example-cpp-license-validation VS Snipe IT

Would be a real shame if someone used mitmproxy modify the validation request in transit. Looking at one of the provided examples [0] it does not have any mention of certificate pinning.

With all due respect this service seems to alleviate the most simple to implement parts of a licensing scheme while not solving the actually challenging parts. Even combined with a sophisticated obfuscating tool it leaves a lot of holes to be filled by the end user.

[0]: https://github.com/keygen-sh/example-cpp-license-validation

Snipe-IT for Asset Management

At work I use snipeIT to manage our asset inventory, it's fairly quick to spin up with docker and it's quite customisable https://snipeitapp.com/

Another great open source asset management system to check out is Snipe-IT. https://github.com/snipe/snipe-it

I have used it for years both self hosted and with them hosting and it's been a great low cost solution for asset management.

If you like the IT method of asset management, then Snipe-IT is what you want. If you want something more inventory-y and parts-y, then check out PartKeepr or Inventree.

We use SnipeIT

I very strongly disagree, use serial numbers if at all possible, set up Snipe-IT, and you'll never have to change labels again. As long as you are the one handling provisioning, repairs and such, or those who do is allowed access, you'll always know the location, status and ownership of everything in there.