is there any way to make unreadable digital assets after publishing ?

for example I made a digital asset with some nodes in it ,Then I want to give this tool to my team ,But I don't want they can read and edit inside nodes and just they access to use it .

Maybe this is so simple ,I don't know :?

Unfortunately the encryption is only possible with Orbolt, but it would be nice if this comes as a common Houdini feature.

make a dive node that goes to a laberint of node that goes into another subnet of the subnet of a chop inside a cop inside a geometry inside pops inside shops.

:? Nice one!!!!!!

Ha… maybe houdini should actually ship with a Black Box subnet

Dive node target is easy to pass though if you use the Object Tree View.

Thsnks my friends

Maybe I should wait for adding this feature :?

Surely the simple answer is to tell your team “not” to edit your tool !.

Rob

If you want to defeat your artists, well here are a couple things you can try:

- ophide. You can hide all the operators inside your asset. Because this requires commands on nodes, unless the artist unlocks the asset and opunhides the nodes, this works well.

- opchmod. You can use the opchmod command to remove permissions from all the users except yourself of course. Even if they figure out how to unlock and unhide the nodes, you can remove all permissions from them for read, write and execute.

wow. this is an ugly internal people problem, not a thechnical one…

cpb
wow. this is an ugly internal people problem, not a thechnical one…

Not necessarily. Being able to encrypt and lock down assets would be beneficial when dealing with outsource vendors for example. Give them the tool to help in the creation of shots, without giving away proprietary IP that potentially represents significant investment in R&D.

Untrustworthy vendors: also a people problem.
Trying to cope with people-problems via software engineering rarely works.
If your vendors are truly crooks then they'll find a way to steal your tech regardless (otherwise you probably owe them an apology)… Its like how onerous DRM only punishes paying customers while everyone else enjoys great hassle-free service via mutorrent.

Getting Sidefx involved messy people-problems is a waste of resources IMHO, they could be fixing neglected SOPs instead 8)

Really thanks for your attentions

It's not always for crooks or stealing ,Sometimes we wanna hide inside nodes and formula just to make exclusive !

Exactly like a python script that I wrote for Maya ,But I Just give compiled file (pyc) to client and it's not necessarily to give him my source code and formula !

cpb
Untrustworthy vendors: also a people problem.
Trying to cope with people-problems via software engineering rarely works.
…
Getting Sidefx involved messy people-problems is a waste of resources IMHO, they could be fixing neglected SOPs instead 8)

That's like saying that making cars lockable is waste of resources, because if someone wants it, they'll steal it anyways.

It's not necessarily about vendors, but also individual artists working for them. They can be the most honest company out there, but if someone from inside plagiarizes your IP which might have cost you a lot of time and money and you've sent it to them to use on shots, there's no defense against it. Being able to black box an asset could possibly easy collaborations between people studios.

The fact that Houdini is so open is certainly one of the best things about it, but it doesn't really help to protect you work.

I like your example mkolar !

Yes ,this is all things that I say

And if this is true ,So the big companies like Pixar ,Autodesk ,Foundry and … most be remove license from their softwares !
because they should trust to people :!:

Of course I approve that people-Opinions is basic problem and if we have ideal world without any crooks and criminal ,so we can have cars without locks or softwares without license !

But for now, +++ Prevention is Better than Cure +++

I agree, being able to blackbox a digital asset has real industry value. If you only think from the perspective of DAs being created by a lead or dev and used within that company, then yes it's a people problem. But if you think from the perspective of creating a DA for sale or as contract work, you definitely want to lock that down for multiple reasons.

1: If you expose your methods, the client can simply look at your work and say “oh THAT'S how you do that” and then your expertise may no longer be needed.

2: If you consider any of those methods to be your trade secret, maybe a fantastic way of doing something that reduces computation time and gives a better result, once you've given a DA with that IP to one company your R&D on that trick has lost its value.

3: If the client dives into the DA and screws it up, you can bet they'll be calling you for support on “your busted work”.

I'd also like a way to do this and may need it soon. I'll look in to Orbolt, but any details from someone with experience blackboxing assets would be nice to have.

: Looks like Orbolt will protect the asset, but only if I sell it through the Orbolt store. This won't do, because the asset I may be selling is wrapped around a very specific niche pipeline in an industry that 99% of Orbolt users won't be interested in (not CG), and also because the company I'm selling to believes they have a patent on the process my work is driving.

So, I need to sell a locked digital asset to exactly one client.

Orbolt prevents from people diving down inside subnet of your DA if it's locked, but it won't encrypt code based operators AFAIK, i.e. VEX based OPs, Python OPs, etc.

Although thanks to SESI, they added the ability to define functions in Inline, Snippet VOPs, and Wrangle SOPs, so now we don't have to create new OPs for complex but very specific operations within DAs. But if your work is made up of many DAs some of which are code based, they won't be protected.

Yes misterbk ,
You mention all of the reasons to make unreadable DA !

And I need it for contract work