Well, I know the difference between virtualisation and a virtual machine. And, again, I didn't say this protection uses a VM.

Of course a VM needs a operating environment. But anybody can code a VM in just two minutes (OK, maybe 2 hours if you don't just want to have a two-opcode VM, but something which can be used for something).

But the problem is not to create the VM, the problem is how to convert any existing piece of code into virtual opcodes, which behave in the VM exactly like the original opcodes on a real CPU.

And if you've already analysed the original code deep enough to use the type of protection mentioned in the first post, it is just a simple step to convert any instruction into a virtual opcode and run it in the VM.

What other really big part do you miss, if this "is not even a small step for vm development"? (assuming that I'm not a super great coding mastermind and therefore don't understand where the big problem is hiding)