Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. General Programming
  3. .NET (Core and Framework)
  4. .NET code protection

.NET code protection

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved .NET (Core and Framework)
helpcsharpcollaborationquestion
6 Posts 4 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • C Offline
    C Offline
    cherrymotion
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Hi, does anyone know a free .NET crypter/protector? My problem is, that there are many free obfuscators I could use, but with obfuscation all the code (also in Log and Tracefiles) is blurred and our developement team is no longer able to assigne the error codes to a function. So, does anyone know of a possibility to obfuscate code without blurring special function names? A tool, which just obfuscates the "in-function" code like algorithms? Or is there maybe a completely different solution for my problem? Thanks for any advice! Cheers, cheery

    K L 3 Replies Last reply
    0
    • C cherrymotion

      Hi, does anyone know a free .NET crypter/protector? My problem is, that there are many free obfuscators I could use, but with obfuscation all the code (also in Log and Tracefiles) is blurred and our developement team is no longer able to assigne the error codes to a function. So, does anyone know of a possibility to obfuscate code without blurring special function names? A tool, which just obfuscates the "in-function" code like algorithms? Or is there maybe a completely different solution for my problem? Thanks for any advice! Cheers, cheery

      K Offline
      K Offline
      Kubajzz
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      What you want is near to impossible, or at least very difficult. I believe professional obfuscation tools might be able to do what you need, at least partially, but you can't get those for free. Anyway, no obfuscation algorithm can protect your code. If you keep your method names unchanged - probably because you need descriptive names - then your code cannot really be obfuscated. A good descriptive method name pretty much says what the method does (that's its purpose, in the end), which helps a lot to any potential reverse-engineer. As for the method body, automatic obfuscation usually only consists of renaming all identifiers and a few more well-defined steps. The algorithm has no knowledge of your code and it can only do very little because it must not break your code.

      L 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • K Kubajzz

        What you want is near to impossible, or at least very difficult. I believe professional obfuscation tools might be able to do what you need, at least partially, but you can't get those for free. Anyway, no obfuscation algorithm can protect your code. If you keep your method names unchanged - probably because you need descriptive names - then your code cannot really be obfuscated. A good descriptive method name pretty much says what the method does (that's its purpose, in the end), which helps a lot to any potential reverse-engineer. As for the method body, automatic obfuscation usually only consists of renaming all identifiers and a few more well-defined steps. The algorithm has no knowledge of your code and it can only do very little because it must not break your code.

        L Offline
        L Offline
        Lost User
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        There is control-flow obfuscation though

        L 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • L Lost User

          There is control-flow obfuscation though

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Luc Pattyn
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          spaghettization? :)

          Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum

          Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, and improve readability.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • C cherrymotion

            Hi, does anyone know a free .NET crypter/protector? My problem is, that there are many free obfuscators I could use, but with obfuscation all the code (also in Log and Tracefiles) is blurred and our developement team is no longer able to assigne the error codes to a function. So, does anyone know of a possibility to obfuscate code without blurring special function names? A tool, which just obfuscates the "in-function" code like algorithms? Or is there maybe a completely different solution for my problem? Thanks for any advice! Cheers, cheery

            L Offline
            L Offline
            Lost User
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            cherrymotion wrote:

            all the code (also in Log and Tracefiles) is blurred and our developement team is no longer able to assigne the error codes to a function.

            They're using reflection to determine the name of the current function? How about replacing those with encrypted constants? Should be easy to decrypt. Wouldn't recommend on doing that change manually though; best to create a small app that modifies the current source-files.

            cherrymotion wrote:

            Or is there maybe a completely different solution for my problem?

            There's no solution, merely patches.

            I are Troll :suss:

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • C cherrymotion

              Hi, does anyone know a free .NET crypter/protector? My problem is, that there are many free obfuscators I could use, but with obfuscation all the code (also in Log and Tracefiles) is blurred and our developement team is no longer able to assigne the error codes to a function. So, does anyone know of a possibility to obfuscate code without blurring special function names? A tool, which just obfuscates the "in-function" code like algorithms? Or is there maybe a completely different solution for my problem? Thanks for any advice! Cheers, cheery

              L Offline
              L Offline
              Lost User
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              Even if you obfuscate function names, your obfuscator tool should be able to convert the obfuscated stack trace to original stack trace. Use Crypto Obfuscator (although not free) which supports this. But if you want, it can also keep your function names intact and do other obfuscations like string encryption, control flow obfuscation, method call hiding, etc.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              Reply
              • Reply as topic
              Log in to reply
              • Oldest to Newest
              • Newest to Oldest
              • Most Votes


              • Login

              • Don't have an account? Register

              • Login or register to search.
              • First post
                Last post
              0
              • Categories
              • Recent
              • Tags
              • Popular
              • World
              • Users
              • Groups