Free Software.
> 
> gcc is also free software. Does that mean that all C programs should
> be free software? No.

IMNSHO, yes.  At the very least because in using gcc you benefited from the 
free software community, so you should give back to the free software 
community accordingly.

> However, since all software can be reverse-compiled (particularly

You mean _decompiled_.

> byte-code like .pyc files),

Yes, it is easier with bytecode *if you know the VM*.

> the only truly reliable way to make completely closed software is to 
> restrict access to it in all forms.

ACK.

> In today's world, that usually means providing it as a web service.

ACK.  That’s why RMS calls it SaaSS, Service as a Software Substitute :)

> Otherwise, you have to assume that anyone can see your source. The
> only difference between open-source and closed-source is the license,
> not the ability to see stuff.

If that were the case and reverse engineering were an easy task that 
everyone could do, we would have a lot more free software variants of 
proprietary software.  Particularly, we would have a lot less proprietary 
device drivers.  ISTM that you do not know what you are talking about here.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.