Tell me about this crack
Adams-Blake Publishing
soho-123 to see what cracks are out there. There isn't much I can do about
them, but I am interested in the technique. I've noticed on many crack sites
(for example http://servisco.net/s_page_5.htm ) when it lists our program,
it is a link to a zip file calle3d pcys3a01.zip. I downloaded it and in it
is a program called pcysoho3.exe and the icon is a skull and cross bones.
It's only 122K, so I know it isn't our application.
Now I can understand how someone could hack our program and put out a new
(huge!) executable. In fact, it has been done. But what is this small 122K
module?
There is no way I'm going to run this thing as who knows WHAT it might do.
However, assuming it is not a virus filled .exe, what is your best guess
that it might be? I've heard about key-generators, but I've never paid much
attention to them and have zero idea how they work. How would this .exe work
with my program to break it? What's the technique here. (I'll be glad to
send the zip file to anyone who might be brave enough to run it on THEIR
machine!!!).
Thanks
ANC
Carsten A. Arnholm
news:94621j$b2v$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
> As I do every so often, I go to www.astalavista.net and do a search on
> soho-123 to see what cracks are out there. There isn't much I can do about
> them, but I am interested in the technique. I've noticed on many crack
sites
> (for example http://servisco.net/s_page_5.htm ) when it lists our program,
> it is a link to a zip file calle3d pcys3a01.zip. I downloaded it and in it
> is a program called pcysoho3.exe and the icon is a skull and cross bones.
> It's only 122K, so I know it isn't our application.
>
> Now I can understand how someone could hack our program and put out a new
> (huge!) executable. In fact, it has been done. But what is this small 122K
> module?
Most likely it is a small program that expects a copy of your time-limited
and/or feature-limited shareware/trialware program to be available. Your
program is available on multiple shareware sites anyway, isn't it?.
What the cracker program does is perform a very specific binary edit on your
file (i.e. it performs a "patch"), for example by inserting a low level jump
instruction by-passing a licence test, opening up the full-featured program
or eliminating a nag-screen. This modification is typically targeted at a
specific version of your program, and nothing else. The "author" of the
small patch program has used a disassembler or a binary editor of some sort
to figure out exactly which modifications your trial version requires to
become full-featured, by-pass nag-screens etc.
One way of protecting a program against this sort of crack, is to
compile/link two separate versions of your program: a shareware/trial
version and a registered version. That way, you can create a feature-limited
version that cannot be cracked, because the missing features are truly
missing (not only in the GUI). In C or C++, you can do it using the
preprocessor, like this:
#ifndef FULL_FEATURE_VERSION
code that is not available in trial version goes here
#endif
The effect is that the protected code is never seen by the C++ compiler, and
it is therefore not present in your trialware executable.
Another useful protection is to create multiple trial versions that are
functionally identical, but with different binary organisation/layout. That
way, a patch is likely to fail, because it does not recognise the binary
"signature" of your software.
Also, it is wise to never isolate a licence check into a separate function,
which would be natural in most other cases, because it makes life very
simple for those who want to crack your software (a single patch is
required). Instead, use preprocessor macros, conditional compiles etc. so
that the licence check code becomes duplicated in various places in your
executable. That makes cracking it more difficult, because multiple (and
potentially different) patches must be applied.
> There is no way I'm going to run this thing as who knows WHAT it might do.
> However, assuming it is not a virus filled .exe, what is your best guess
> that it might be? I've heard about key-generators, but I've never paid
much
> attention to them and have zero idea how they work. How would this .exe
work
> with my program to break it? What's the technique here. (I'll be glad to
> send the zip file to anyone who might be brave enough to run it on THEIR
> machine!!!).
Try it on a low-risk computer. I did that once on a crack for an old version
of my program. It was a pleasant experience, because I found that they had
patched away a nag-screen, but had not discovered that the time limitation
still worked. Someone using the patch would not be able to use the time
limited trial infinitely, they would simply not be warned when the time was
running out! The crackers seem to have given up on the latest versions of my
software ;->
--
Carsten A. Arnholm
arn...@online.no
http://home.online.no/~arnholm/
John A Fotheringham
I should imagine it will apply a "patch" to your program. That is
it will effectively "edit" your .exe to remove the protections in
it. Crackers analyse your program to work out where the code is
checking for registration and implementing limits etc. They then
edit the executable's assembler to "jump" around this test, and
move on to the next.
Usually the changes are minimal, so they can be easily packaged into
a small program that will apply these changes to the target program.
The crackers prefer to distribute the smaller (often tiny) patches
rather than the full-sized patched original.
One weakness of this approach is that it's pretty well tied into
a particular version of the executable, so a small program change
uploaded to your web site will render it useless, although people
can still probably get a download from the various shareware sites
around.
I've never run one of these myself, but I believe that's the essence
of it.
--
Jaf (or John A Fotheringham for "long")
http://www.jafsoft.com/
Ed Guy
Or it could be a key generator. They seem to make these by "lifting" the assembly code
from your application which generates the code for comparison purposes.
Various ways around this which none of us is likely to discuss in a public forum.
--
Ed Guy P.Eng,CDP,MIEE
Information Technology Consultant
Internet: ed_...@NOSPAMguysoftware.com remove NOSPAM from email address.
http://www.guysoftware.com
"Check out HELLLP!, WinHelp author tool for WinWord 2.0 through 2000,
PlanBee Project Management Planning and Scheduling
and ParseRat, the File Parser, Converter and Reorganizer"
Michael Fullerton
I'll discuss it. The best way around this is to not use unlock keys at
all. Use conditional compiling to create a separate download for the
purchased version.
___
The Delphi Trialware Developers Page
http://www.cyber-matrix.com/delphisw.htm
st...@tropheus.demon.co.uk
(Michael Fullerton) wrote:
>Ed Guy <ed_...@NOSPAMguysoftware.com> wrote:
>
(snip)
>>Or it could be a key generator. They seem to make these by "lifting" the assembly code
>>from your application which generates the code for comparison purposes.
>>
>>Various ways around this which none of us is likely to discuss in a public forum.
>
>I'll discuss it. The best way around this is to not use unlock keys at
>all. Use conditional compiling to create a separate download for the
>purchased version.
>
I'm in full agreement here. Conditional compiling is the best solution
for most developers. It's so easy to implement and it moves cracking
up to another level because they have to steal a real full version to
start with. Trial versions can't be cracked - no code to crack.
Steve
--
Steve Wolstenholme
Neural Network Applications for Windows
http://www.tropheus.demon.co.uk
John A Fotheringham
>>>from your application which generates the code for comparison purposes.
>>>
>>>Various ways around this which none of us is likely to discuss in a public forum.
>>
>>I'll discuss it. The best way around this is to not use unlock keys at
>>all. Use conditional compiling to create a separate download for the
>>purchased version.
>>
>I'm in full agreement here. Conditional compiling is the best solution
>for most developers. It's so easy to implement and it moves cracking
>up to another level because they have to steal a real full version to
>start with. Trial versions can't be cracked - no code to crack.
This only works if the trial version is completely missing in some
function (like the "Save" function). If your trial version applies
limits of some time (size of file, number of uses) then it's possible
that a patch can remove the code that enforces these limitations.
Some would argue that removing some function reduces the value of the
trial.
st...@tropheus.demon.co.uk
<spam.my....@jafsoft.com> wrote:
>>I'm in full agreement here. Conditional compiling is the best solution
>>for most developers. It's so easy to implement and it moves cracking
>>up to another level because they have to steal a real full version to
>>start with. Trial versions can't be cracked - no code to crack.
>
>This only works if the trial version is completely missing in some
>function (like the "Save" function). If your trial version applies
>limits of some time (size of file, number of uses) then it's possible
>that a patch can remove the code that enforces these limitations.
>
>Some would argue that removing some function reduces the value of the
>trial.
The trial version of EasyNN (my main application) is fully functional.
I wouldn't want to release a version with restrictions that reduced
the value of the trial. The code that I exclude at compile time
implements functions that are extras. My idea is that, sooner or
later, anyone using the trial version will realise that the extra
functions would be useful.
Chris Smolinski
> I'm in full agreement here. Conditional compiling is the best solution
> for most developers. It's so easy to implement and it moves cracking
> up to another level because they have to steal a real full version to
> start with. Trial versions can't be cracked - no code to crack.
One question - how do you handle new versions? Do you have a password
protected ftp directory where registered users are directed to download
from?
A second question - what's to prevent someone from distributing a copy
of the "real full version" ?
Ok, a third question - how do you handle people who don't want to
download? Do you send them a disk/disc? Many of our customers buy our
CDROM ($5 nominal charge for costs & shipping, not to make money) with
copies of all of our software. I suspect this is because some of them
have slow internet connections, or don't feel comfortable downloading
software (either they don't know how, are afraid of viruses, etc). They
then register a program after getting the CDROM.
Chris
st...@tropheus.demon.co.uk
<csmol...@erols.com> wrote:
>st...@tropheus.demon.co.uk wrote:
>> I'm in full agreement here. Conditional compiling is the best solution
>> for most developers. It's so easy to implement and it moves cracking
>> up to another level because they have to steal a real full version to
>> start with. Trial versions can't be cracked - no code to crack.
>
>One question - how do you handle new versions? Do you have a password
>protected ftp directory where registered users are directed to download
>from?
>
I use a "moving target" for upgrades and tell registers users where it
is by e-mail. This does mean that I have to maintain a BCC list and
that has some problems because some users change e-mail address
without telling me.
>A second question - what's to prevent someone from distributing a copy
>of the "real full version" ?
>
Nothing it all, but it does have the users name on the splash screen
so I think that will put a few people off.
>Ok, a third question - how do you handle people who don't want to
>download? Do you send them a disk/disc?
Yes, I will send the software on a disc if asked. I was only asked for
disc copies four times last year.
>Many of our customers buy our
>CDROM ($5 nominal charge for costs & shipping, not to make money) with
>copies of all of our software.
I don't charge any extra. Perhaps I should.
>I suspect this is because some of them
>have slow internet connections,
The EasyNN setup file is only 1.3 MB so it doesn't take long to
download, even on a slow connection.
>or don't feel comfortable downloading
>software (either they don't know how, are afraid of viruses, etc). They
>then register a program after getting the CDROM.
>
I don't see why downloaded software has a greater risk of virus than
that distributed by disc.
In my case, I use a different (isolated, no internet) PC for
development than the one I use for distribution so I can't pick up a
virus in my e-mail, from usenet or the web that could finish up on my
development PC. No reverse transfers to carry the virus back - I don't
even recycle floppies.
John A Fotheringham
>>function (like the "Save" function). If your trial version applies
>>limits of some time (size of file, number of uses) then it's possible
>>that a patch can remove the code that enforces these limitations.
>
>registrations. Once someone has everything for free they may not be
>as willing to pay. But if you disable and "extra" feature like
>steves says in his response sooner or later they will decide that
>might be cool to have. By doing this you are letting the user set
>their own trial period. After a period of time using it they either
>decide they want the full version, they stop using it, or stick with
>free version. Which isn't so bad because they may tell others about
>your program.
>
>They hard part is finding which feature to limit. You want to limit
>something that lets them give a full trial of the program. Something
>that they won't need until later. My first program I think I limited
>to much. My next one I am giving away most everything except one
>feature. I will see how it goes.
In my program I've limited (as opposed to omitted) a number of
features... for example wildcard operations are limited to 5 files.
I eventually found a crack tutorial for my program (sigh) which was in
many parts because each time the cracker thought they'd found all the
limits, and each time one more crept out of the woodwork. This really
annoyed them :-)
FWIW I find the most frequent registration period is "same day", i.e.
people commonly register within hours of downloading. I'd like to
believe this is because my app is wonderful (it is :-), but I must
admit I'm curious to the extend to which people felt "driven" to
register.
Alun Jones
> A second question - what's to prevent someone from distributing a copy
> of the "real full version" ?
Copyright law.
It may sound crazy, but the kind of person who distributes a crack has
generally justified it to themselves as not being illegal, and therefore
must be moral / ethical. Distributing a full app, on the other hand, is
_clearly_ illegal.
Besides, you can get ISPs to shut down web sites that distribute full copies
of copyright software, whereas they may be less willing to do so for crackz.
Alun.
~~~~
[Note that answers to questions in newsgroups are not generally
invitations to contact me personally for help in the future.]
--
Texas Imperial Software | Try WFTPD, the Windows FTP Server. Find us at
1602 Harvest Moon Place | http://www.wftpd.com or email al...@texis.com
Cedar Park TX 78613-1419 | VISA/MC accepted. NT-based sites, be sure to
Fax/Voice +1(512)378-3246 | read details of WFTPD Pro for NT.
Adams-Blake Publishing
> of the "real full version" ?
>
Here is what a lot of programmers who have systems that have lots of
datafiles do (and it is no great secret.) They hard-code the opening of a
filename... such as MyFile111.XXX. Assume that this version gets hacked. In
the next version, they change it to MyFile222.XXX.
Here is what happens a lot of the time. Most pepple looking for hacked
software will FIRST go the the legal site and download the current demo
version of the system (the whole thing)... and it will have MyFile222.xxx.
Then they go to the warz site and get the hacked module(s) but not data
files. The hacked version will try to open MyFile111.xxx and it will fail.
Every time you put out a new version, you change the names of your files.
And open/close them at (many) various places in the program
You could do the same kind of thing in the registry. Anything you can hard
code that has to "relate" to something outside the program will work.
The question remains on what do you do for old (legal) users who get the
update? You just include a small "run this before you use the new version"
utility that re-names the files or does whatever needs to be done in the
registry, etc.
Of course this method is not hack proof. Nothing is. And I've learned not to
worry about hacked copies. Ed Guy has taught me to think of them as "free
advertising." We gave up on the reg codes and have been putting out demos
with a number of limitations via " #if.....#end if " conditional
compilation. It makes it harder to hack. And doing the frequent updates
helps stay a step ahead of them. And Ed is right. People who use hacked
software would not pay for it in the first place... or in the case of some
counries, could not afford it. I know there are versions of my code being
used by people who could never afford the $199 price in a month! I guess it
is my contribution to foreign aid.
ANC
Chris Smolinski
>
> In article <3A682F5E...@erols.com>, Chris Smolinski
> <csmol...@erols.com> wrote:
> > A second question - what's to prevent someone from distributing a copy
> > of the "real full version" ?
>
> Copyright law.
What's to prevent someone from speeding? The speed limit sign? It
doesn't work very well. Nor does copyright law stop software piracy. It
is, as Mao would put it, a paper tiger.
> It may sound crazy, but the kind of person who distributes a crack has
> generally justified it to themselves as not being illegal, and therefore
> must be moral / ethical. Distributing a full app, on the other hand, is
> _clearly_ illegal.
I think most people distributing serial numbers or warez know exactly
how illegal it is. They don't care. Back in the good old Apple ][ days,
there were hundreds if not thousands of BBS's where one could download
kracked versions of programs. One rarely, if ever, heard of a system
being raided or shut down. Most of the krackers ran their own BBS, and
would proudly advertise it (with the phone number) on the kracked
version! "Kracked by The Exorcist and Mr. Houdini. Call The Devil's
Possession 301-486-XXXX" (Real example from memory, only the last four
digits of the number have been changed to protect the guilty)
> Besides, you can get ISPs to shut down web sites that distribute full copies
> of copyright software, whereas they may be less willing to do so for crackz.
The problem (IMHO) isn't distribution via web sites. It's the warez
groups. People post entire copies of the MS Office CD on them, and
probably your program as well. Warez web sites are a trivial part of the
problem.
Chris
H.D.
<aca...@adams-blake.com> wrote:
>There is no way I'm going to run this thing as who knows WHAT it might do.
Maybe install eSafe first ? (www.esafe.com)
Greetings from H. Desmet, West Flanders, Belgium, Europe.
<<< DH/DSS key id 0x0FE4EF7E RSA key id 0xFD14799D >>>
http://user.online.be/~hdesmet/rar/
Günter Nagler
> That can be o.k. too but it depends on how you implement it. I deal
> with files a great deal and the few instances I thought about this
> really didn't seem to work at least for me. I downloaded a mpg
> combiner. The thing barked at me every so many files. So during
> one combine it gave me nag screen at least ten times. I found this
> so annoying I thought it unusable and would never buy the program
> because it just pissed me off hitting the return key every two
> seconds. In another instance my boss had loss about 700 meg of very
> old important files on his computer. I pointed him to all the
> shareware sights. All the programs we found had a limited feature
> by file size. So out of the 700 meg it would only show us about 50
> files all around one or two k each. The where most likely file
> fragments anyhow and not very convincing. Never the less my boss
> wasn't going to plop down 60 bucks to find out. If they had charged
> 30 and given him a better demonstration he surely would have bought
> it.
the demos are not intended to do this work, they should only show you
that the software can do it, use the demo versions only to test if the
software works on your computer, does really what you expected and has
no problems with the given tasks.
But if you want to "work" with this software then simply register it ...
Probably if the software demo would have no limitation then your boss might
have thought that he doesn't need to purchase the software because he
already has in hands what he wants (and thinks it is ok because he needs
it only for few files, which is not correct). That is what usually
happens when software demo has no limits.
Users should know that trying software and working with software are
two different things.
If trying is not wanted then simply order for full version without testing
the demo and user gets directly what he wanted.
Offering possibility to try before buy is only a nice gift from author,
to reduce any fears that you might buy something wrong or something that
does not work with your computer.
The offer is only optional for user...
Dotnames
> >Various ways around this which none of us is likely to discuss in a
public forum.
>
> I'll discuss it. The best way around this is to not use unlock keys at
> all. Use conditional compiling to create a separate download for the
> purchased version.
Okay, I'm a bit confused...
I've seen talk of distributing a demo version that is not disabled, it
simply has the goodies missing. And then the full version to registered
users.
What prevents a hacker from distributing the full version?
--
50 pages of freebies! http://www.allfreespot.com
Mac Shareware Games http://www.gypsyware.com
OpDesign Website Creations http://www.opdesigns.com
Buy a Domain Name http://members.afternic.com/dotnames?showcase
Dotnames
> Many of our customers buy our
> CDROM ($5 nominal charge for costs & shipping, not to make money) with
> copies of all of our software. I suspect this is because some of them
> have slow internet connections, or don't feel comfortable downloading
> software (either they don't know how, are afraid of viruses, etc). They
> then register a program after getting the CDROM.
>
> Chris
Chris,
You mean on the CD ROM you are distributing the shareware/demo versions,
not the full featured versions? So they'd still have to register the
individual programs?
Do you burn the CD's yourself?
Shari
Dotnames
Publishing" <aca...@adams-blake.com> wrote:
> People who use hacked
> software would not pay for it in the first place...
I've heard several authors say that their sales dropped way down when a
crack appeared. So I don't know about this statement.
Chris Smolinski
>
> In article <3A682F5E...@erols.com>, Chris Smolinski
> <csmol...@erols.com> wrote:
>
> > Many of our customers buy our
> > CDROM ($5 nominal charge for costs & shipping, not to make money) with
> > copies of all of our software. I suspect this is because some of them
> > have slow internet connections, or don't feel comfortable downloading
> > software (either they don't know how, are afraid of viruses, etc). They
> > then register a program after getting the CDROM.
> >
> > Chris
>
> Chris,
>
> You mean on the CD ROM you are distributing the shareware/demo versions,
> not the full featured versions? So they'd still have to register the
> individual programs?
That's right. It's just offered as a convenience for users who don't
wish to download. Some register a program and buy a CDROM also. I
suspect some want a physical backup copy, some buy before trying, and
some love the program so much they want to try all our other titles as
well <cough, gag>
> Do you burn the CD's yourself?
Yep. Only takes a few minutes. Still using an old 4X USB drive. Got a
nice new Que firewire X12 drive late last week, burned 20 discs with it,
made 20 coasters (at speeds ranging from 12X down to 1X), so it's going
back to Outpost.com. Anyone know of a decent Firewire CD-RW drive?
We burn on demand, so the CD always contains the latest version of each
program. I release new versions too often to have a batch of CDs made.
The CDROMs have been doing very well the last few months. I don't view
them as a money maker (they're not, I just want them to break even) but
as a tool to sell programs.
The next step would be to send complimentary copies to Mac users groups.
Anyone have a list of snail mail addresses of MUGs ?
Chris
Chris Smolinski
>
> In article <949s12$vmb$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>, "Adams-Blake
> Publishing" <aca...@adams-blake.com> wrote:
>
> > People who use hacked
> > software would not pay for it in the first place...
>
> I've heard several authors say that their sales dropped way down when a
> crack appeared. So I don't know about this statement.
I think both are true. Some people who used
hacked/kracked/warez/serials/whatever versions will never buy your
software, for any reason. Back in the good old Apple ][ days, it was
popular to collect programs, much as you'd collect stamps. You didn't
really do much with the programs, you just wanted to try to have the
most. Then you'd get together in swap meets, and trade copies of
programs. I think it was invented by floppy disk makers, they're the
only ones who profited from it. Even today, you see some of that. Or
someone casually uses a hacked copy of your program, but doesn't really
need it, so they'd never register it, if forced to in order to continue
using it.
The second group are those who are basically honest, but can't "pass up
a good deal" (ie: not paying for software). They'd be shocked if someone
they knew shoplifted a pencil from a store, but think nothing of copying
a program for/from a friend. In the same way people copy tapes and CDs
and albums. But if forced to (because they can't find a kracked copy or
reg code) register a program, they will.
The first group are not your customers. Never have been, never will be.
The second group could be your customers. Work on them.
Most important, keep group two away from group one. For it is group one
that will turn group two into lying thieves. This is why it's important
to stop the spread of serial numbers. They'll always be around, but if
you can make it hard for basically honest people to find them, they will
give up and register your software.
The best analogy I can make is comparing to drugs. If drugs are
available out in suburbia, then it's easy for Yuppie Joe Average to
score some. If you have to go all the way down into the dirtiest,
nastiest slum in the city, where even the cops fear to tread, then its
much less likely for Joe to make the effort to buy some.
Chris
Alun Jones
> I've seen talk of distributing a demo version that is not disabled, it
> simply has the goodies missing. And then the full version to registered
> users.
>
> What prevents a hacker from distributing the full version?
IMHO (and a lot of people here disagree with me), it's because that would be
_clearly_ illegal - a breach of copyright.
Cracks, on the other hand, are constantly being "justified" by their
supporters as not _really_ a copyright violation, since you're only
distributing or altering a small part of the overall work.
This is, of course, a rather specious argument since the part they are
overwriting is clearly a very important part of the overall work - like
claiming that stealing a list of Colonel Sanders' "eleven herbs and spices"
is not a theft, because it's only a small part of the total documentation
that KFC has in its offices. :-)
Many hackers, crackers, etc, are in it for the thrill of being
anti-authority. They see _all_ software authors (even those of us only just
making a living for ourselves) as being equivalent to the worst impressions
of Bill Gates et al - rich, money grubbing, corporate sponsored thieves.
Scott Kane - MSA
news:r5ci6.27388$gb1.1...@news4.aus1.giganews.com...
> Cracks, on the other hand, are constantly being "justified" by their
> supporters as not _really_ a copyright violation, since you're only
> distributing or altering a small part of the overall work.
Depending on where you are located geographically their
argument doesn't hold water. The Digital Millennium Act
comes close to addressing it in the USA. IMHO the current
Napster issue is going to see, ultimately, major changes to
the law and how they are enforced. Where I live a crack
could just as easily get you into convicted as copying a
program. With stat's showing 39% of small business
using cracks/pirated copies (down here) it's good to
see when it gets enforced (increasingly).
--
Scott Kane
MicroNexus Software Australia
http://www.micronexus.com.au
MSA Animal Husbandry Software
MSA Herp,Nominated Best Vertical Market Application
SIC 2000.
Moderator comp.software.shareware.*
Sharon Housley
Chris Smolinski wrote:
> The next step would be to send complimentary copies to Mac users groups.
> Anyone have a list of snail mail addresses of MUGs ?
If you scroll to the bottom of http://www.npsoft.org/usergroups.html there are
2 lists that are specifically for Apple User Groups.
HTH
Sharon Housley
NotePage, Inc.
http://www.notepage.net
Leaders in Wireless Messaging Software
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Steve Lee
> I've heard several authors say that their sales dropped way down when a
> crack appeared. So I don't know about this statement.
>
I find it a bit strange that because a crack exists the general punter
who is going to buy the software will (a) know there is a crack and (b)
be dishonest enough to use it.
I find that most difficult to believe.
My experience is that several (usually fraudulent) purchases ar emade
prior to a succesful crack as it is the crackers making the purchases
(with stolen card numbers). They do the purchases to get legitimate
codes to reverse calculate the keycode method.
Gerry Quinn
>Dotnames wrote,
>
>> I've heard several authors say that their sales dropped way down when a
>> crack appeared. So I don't know about this statement.
>>
>I find it a bit strange that because a crack exists the general punter
>who is going to buy the software will (a) know there is a crack and (b)
>be dishonest enough to use it.
>
>I find that most difficult to believe.
>
What might happen is that downloads go way up when a crack is released,
but the expected sales don't materialise. That might look like a
lot of lost sales to the author, but only some of it is really lost
sales.
Gerry Quinn
--
http://bindweed.com
Puzzles, Strategy Games, Kaleidoscope Screensaver
Download evaluation versions free - no time limits
New puzzle challenge: "Dragon Scales"
Günter Nagler
> What might happen is that downloads go way up when a crack is released,
> but the expected sales don't materialise. That might look like a
> lot of lost sales to the author, but only some of it is really lost
> sales.
The number of downloads is not to consider, it does not guarantee any sale.
Only the number of average sellings / month gives statistics and when a month
when a crack occured had significantly less sales than months before then it can
be indice that the crack could have influenced the selling behaviour of users.
But surely it could be something else if there was a extreme change somewhere
else e.g. if software update has bug ...
But if no changes were might then crack must have something to do with the
reduced number of sales.
Especially interesting is then to see when it grows again when a software update
blackmails the crack.
For me its clear that it does influence the sales, I noticed it at least 5 times
in last years.
I guess 50% less sellings than usual when a crack comes out.
Steve Lee
> For me its clear that it does influence the sales, I noticed it at least 5 times
> in last years.
> I guess 50% less sellings than usual when a crack comes out.
>
What sort of software do you have? Is it security software? It seems strange
that you lose 50% of your sales when a crack comes out - that implies that at
least 50% of your customers frequent crack sites!
st...@tropheus.demon.co.uk
wrote:
>In article <949s12$vmb$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net>, "Adams-Blake
>Publishing" <aca...@adams-blake.com> wrote:
>
>> People who use hacked
>> software would not pay for it in the first place...
>
>
>I've heard several authors say that their sales dropped way down when a
>crack appeared. So I don't know about this statement.
Pauses in sales are often blamed on cracks. I maintained a spreadsheet
for a few years that included the sales and the number of cracks that
I could find for one of my applications (Neural Planner). I once
thought I could find a relationship but eventually I decided it was
just my "creative" statistics.
Dotnames
> I find it a bit strange that because a crack exists the general punter
> who is going to buy the software will (a) know there is a crack and (b)
> be dishonest enough to use it.
>
You know, I wondered the same thing. The average person I know is not
aware of crack sites, and would not use them if they knew. Of course, I
tend to hang with an honest bunch... :-)
>
> My experience is that several (usually fraudulent) purchases ar emade
> prior to a succesful crack as it is the crackers making the purchases
> (with stolen card numbers). They do the purchases to get legitimate
> codes to reverse calculate the keycode method.
Oh lordy, I think I had one recently. Credit card fraud or something...
--
50 pages of freebies! http://www.allfreespot.com
Mac Shareware Games http://www.gypsyware.com
OpDesign Website Creations http://www.opdesigns.com
Domain Names http://members.afternic.com/dotnames?showcase
Alun Jones
<dotnames-160...@host-209-214-73-139.atl.bellsouth.net>,
> In article <VA.0000119...@atlantic-coast.com>,
> swregj...@compuserve.com wrote:
> > My experience is that several (usually fraudulent) purchases ar emade
> > prior to a succesful crack as it is the crackers making the purchases
> > (with stolen card numbers). They do the purchases to get legitimate
> > codes to reverse calculate the keycode method.
>
> Oh lordy, I think I had one recently. Credit card fraud or something...
We _used_ to get a whole bunch of credit card fraud. Something like 2% of
all orders.
Now, we don't ship software immediately. We wait until we can look at the
order, match the address entered with the one issued for the card, make sure
the phone number matches the address, is the email address at a 'free'
provider, etc, etc. Each failed match is a red flag, and too many red flags
mean we ask for more information on the order and don't charge the card
until we're satisfied of it being used correctly.
Since doing that, our only chargebacks have been due to bank errors.
Dotnames
al...@texis.com (Alun Jones) wrote:
> We _used_ to get a whole bunch of credit card fraud. Something like 2% of
> all orders.
>
> Now, we don't ship software immediately. We wait until we can look at the
> order, match the address entered with the one issued for the card, make sure
> the phone number matches the address, is the email address at a 'free'
> provider, etc, etc. Each failed match is a red flag, and too many red flags
> mean we ask for more information on the order and don't charge the card
> until we're satisfied of it being used correctly.
>
> Since doing that, our only chargebacks have been due to bank errors.
>
> Alun.
I use a third-party vendor, who has certain checks set up. I remember
this one, as it struck me odd at the time the order was placed. I was
suspicious of it at the time. Rightly so, in hindsight.
The vendor I use checks the email address, freebies aren't allowed. I'm
not sure what other checks they have in place. I've been with them about
two years, and so far have had no major problems, and one chargeback.
Steve Lee
> Now, we don't ship software immediately. We wait until we can look at the
> order, match the address entered with the one issued for the card, make sure
> the phone number matches the address, is the email address at a 'free'
> provider, etc, etc. Each failed match is a red flag, and too many red flags
> mean we ask for more information on the order and don't charge the card
> until we're satisfied of it being used correctly.
>
You are taking a very responsible attitude whether or not you use a
registration service.
The problem with a realtime system like ours is that although we do trap an
incredible number of frauds before they happen, a number get through so only an
experienced human can spot them.
If in doubt, phone, is my motto.