The old software protection method I used for years was Armadillo. Handled registrations good, but was bloated and became increasingly insecure for the $$ it cost. For distribution on free stuff, I used Molebox and a proprietary method, both of which are in my stuff in storage and I can't access them. So, I explored the current offerings including new protection programs.

The mafioso protection racket designed by AV authors with their false positives has become absurd. I compiled a simple demo program in PowerBASIC.

1. As is, compiled and then tested in Virus Total, the program was 76k and scored a 2/64. Ironically, this is the ONLY one who flags Comodo. Native PB was the only one to flag what I consider to be one of the big boys and legitimate programs. I would be curious to retry this in PB 9, as PB 9 was a better product (much smaller compiled EXEs and often much faster compiled EXEs).

2. The same EXE compressed with ASPack was 42k and scored 15/62.

3. The same EXE compressed with UPX (ultra brute) was 37k and scored 10/63. Not only is UPX finally compressing smaller than ASPack, it also triggers less false positives. Needless to say, I will NOT be repurchasing ASPack (I own it, but it is in storage).

4. The same EXE, protected with a new protector which also compresses/encrypts was 54k and scored 24/64. Not bad on compression, given the type of product it is, but the false positives are concerning. But, the program works well and seems easy to use for me as well as potential customers.

These AV authors have literally made it almost impossible for an indie developer to exist. Something I have raved about for years, but it is getting increasingly worse over the years. Even if indie developers tell their customers the truth, that the program is fine and the AV company is wrong, the customers are still going to believe the multi-million dollar AV company and not run your software and bad mouth it for viruses.

As indie developers, we are expected to do the work of the lazy and incompetent AV authors and report false positives and hope and pray they safe list our program, which may or may not happen and may or may not require money changing hands. Self-proclaimed AV experts, have been running roughshod over indie authors for many years. The only ones who are not routinely dealing with false positives are the major software companies who do exchange some $$ with the AV authors.

I am amazed there have not been multiple class action suits against every AV author out there due to their continued false allegations that a program is or may be harmful when it is not.

Very hard to think about even trying to compete in today's software market...