From: Steve Amphlett on
"Giovanni Ughi" <giovanni.ughi(a)yahoo.it> wrote in message <i2umlh$n2k$1(a)fred.mathworks.com>...
> suggested solution seems to work well.
>
> But, if I change the windows clock (system time) will this "crack" the time-bomb?
>
> there is any solution robust to that?
>
> thanks in advance

Winding the clock back is surprisingly harmful these days. Not to be recommended, specially if it's running other licensed software.
From: us on
"Giovanni Ughi" <giovanni.ughi(a)yahoo.it> wrote in message <i2umlh$n2k$1(a)fred.mathworks.com>...
> suggested solution seems to work well.
>
> But, if I change the windows clock (system time) will this "crack" the time-bomb?
>
> there is any solution robust to that?
>
> thanks in advance

the solution is not working...
1) no need to play with the clock...
2) the user can simply overload the function NOW...

us
From: Walter Roberson on
Giovanni Ughi wrote:
> suggested solution seems to work well.
>
> But, if I change the windows clock (system time) will this "crack" the
> time-bomb?
>
> there is any solution robust to that?

Network connection to a server that indicates whether it is authorized
or not. To prevent the user from interposing a different server, use
encryption on the transaction. Do not make the return value a simple
binary "yes/no" as the user could simply alter that return value.
From: Andy on
"us " <us(a)neurol.unizh.ch> wrote in message <i2uofk$l42$1(a)fred.mathworks.com>...
> "Giovanni Ughi" <giovanni.ughi(a)yahoo.it> wrote in message <i2umlh$n2k$1(a)fred.mathworks.com>...
> > suggested solution seems to work well.
> >
> > But, if I change the windows clock (system time) will this "crack" the time-bomb?
> >
> > there is any solution robust to that?
> >
> > thanks in advance
>
> the solution is not working...
> 1) no need to play with the clock...
> 2) the user can simply overload the function NOW...
>
> us

Quick fix: use builtin('clock') to get the current date and time as a datevec, and compare that to your time bomb date.
From: us on
"Andy " <myfakeemailaddress(a)gmail.com> wrote in message <i2up9s$elv$1(a)fred.mathworks.com>...
> "us " <us(a)neurol.unizh.ch> wrote in message <i2uofk$l42$1(a)fred.mathworks.com>...
> > "Giovanni Ughi" <giovanni.ughi(a)yahoo.it> wrote in message <i2umlh$n2k$1(a)fred.mathworks.com>...
> > > suggested solution seems to work well.
> > >
> > > But, if I change the windows clock (system time) will this "crack" the time-bomb?
> > >
> > > there is any solution robust to that?
> > >
> > > thanks in advance
> >
> > the solution is not working...
> > 1) no need to play with the clock...
> > 2) the user can simply overload the function NOW...
> >
> > us
>
> Quick fix: use builtin('clock') to get the current date and time as a datevec, and compare that to your time bomb date.

well... then the user overloads BUILTIN...

us