Post RELEASE luawl | lua runtime obfuscator

RELEASE luawl | lua runtime obfuscator # luawl | lua runtime obfuscator​ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀https://luawl.org https://preview.redd.it/4stc6l1odysh1.png?width=1070&format=png&auto=webp&s=3eebfcf5806042e4825bd9b80eecf70c3cfbbe92 # is luawl an obfuscator? a whitelist? or what the hell exactly is it? luawl is in technical terms, a DRM. its meant to resist static deobfuscation. >bcs the script is obfuscated and sent during runtime (when someone executes luawl), you can't just 'save file' or hook loadstring, for there isn't any. there is a VM to execute instructions. ^(you can test our static deobfuscation protections through our offline crackme @) [^(https://crackmes.one/crackme/6a84e079184836c0dbe7d836)](https://crackmes.one/crackme/6a84e079184836c0dbe7d836) >furthermore, as a runtime obfuscator, stale responses sent from the server cannot be reused. (for example, an attacker cannot simply hook the response and replay it.  that "vm" executor is highly polymorphic. >its not a register VM from the very core. stack vms can, inheritably, be much more polymoprhic. strict control. luawl isn't static: you can't just obfuscate a file which is runnable forever from there on. luawl forces server-gated security: and therefore, our antitampers goes above a static level. 1. antitamper to the user-level >if a user is silent-flagged, we track that. >if a user with luawl has a script with many silent-flags, we can note that, and implement different versions from the main-versions, etc. 2. polymorphic layers >the obfuscation isn't just polymorphic. the whole system is. luawl users uniquely have different polymorphic versions, architectures, etc. >people who run these luawl scripts have a level of polymorphic, as \*every execution has a custom-session obfuscated file.** >and people who create these luawl scripts also have polymorphic, polymorphic-obfuscations.  3. rapid-updates >luawl isn't static. when you run it, we obfuscate it for that execution. an old obfuscated response isn't usuable. >we update everyday. every update changes the script significantly. deobfuscation progress essentially gets reset: as you cannot re-execute a previous luawl version script. luawl isn't just obfuscation >if you've tried our crackmes, you may have noticed we use a lot of white-box cryptography techniques. this is because: we do use white-box cryptography. self-attestation >Luawl began from a simple refusal: a secrecy service should not ask customers to trust what they cannot verify. >Good security was never not just in the output, but the entire architecture. Through a zero-trust infrastructure, our servers are provable one-way self attestable runtimes, for true transparency for privacy assurance. >The reliance on trust in this age is only an excuse for incompetence or abuse. Luawl, from our decentralized database to an amnesic hardware-isolated enclave model, breaks every industry standard. And that's the point. https://redd.it/1wvgibj @r_lua