Crypto obfuscator vs dotfuscator

No crypto obfuscator vs dotfuscator missed important software updates! The database recognizes 1,746,000 software titles and delivers updates for your software including minor upgrades. Download the free trial version below to get started.

Double-click the downloaded file to install the software. The Premium Edition adds important features such as complete software maintenance, security advisory, frequent minor upgrade versions, downloads, Pack exports and imports, 24×7 scheduling and more. Simply double-click the downloaded file to install it. You can choose your language settings from within the program. M9 1a8 8 0 1 0 0 16A8 8 0 0 0 9 1zm. Join Stack Overflow to learn, share knowledge, and build your career.

M9 1a8 8 0 1 0 0 16A8 8 0 0 0 9 1zM8 15. Best method to obfuscate or secure . This is not for use on the web, but for a desktop application. So, do you know of any tools available to do this type of thing? What kind of performance implications do they have if any? Does this have any negative side effects when using a debugger during development?

We log stack traces of problems in the field. This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:”Questions asking us to recommend or find a tool, library or favorite off-site resource are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract opinionated answers and spam. Instead, describe the problem and what has been done so far to solve it.

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question. I have not observed any performance issues when obfuscating my code. If your just sending text basted stack traces you might have a problem translating the method names. It would be nice to have links. If you get a chance, could you add them? I don’t disagree with you, its true that almost any antivirus program detects it too.

This is not a problem of the obfuscator. I it is bad anti-virus software which gives false alarms. On the other hand antivirus software does not detect many real threats. Done the job for me in the past.

There are tools that also ‘deobfuscate’ obfuscated DLLs – I’d suggest turning the piece that needs to be protected into an unmanaged component. At which point we will just turn to de-assemblers just like they do for cracking the copy-protection on computer games. Jonathan Allen: It’s called disassembler, not de-assembler. By the way, you don’t need to disassemble.

You are wasting your time going down that path. If you have code that you don’t want anyone to see, you need to keep it behind closed doors. Obfuscating your code only deters the most casual of people. As the video game industry leaned a long time ago, no code is safe from cracking. It’s absolutely true that none of the protection options will stop the most determined attacks. That doesn’t translate to “wasting your time”. That’s comparable to suggesting you not lock your car when you leave it because a skilled thief can break in.

It’s still an asset worth protecting and it’s negligent not to try and protect it. Safety from unauthorized use of a “cracked” copy is not the same as safety from reverse engineering to extract code for a competitive product. If competition requires improvements and evolution, perhaps obfuscation is sufficient for programs that are already complicated pre-obfuscation. Cracking a video game is very interesting for crackers, so the best crackers in the world get involved. But few people are able to reverse engineer assembler code. This is done by very experienced crackers. Did you know that even experts in Antivirus companies needed several MONTHS to analyze Stuxnet?