How to convert REXX program into object code/ load module.

prahalad · New User Joined: 14 Sep 2010 Posts: 18 Location: Pune

I want to convert Rexx program into object code/load module.

It will help to protect the Rexx code from other people from making unauthorized changes to the programs.

I will distribute the Rexx program in the form of object code/load module. So other people are not able to change the code.

enrico-sorichetti · Posted: Mon Jan 03, 2011 6:39 pm

why not look Yourself at
publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/Shelves/EAUGB10

daveporcelan · Posted: Mon Jan 03, 2011 8:52 pm

What I do to protect the Rexx code is to place it in a Library that the user community has read only access to.

Only authorized people have update access. This allows easy access to changes when necessary.

This library either needs to be allocated in the general logon proc, or be able to altlib to, or do an alter of their syspproc dd.

Just another option to consider.

Anuj Dhawan · Posted: Mon Jan 03, 2011 9:36 pm

At one of my shop, we were able to compile REXX using ChangeMan and then it was distributed to the libraries. Check if your CM-tools are modified to have this capability.

prahalad · New User Joined: 14 Sep 2010 Posts: 18 Location: Pune

Thanks for your help.

enrico-sorichetti:
I gone through the link provided by you. But it seems to me, first of all my shop need to purchase REXX compiler. Can you please let me know without purchasing it, can I complie it?

Anuj Dhawan:
At my shop, changeman is not present.

dick scherrer · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 11:31 am

Hello,

Anuj Dhawan · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 3:27 pm

enrico-sorichetti · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 4:05 pm

enrico-sorichetti · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 4:28 pm

what is that You want to protect? the code, the process, the resources !
in any case Your approach will face lot of effort with little success!

the code/process is already protected inside/outside Your organization by the current IP/copyright regulations

the resources accessed can/should be protected using the security product in place

if there is enough <return> anybody with the proper authorizations can rewrite a modified process
(without the need to look at Your precious code)

hiding/compiling the code will simply make the task a bit more difficult
reverse engineering REXX compiled code is difficult, but not that much!
( will not get an out of the box source, but close enough )

Kjeld · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 5:46 pm

If you want to protect the source code from being inspected or copied by external customers, use a compiled language instead, preferably one for which you already have the neccessary development environment infrastructure in place.

superk · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 6:07 pm

daveporcelan · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 6:34 pm

One of the reasons I like to code in Rexx is that it does not need to be compiled.

I like the instant gratification of change a line of code and see the result.

In all my years of coding Rexx, I rarely felt the need to compile the code.

When I have, it was not for protection reasons, but for performance.

With those cases, I chose to write the application in Cobol instead.

don.leahy · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:03 pm

Well, I suppose you could encrypt the Rexx source and decrypt it at execution time, but that's just dumb.

On the contrary, Rexx users should be encouraged to experiment with the source code. As long as they cannot update the production version, they should have the freedom to do what they wish (short of stealing the code and selling it, of course).

Anuj Dhawan · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 8:14 pm

Pedro · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 9:12 pm

If you are writing code for commercial distribution, consider actually purchasing the rexx compiler.

==============

I recall my peers on VM having something called 'oneline'. I was a program that took a rexx exec and removed comments and blank lines, and also concatentated all of the rexx instructions, separated by semi-colons, into a single line. I think it was intended to help with performance, but might also be used to hide somewhat the workings of the exec.

enrico-sorichetti · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 9:17 pm

dick scherrer · Posted: Tue Jan 04, 2011 10:06 pm

Hi Pedro,